Thoughts on job decision

[anon4this]

I am debating three postdoc / job options. Would appreciate any thoughts.

1. A Tenure-track position in the city that is my goal love to live in / would work very well for my family, but that is an R2 school and not as research focused as I would like
2. A postdoc on someone else’s grant that is super productive, known for mentoring well, and the research fit is perfect
3. A T32 at a prestigious institution, but with a mentor who is not the perfect fit and a past trainee advised me to stay away from. This is attractive because my grad institution isn’t a great name.

I have made a list with lots of pros and cons, talked to a bunch of people, but I am still a bit indecisive .. so I would any appreciate thoughts. My goal is to have a tenure-track job at the most-research focused institution I can get myself into, but have substantial geographic limitations due to partners job.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[WisNeuro]

With limited information, #2 seems like the runaway favorite. Postdoc, especially for a research oriented career should be about showing a clear trajectory with your research and being as productive (with quality pubs) as you can. 3 seems like it'd only be a good option if this place would be guaranteed to open lots of doors on name alone.

 

[CatsFan]

So is option #1 basically your goal job? Or is there a more research-focused institution in your limited geographic range that you have your eye on? If the former is true, take #1. If the latter, then I agree with WisNeuro that #2 seems like the best option.

 

[Justanothergrad]

If I were you, I'd take #1 in a hot second if it approaches any part of what you want to do (note. R1/R2 labels vary so greatly that its hard to say for sure without knowing your aspirational productivity level/institution expectations). If your goal is to live in that area (or city in particular) and engaged in academics, you will likely have a difficult time with that sort of regional capacity. In academic jobs you often have to pick for type of university versus dream location- or be willing to wait and roll the dice over time. Having served on search committees, the competitiveness is extremely high and there are no certainties so don't hold your breath waiting for a single institution you think you would be perfect for. All of this combined with the idea of taking a post-doc and being on the market to move again 1-2 years later sounds less than exciting to me. If you can give more details (publicly or in PM) about the R2 expectations/support and your productivity/aspirations, I'm happy to share more thoughts.

#3 wouldn't even be on my radar.

 

[WisNeuro]

All depends on your outlook. My decisions early on in training were to maximize flexibility later in my career. It led to a lot of moving around, but it set me up well to be a front runner for most jobs that I'd want, which in turn lets me be in the city that I want to be in and making good money. Examine your priorities, and what you're willing to give up in short, intermediate, or long-term. Is location more important, or is job satisfaction more important, etc.

 

[Justanothergrad]

All depends on your outlook. My decisions early on in training were to maximize flexibility later in my career. It led to a lot of moving around, but it set me up well to be a front runner for most jobs that I'd want, which in turn lets me be in the city that I want to be in and making good money. Examine your priorities, and what you're willing to give up in short, intermediate, or long-term. Is location more important, or is job satisfaction more important, etc.

We've had applicants with over 40 extremely high pubs and some of the strongest letter writers in the field coming out of post-doc before. We regularly have people with over 25. I agree that its a matter of value, but TT academics can be tough to hold your breath for a single city. Not only are the searches not predictable (budget, hiring times) but what the committee identifies as the search criteria may exclude good people that don't fit. Either way, lots of stuff to think about in terms of values and long term goals.

 

[WisNeuro]

We've had applicants with over 40 extremely high pubs and some of the strongest letter writers in the field coming out of post-doc before. We regularly have people with over 25. I agree that its a matter of value, but TT academics can be tough to hold your breath for a single city. Not only are the searches not predictable (budget, hiring times) but what the committee identifies as the search criteria may exclude good people that don't fit. Either way, lots of stuff to think about in terms of values and long term goals.

Fair, it's definitely a shrinking career option as federal and state funds continue to dwindle. One of the reasons I always advise staying in clinical practice in some way as a fallback.

 

[Mama Bear]

I’d be curious about job specifics and if the R2 otherwise has what you want. Are you able to negotiate a lower teaching load for more research time? Are the resources available to carry out your research?

If the position has enough flexibility to make it what you want, it may be worth considering.

 

[Fan_of_Meehl]

I am debating three postdoc / job options. Would appreciate any thoughts.

1. A Tenure-track position in the city that is my goal love to live in / would work very well for my family, but that is an R2 school and not as research focused as I would like
2. A postdoc on someone else’s grant that is super productive, known for mentoring well, and the research fit is perfect
3. A T32 at a prestigious institution, but with a mentor who is not the perfect fit and a past trainee advised me to stay away from. This is attractive because my grad institution isn’t a great name.

I have made a list with lots of pros and cons, talked to a bunch of people, but I am still a bit indecisive .. so I would any appreciate thoughts. My goal is to have a tenure-track job at the most-research focused institution I can get myself into, but have substantial geographic limitations due to partners job.

Hope it works out for ya. Just don't forget your roots (clinical practice)

 

[Fan_of_Meehl]

I am debating three postdoc / job options. Would appreciate any thoughts.

1. A Tenure-track position in the city that is my goal love to live in / would work very well for my family, but that is an R2 school and not as research focused as I would like
2. A postdoc on someone else’s grant that is super productive, known for mentoring well, and the research fit is perfect
3. A T32 at a prestigious institution, but with a mentor who is not the perfect fit and a past trainee advised me to stay away from. This is attractive because my grad institution isn’t a great name.

I have made a list with lots of pros and cons, talked to a bunch of people, but I am still a bit indecisive .. so I would any appreciate thoughts. My goal is to have a tenure-track job at the most-research focused institution I can get myself into, but have substantial geographic limitations due to partners job.

If there is a cardinal rule it would be, always doubt yourself.

Which shouldn't be hard for OCPD people like us. Be wary of the links and the assumptions. If you give a veteran a PCL-5 and his whole goddamned family depends on his income related to his 'disability'...well, think about that for a second.

 

[Ollie123]

I would strongly consider the R2 job depending on the specifics. If not, I would take #2. A T32 at a prestigious institution won't help you as much as you think, even putting aside the other problems.

No one has asked yet, but what city? I think an important consideration is how many R1 institutions there are in the area. If we are talking about NYC and there are a boatload of nearby research-heavy schools and a boatload of institutes you could be happy at, that is one thing. If we are talking about a mid-size city with 1 or maybe 2 R1 schools...there is a VERY real possibility they could go a decade without hiring another faculty member...and at the end of that decade of waiting it is far from guaranteed they would hire you!

It is between #1 and #2. I think the decision really just boils down to your priorities. If you would <like> to live in the city, but would be perfectly happy to live elsewhere for the right job I would probably take #2. If you really want to be in this city...take #1 unless it is one of the handful of cities with tons of options. And I really do mean tons....I can think of maybe 5 cities in the US that might fit the bill and all would still require some flexibility on your part (e.g. be willing to be in AMC with some clinical load, consider non-psychology departments and have a research program that could fit outside psychology, etc.).

Some additional nuance to consider:
- Is the school in #1 otherwise a good environment? If its not, that may change the above
- Not research-focused as in not supportive of research or not research-focused as in it just didn't have as much of a historical focus on it? There is a big difference between a place that is trying to build its research portfolio versus a place that will disparage you for going after grants. There are also special NIH grants for institutions without much funding history. My understanding is they are (comparatively) very easy to get.
- Big fish in a small pond or small fish in a big pond? I'm a guppy in an ocean right now and let me assure you there are definite disadvantages. I'm fairly certain I could get more resources by stepping down a bit. Its a lot tougher to negotiate when the competition is (metaphorically or literally) a bunch of nobel laureates.
- While not as common (or as easy) as sliding down to less research-focused institutions...people do move up. I know more than one researcher who stood out from the pack in a smaller/less research-intensive place and got picked up by an R1.

 

[futureapppsy2]

Take the TT job. If this was at all a small, struggling LAC or regional comprehensive, I might say otherwise, but an R2 should be safe and stable.

 

[DynamicDidactic]

Let me also add that your first job doesn't have to be your last. Numerous people (even on this forum) leave their first academic position.

But if geography is important, I'd take #1. You can always find another job in that city if you don't end up liking your first position.

 

[ClinicalABA]

1. ... would work very well for my family...

I’m surprised that more people haven’t cued in on this. Maybe it’s just where I’m at in life, but think that this is a primary consideration. Especially so if “family” includes children.

 

[cara susanna]

I'd take the first one. Although I'm no longer research-oriented, I've learned that geographic location is extremely important. Even if you dislike the job, you'll be happier if you're in a city that you want to be in. Otherwise, it's possible that you'll hate the job and the location, which makes you doubly miserable.

 

[WisNeuro]

I'd take the first one. Although I'm no longer research-oriented, I've learned that geographic location is extremely important. Even if you dislike the job, you'll be happier if you're in a city that you want to be in. Otherwise, it's possible that you'll hate the job and the location, which makes you doubly miserable.

I don't know, I'd rather be in a job I liked in a city I was lukewarm about, rather than a city I loved but a job that I hated.

 

[cara susanna]

I don't know, I'd rather be in a job I liked in a city I was lukewarm about, rather than a city I loved but a job that I hated.

The thing is you don't know if you're going to like the job. I moved to a city I was lukewarm about for a job I loved on paper, and I ended up hating both the city and the job.

 

[WisNeuro]

The thing is you don't know if you're going to like the job. I moved to a city I was lukewarm about for a job I loved on paper, and I ended up hating both the city and the job.

True, but if I disliked the job, and had trouble finding another in that city, I'd rather move from a city I love than sit in a job I hate.

 

[cara susanna]

True, but if I disliked the job, and had trouble finding another in that city, I'd rather move from a city I love than sit in a job I hate.

You can always look for another job in that city, though.

I dunno, I feel like our field minimizes the importance of geographic fit (probably as a coping mechanism given that we often have to prioritize it last).

 

[WisNeuro]

You can always look for another job in that city, though.

I dunno, I feel like our field minimizes the importance of geographic fit (probably as a coping mechanism given that we often have to prioritize it last).

I think we minimize openness to new experiences. I'm actually glad that I moved around a lot for training. Not only did it allow me to choose the best training option available, but I also learned a ton about what I did and did not like in a living situation. The place I thought I was definitely going to move back to after internship fell by the wayside. Much easier to find things to like about a place, than to find things to like about a soul-sucking job.

 

[Dr. Switzer]

We've had applicants with over 40 extremely high pubs and some of the strongest letter writers in the field coming out of post-doc before. We regularly have people with over 25. I agree that its a matter of value, but TT academics can be tough to hold your breath for a single city. Not only are the searches not predictable (budget, hiring times) but what the committee identifies as the search criteria may exclude good people that don't fit. Either way, lots of stuff to think about in terms of values and long term goals.

I have to agree with this. At one institution I recently worked at, we have over 150 applications for a position with the majority of them having very high level of pubs (e.g., >30 pubs) and independent grant funding all at the early career stage. If #1 gives you the flexibility to do the work you enjoy and has the infrastructure - it seems like a no brainer to take #1. But, if for example you need to run clinical trials with medical staff and the school doesn't have a medical school, that could be a big barrier.

Academic jobs continue to become harder and harder to obtain. If it is a place you and your family would like to live and a job that is acceptable and you want an academic career, it sounds like a great place to start! Why not attempt to collaborate with postdoc mentor from #2 in ongoing research projects?

 

[deleted343839]

You have a TT job offer in your preferred geographical location. Congratulations, you won the lottery. Seriously.

Unless there are serious red flags about the department, or other major career-altering drawbacks you haven't shared, I would take the job, hustle, and re-evaluate in a few years.

 

[cara susanna]

I think we minimize openness to new experiences. I'm actually glad that I moved around a lot for training. Not only did it allow me to choose the best training option available, but I also learned a ton about what I did and did not like in a living situation. The place I thought I was definitely going to move back to after internship fell by the wayside. Much easier to find things to like about a place, than to find things to like about a soul-sucking job.

YMMV. I moved around a ton and I got incredibly sick of it. By the time I was ready for a job I just wanted to stay put somewhere.

 

[Justanothergrad]

After some private discussion with OP about the offer, I can see some of the draw backs associated with the #1 position. They may be manageable in some ways, but some will continue to be draw backs. To be fair, every place has them and there are some considerable strengths (a few notable ones which are unmentioned here), given some of the considerations associated with personal/professional needs/resources.

 

[futureapppsy2]

YMMV. I moved around a ton and I got incredibly sick of it. By the time I was ready for a job I just wanted to stay put somewhere.

Ditto. I moved four times in three years (postdoc, VAP, research professor, TT), and it was expensive, difficult, and made it nearly impossible to date or make close local friends. 0/10, would not recommend at all.

After some private discussion with OP about the offer, I can see some of the draw backs associated with the #1 position. They may be manageable in some ways, but some will continue to be draw backs. To be fair, every place has them and there are some considerable strengths (a few notable ones which are unmentioned here), given some of the considerations associated with personal/professional needs/resources.

OP, I would be really curious to hear about these drawbacks. Can you PM me?

 

[WisNeuro]

Ditto. I moved four times in three years (postdoc, VAP, research professor, TT), and it was expensive, difficult, and made it nearly impossible to date or make close local friends. 0/10, would not recommend at all.

OP, I would be really curious to hear about these drawbacks. Can you PM me?

I met my spouse in the middle of all of the moves. Harder, yes, but doable with communication.

 

[anon4this]

Thanks everyone. Another important detail regarding the post-doc (#2) is that it is pretty much my dream job (the fit really is perfect), and there is opportunity to stay there on soft-money (but with lots of PIs in the lab who could put me on grants, I could pick up clinical work or teaching to fund salary, etc.). A part of me is leaning towards the stability of hard money, but another part is leaning towards learning how to do research in my field better and the ability to stay in this lab in the long-run. I could still leave for hard-money after staying there (although it may not be in the city that works well for my family), or I could fund myself with soft-money in this lab that I see myself very much enjoying working in.

 

[Ollie123]

In that case I think it is very much a personal decision. Location or job?

Location may be less of a gamble since (if I am reading between the lines correctly) you likely have family there, but there is an element of risk to both. Areas change. People move. Dream jobs are less dreamy when your 10th R01 in a row doesn't get funded and they tell you to get the hell out.

Its a tough call, but based on what you have shared here I dont think either decision is a clear winner from a professional standpoint. Just depends what you want at this stage of your life.

 

[cara susanna]

I want to add that I know T-T hopefuls who completed multiple post docs.

 

[PhDPlz2011]

If I were in your shoes, I would go for #1, no question. Can you buy out of teaching if you get grants? Is the department research-active (even if not R1 level)? Is the department generally functional/not toxic? As long as the answer to those questions is yes, then you should be able to do your research there. There are many ways to get more mentoring and develop new skills in the faculty role, but it could be years before another TT position in the area you want to live in comes up, and then you might not get it.

That said, I have kids and a spouse. Living with them in an area we want to live in is my top priority, without question. If you are more flexible--if you would live apart from your partner, if your partner's career might change, etc.--or if you are more ambitious than I am, your priorities may be different. FWIW, I have found that my ambitions have softened over time and I'm glad I didn't end up at a super intensive research institution. Having a reasonable lifestyle is nice. How confident are you that you want to be a top researcher for the long term?

 

[PhDPlz2011]

Oh--and definitely not #3. No one will care where you went to grad school as long as your publication and funding records are good (and as long as your grad institution is just lower tier and not disreputable). A bad mentor, though, can really hurt your career.

 

[singasongofjoy]

It'd be about bird in hand and broader quality of life for me. It would be a fairly easy decision for number 1. But then, I like stability, proximity to family, being in a climate and city I love, and there's still likely to be more than plenty of research to go around at an R2, I think, especially if that's what motivates you. And #3 is a hard, hard no. You never know when a bad mentor experience might come back to bite you in the ass later on down the line. I've heard too many stories and just barely skirted it myself.