When I was post-doc at a well-respected university, the Profs treated me with a combination with disrespect and contempt (when they were not outright ignoring me). I switched to industry; my pay went up 3X-fold, and my talented colleagues praised those problem-solving abilities that I developed over the course of my academic career. My advice to you; f*ck academia! Its a petty pointless prison where you’ll never do anything worthwhile. Switch to industry in order to work and projects that actually have some impact on the world. Only then will you be treated with respect.
> the Profs treated me with a combination with disrespect and contempt (when they were not outright ignoring me).
That's my experience of working with PhDs in software development (Germany). Yes, you are very smart Mr. Dr. Whatever. No, your PhD doesn't give you authority on picking the building blocks for the front-end and devops stacks. Now chill and bugger off, go back to the C++ image processing ML models (1 year of development and no release still).
> No, your PhD doesn't give you authority on picking the building blocks for the front-end and devops stacks. Now chill and bugger off, go back to the C++ image processing ML models (1 year of development and no release still).
There is a pretty big gap between a computer science PhD and software engineering in general. I'd rather have someone that did 4 years of software engineering pick the tech stack than someone that did 4 years doing a computer science PhD.
I've worked with lots of PhDs from all over the world, and I've seen something similar from the Germans among them. Trying to assign menial tasks to their "lesser" colleagues; trying to meddle in their work and impose arbitrary decisions on them. In fact, I've seen them do it among themselves and not just to the non-PhDs.
The German academic system is extremely hierarchical. So the head of the lab will be on all of the papers, in spite of having no academic input etc.
Possibly the German PhDs you've met have inherited this toxic system as being the management style to aspire to.
I've had many coworkers and several bosses with PhDs and I've not seen any negative attitude from them.
In the past I did work with a couple of guys from academia who had little interest in building stuff we could commercialize and that was challenging in the context of a for-profit company.
When I was a developer at a well-respected company, the managers treated me with a combination with disrespect and contempt (when they were not outright ignoring me). I switched to academia, government and the non-profit sector; my pay went up 3X-fold, and my talented colleagues praised those problem-solving abilities that I developed over the course of my commercial career. My advice to you; f*ck industry! Its a petty pointless prison where you’ll never do anything worthwhile. Switch to academia, government or non-profits in order to work and projects that actually have some positive impact on the world. Only then will you be treated with respect.
It's true tho. When I moved from the private sector to working at a university, I doubled my salary. When I moved from there to working at the government, I tripled my pay from the uni job (moved from perm to contracting, however).
New Zealand, followed by Australia for the government contracting. The town I initially lived in in NZ had a very poorly paid range of jobs going, at least at the time. However, I was trapped there, predominantly due to lack of money.
I left academia in the UK as a postdoc in robotics, joined Firebase via H1B visa to San Fransisco, got aquired by Google, worked for 4 years.
I found working for Google stressful, but lucrative and so it was the best decision i made. It totally change the course of my life for the better. I learnt so much about building teams, scaling impact, productionizing software, dealing with public. I missed academic problems, they are fun, but knowing your software has millions of users feels better and its nice having family vaguely recognize what you do.
The medical and financial stability let me start a family without fear, not having to stress about money is a huge weight off my shoulders. I feel very lucky.
Not sure how repetable that is. I was lucky to get a h1b, and i was lucky picking a winner like Firebase early stage, but i genuinely beleived it was the future of development. So great move, and i think i could go back into academia if i wanted, so its left me in a stronger position.
I had failed to make a multiplayer computer game with traditional approach and realized firebase solved all my concurrency and push problems in a much neater way, and the security language didnt compromise too much expressivity unlike many other SaaS dbs. So i saw it solved a real problem in a simple way, way better with better ergonomics than i could do myself
I found out about it just by reading hacknews and noticed it seemed to be posting a lot and well.
Thanks. I missed one such opportunity in my life .. encountered guys at a YC event and thought they were brilliant. Managed to get an interview but it didn't work out (partially my fault, and partially because they had no idea how to deal with PhDs). Such opportunities are so rare in life. It is almost like winning the lottery.
Yeah i seized the oppertunity with both hands. I proposed and married my girlfreind in 2 days to get the visa jointly.
I got a job offer becuase i wrote software to solve a particular issue with firebase at the time, and posted it to their user group, then they offered a guest blog post which i wrote here https://firebase.googleblog.com/2014/02/firesafe-add-complex... then i think i got the offer!
I did my PhD in physics, and worked as a SWE right after graduation. Halfway through grad school, I started to feel academia is not my thing, but I cannot quit for all sorts of reasons (at least if thought so at the time). I used Matlab/FORTRAN/python for data analysis in my research work and intentionally looked into CS stuff along the way. I loved it, took a lot of MOOC and managed to eventually get a job in the industry. I loved it in the beginning, spent a lot of personal time doing work and had no complaints. The industry has amazing stride of coming up new technology/ideas, there is always something I can learn which never makes me bored. Most of the people seem generally smart and love their job. Over time I start to realize work is work and there are many factors in the play. I have to find a balance among interesting work, nice colleagues and good pay, but it is not too hard given the amount of opportunities the industry offers. Overall I am happy I made the move.
My academia background wasn’t in the CS field, so I am not sure how relevant my experience is. I did often need to look up and read CS papers to help with my job, obviously not the same way as in research. I hated paper reading in grad school but start to enjoy it now, one of the reasons is the interest and motivation are stronger and also the for-fun mindset. Strangely it came to me that maybe things would work out as well had I stayed in academia.
> I hated paper reading in grad school but start to enjoy it now, one of the reasons is the interest and motivation are stronger and also the for-fun mindset.
You're not alone! I found reading papers for the sake of reading them to be boring. I'm not smart enough to read papers for fun like that. I need motivation. As soon as I'm actually working on software, I can cut through relevant papers and documentation like butter. Anything that isn't relevant to a problem I've created for myself is very hard to get through.
Matt Welch has written extensively about switching from tenured Professor at Harvard to Software Engineer at Google: http://matt-welsh.blogspot.com/, with the initial post http://matt-welsh.blogspot.com/2010/11/why-im-leaving-harvar... Matt's blog is great because (a) he writes it, (b) he's still connected to academia via program committees and (c) you can see how his thinking has evolved over the last 8 years.
And there are of course a number of other former faculty there too, but none that I know of who've blogged as much as Matt. In the systems space, off the top of my head: Amin Vahdat, Mike Dahlin, Steve Gribble, Craig Chambers, David Patterson, David Wetherall, Eric Brewer.
Personally, I've had way more impact (and fun!) building Compute Engine and Kubernetes than I had in academia. If in doubt, try industry for a summer or a year -- nothing we write can replace personal experience.
Given that he put "teaching" in with "overhead", there's no shock that he left. The precise reason I chose to push to continue into a professor position was my love of teaching, and my willingness to sacrifice lucrative pay and work-life balance for it.
To me, hearing this is like an architect talking about loving the job, but not caring for all the designing buildings it seems to entail. And it's part of the reason that I never advise my students who dislike teaching to even contemplate the academic job market and trying to get a faculty position. If you don't love teaching, go get actually paid elsewhere.
At a tier one, you are paid to do research, not teach, unless you are a clinical or adjunct. So it’s not just the professor binning teaching as overhead, but the universities as well.
If you love teaching, then being a professor at a top tier CS program might not be the right choice.
This is true for grant fields. Teaching really is irrelevant if you're bringing in big grants. In non-grant fields, however, you do have to teach at an acceptable level, even at good research universities.
All of the researchers I know take teaching very seriously and do a good job at it. Some of them even kind of like it, but their tenure case depends on their research output, and that is their primary job and usually passion.
Carnegie Mellon has no problem with you not teaching anything but grad courses if you bring in enough grant money to cover your salary and I’m not sure they care if you teach grad courses either.
UW CSE requires (or required when I was there?) their faculty to teach 2 courses every 3 quarters. So they got paid to teach, but they didn't have to teach very much.
I finished my PhD in neuroscience, then went to work for a new biotech startup in the Bay Area. I did a mix of programming and chemistry automation there. Then I started a software company with a lifelong friend and after a couple years we found product market fit and it took off. We’re almost 100 people now.
The work I do now has nothing to do with neuroscience, but I have zero regrets about my PhD. It was a fascinating period for me and I view it as an adventure I did in my 20s. I loved the work I did and it didn’t need to lead into something else.
An education :) Two start ups after phd and postdoc. Liked academia but couldn't afford it with two young kids. Joined a well funded start up. Was great for the range of problems I got to engage with. Was eventually sold to a multinational and very quickly turned into a soul destroying journey into the abyss. So much dreadful politics and nastiness. Left for another start up and am enjoying it. Have been involved in more of the business side this time, which is also interesting (and maybe depressing). I think I like the early stages of making something new. Supporting production systems and generally being "in operations" isn't my cup of tea. Your experience may vary...
Strangely mostly miss teaching rather than research. I do more research now, just don't publish it.
I earned a PhD in Neuroscience. Then suffered through a couple of postdocs and was not advancing in that career. I jumped ship to tech, working at startups and big-ish companies in San Francisco. The money was nice but working style did not match my preferences (frequent interruptions, projects decided by others, and hierarchies).
I decided to go back to academia (and stay in SF), primarily teaching Data Science. I realized that teaching is my passion. I took a pay cut, but it is more joyful for me. I can pick the courses I teach and get to mentor students. As I long I deliver, I can manage my time how I please. I still consult with tech companies.
I realized that I had to make my own way through my life. I found my niche which is 75% academic and 25% industry.
I don't equate the way that academia is run with science (nor do I think they hold a monopoly on knowledge as people would rather believe and prostrate themselves for as if it were an altar), I don't think I could be friends with people who are that simple minded, probably why I don't have many friends in the first place lol
Maybe I got lucky and never saw any of the relationships I had with academia, corporate world, or society at large permanent or all that interesting in the first place… I tend towards aversion and skepticism, and it seems like every wants someone else to drink the kool-aid they made… best I could do take a sip from what would kill me the least before I piss it out and move on.
No degree, worked in lab for 1.5 years writing software for neuralfeedback and data analysis for eeg/fmri systems in the NE area using a variety of programming languages/hardware. 1 co-authorship for a paper and 1 acknowledgement in another.
I dont find industry nearly as interesting subject wise, but pays way better than a research assistant with no degree. I worked remote (live in SE asia now, and traveling some from ME to Japan) for the past 3 years from one hedgefund to pharmaceutical data company (an arm of a hedgefund), and some random work. Now I algo trade my own funds and work on neuro related software/hardware side projects.
Only complaint is that too many employers still want people on site, but I dont care about it that much as I used to now that I’m doing my own thing and contract work if someone brings me something that interests me.
Don’t see myself going into academia again in the same way, not intersted in the lab politics nor grant-paper hamster wheel.
I was an academic on track to being a professor at a second-level university, or a principal investigator at a National Lab. Moving to industry was a great move- I didn't realize how badly compensated I was (2-3X income), had much more support and freedom for exploratory research, and people paid much more attention to my work (granted, I worked at Google, not all industry gives you this level of freedom). I also learned a ton of better software engineering and how to generally spend less effort to get better results.
If I had stayed in academia, I'd be spending all my time writing grants and papers and getting scooped by less scrupulous but more fecund authors.
One of the things that really struck me is that after you drop out of academia to go into industry there is really no going back. I hadn't expected that; I thought I'd just give industry a shot since I can always go back to academia if I don't like it. Not so. The people hiring for academic roles see it as an act of high treason punishable by lifelong exile.
I don't think that is universally the case. I transitioned back into academia after being in industry. Admittedly, I was only out in industry a couple of years and I've not found academia to my liking.
My background is microelectronics, and in my experience there is still a big skills gap inside academia which I think only people from industry can really fill. There is no substitute for practical/applied engineering experience, and that experience goes a very long way in informing how realistic or implementable a piece of new research is.
If professors are insightful enough to see the skills which engineers from industry can offer academia, then it's a benefit to everyone.
Did you get hired in a proper research and/or teaching role though in the subject area that you previously worked in when you were in academia? Or did they just pay you out of a research grant for a role as a technician of some kind? Big difference there, as the latter are, in my experience, treated as a "lower caste" and get paid neither as much as other academics nor as much as they would get paid in industry.
I'm a PhD dropout, but I did do lots of (somewhat poor) research leading up to that. For me, I was always a practical type, which made me less good as a researcher and more focused on engineering. Throughout my time in school though, I'd worked on the side (first commercializing our raytracing work, then consulting for Sony Pictures Imageworks).
I still stay involved in research, as I attend SIGGRAPH every year and often go to HPG. But, fundamentally, I'm sort of bad at imagining what will be a problem several years from now, and much better at solving something that's right in front of me. That led me to doing fairly systems-ey hardly research work, and then doing that as a full-time job :).
A former co-worker of mine gave a lecture about what it was like to go from academia (Ph.D. in Classical Literature) to working in the tech/creative industry.
In the US. Undergrad degree included CS. Spent a few years in software engineering industry. Left industry to pursue a PhD in computational science. Returned to industry right after completing the degree. At a hedge fund for 4+ years now. Dunno if that counts as "switching". Anyway...
I love it. Interesting problems with demonstrable business impact when you find a good solution. Software in an environment where robustness can be critical but, too, overpolishing work can be full of opportunity cost. A chance to keep reading/using academic literature. I hit a conference about once a year. Great coworkers from a myriad of backgrounds. I can afford to have a family, to spend time with that family, to give them a nice quality of life, and to save for the future. I have been lucky/blessed/etc.
This is a great question. Would be helpful if respondents could at least indicate the city/country of their experiences.
Living in Sydney, Australia I am not finding much interest by potential employers in my knowledge and experience in the field of software engineering. From discussing the situation with people I meet at international conferences, it would appear that the employment opportunities vary greatly across Europe and USA.
The answers to this question will be as spread as possible, as a PhD is hardly comparable to another PhD.
Academic experience varies as much as the experience of working as a toilet cleaner compared to a man of independent means (= someone who stopped working for his/her money) - had to look this up (German: Privatier). It seems to me that there is no word for this in the English language which transports the true meaning [1]. Prove me wrong, please.
After discussions with my SO she suggested to checkout wikipedia, and guess what we found:
Privatier ([pʀiˈvaˈtjeː], also spelled Privatus, with the feminine forms
Privata or Privatière, meaning "private person") is a French word that
was used from the 19th century in Germany and some other countries as
a title by members of bourgeois families of substantial financial means
in lieu of another professional title. Much like rentier, it denoted
someone who did not have to work to make a living, and who lived off
their assets of some size, e.g. interest, profits from investments, real
estate and current assets.
"A gentleman of means" is a somewhat antique term in British English. I don't think there's an equivalent expression for ladies- "A lady of means" sounds a bit strange.
I did my PhD in Civil Engineering and a 2 year postdoc in Austria (home country). I saw absolutely no future in academia, chances to get a permanent position were really slim and you could only go from one project to the other, which you had to hope to get funding for. Additionally, I was not happy with the group I was at.
So I decided to quit and found a new job at a small start up that is developing and providing consultancy for a CAE software. It was the best decision I ever made. I also did simulations during my academic life, but the pace has picked up significantly. I'm still at the forefront of research, but instead of pondering forever over minuscule details I'm now making stuff work. While the pay has not increased a lot, it's still better and I don't have to worry about getting funding, even though we do some research project, but if we don't get them it's not a huge issue. I have quite a diverse range of responsibilities including some managerial duties and I have grown and learned a lot in the past two years.
To sum up, it was great to leave and I wouldn't return unless I would be offered a professorship. I was extremely lucky with the company I work at and I think being in a small company allows to not just be another number in the system but actually contribute in many different ways. Obviously you need to have the right kind of people (incl. bosses) for that to be possible. Clearly, in a small company the human component is a crucial one.
I left a research lab, started a BE company, failed, started a dev shop, which has had some success. I am glad I left, but there is very little opportunity to do research, or work on anything related to my phd. In retrospect, my opinion is academia is a toxic, low productivity environment that punishes ambition.
Not many professors from business schools leave academia in the US partly because in business schools the salaries are much higher compared to other fields. Of course they are still lower than in the industry. However, many b-school professors do consulting and executive education which pays really well - anywhere between 2K to 10K per day. Btw, you can look up salaries of b-school professors in state universities in most states. (This usually excludes other income though) Some of the top professors make more than a quarter million a year. The highest I know earns more than a million a year only from salary.
I know a few people who quit business schools to join industry. Their reasons were mostly personal (spouse didn't get any job or the weather was terrible). They joined different companies in the Bay area. One of them said he is very happy with the transition in terms of money and dynamism but he rarely sees his kids now!
There's a few options in between, namely the "industry professor" and the "industrial researcher". Many universities will hire someone with suitable industry experience who has previously adjuncted to teach classes and occasionally do research as a "Visiting professor" (but you have to be good at both sides, think https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bjarne_Stroustrup).
There are also numerous roles in industry which do research (even Oracle has a research lab!). This is probably the easier route, especially if you're not as keen on teaching, and more and more companies are open to people doing speculative work and publishing papers (note that i'm making the assumption we're generally talking about software development, ML, hardware development, etc).
I've got PhD in a quantitative social science from an R1 university, so my experience may be different than others with PhDs in CS, Engineering, or the Physical Sciences.
In my view moving to industry was one of the best decisions I made in my life. Much(!!) better salary, much easier to find jobs, lots of choices of where to live, and better work/life balance. Having a decent salary and job choices also helped to stabilize my personal life as well.
The big reasons for leaving academia were job and money. Some of the brightest people I knew were fighting to get $40K postdocs jobs in high cost of living cities. Others were taking adjunct professor jobs in towns they didn't want to live in. All of it to hopefully one day have a tenure track job. One of the research jobs I was a finalist for had a terrible salary in NYC, but they provided subsidized housing in what was basically student housing for faculty. Not getting that job was one of the last rejections before I gave up academia.
The small reasons were all around being disillusioned with academia, both with research and teaching. The more honest professors would tell students to explore life outside academia. The ego-manics would boast about how they had a great tenure process and great retirement benefits, but all that was gone for new graduates. Some of the best and worst human beings I've met in life were in academia.
I was lucky that before my PhD I was a developer. So I had a some credibility when I applied for roles in software companies.
Just for a different viewpoint, it's really hard to evaluate the life you didn't live. When I looked at my PhD cohort 1-5 years after graduation it looked liked academia was a terrible decision. 5-10 years out the folks who wanted to stay in academia are doing well and the ones who left are also doing well. By well I mean with life, not just money. So maybe in the long run things work out, but the first few years after graduating can be awful.
As soon as I finished my PhD in computational science, I left to the Bay Area. I did consider some positions in academia, but as others have described, the low impact of the problems I was working on and the path to permanent position didn't really motivate me.
I have been one year in industry and though I am doing something different, filtering and sensor fusion, I would describe my overall experience as very positive. I still get to read a lot of papers, work with very intelligent and motivated people and every now and then I get some praise from my coworkers on my maths knowledge, which is nice.
Deadlines are tighter and the metrics in which my work is judged on are very different.
Got a PhD in Europe and later moved to the US for postdoc, then visiting asst. prof. then tenure-track asst. prof. All of these were very positive experiences, teaching- and research- wise.
I switched to industry while in 3rd tenure-track year and moved back to Europe, though the topic is the same (nonlinear discrete optimization). Most of the work is software development.
Enjoying a better paycheck and working 9to5 Mon-Fri (rarely had a non-work evening/weekend while in academia) but the research is still great and I get to publish articles and go to conferences. Miss teaching a lot and clearly I can't pick my own research topics, but the switch was definitely worth it.
I graduated this past semester (Fall 2018), but I started working in industry a little over a year ago. I knew in my second/third year that academia wasn’t for me. However, grad school gave me a paycheck (albeit small) + tuition and time to develop other skills that I did not have after undergrad. Further I had an awesome PhD advisor and enjoyed my research.
My experience in grad school wasn’t bad and I think it only benefited me when transitioning to industry. At my job, I thoroughly enjoy my work and team (it’s important you find your fit). The compensation bump was also nice compared to a PhD student stipend.
Pharmacology PhD (6years), post-doc(6 years), despite excellent publication record, not flashy enough to get grants or a tenure-track position after post-doc, continue as super post-doc(RS at our institution) for 7 more years until funding finally ran out. Gravitated to big data analytics, learned coding, learned ML and more math, looked for job. Total unemployment time == 1.25 years. Found current position (almost a year now) after about 200 applications. Happy as a clam and not the old bitter scientist of old.
I don't think a general answer is possible. Academia and industry both cover such a huge range.
For example in my case, I did a PhD and then went into embedded industry. We did better engineering in some research projects than in the industry project I'm currently in. In both cases the projects are not representative though.
In general, I can only say that I enjoy building stuff which gets actually used. The chance for that is much higher in industry.
I completed a Ph. D. in software engineering between 1998 and 2003. I started out in Sweden (Blekinge Institute of Technology) and finished it in Groningen (NL). After that I continued as a post doc and then decided to quit the academic world.
My main reason for this was that the paths to success in academia are basically to be a glorified manager (aka. a professor) or a teacher. Doing research seems to be mostly not on the table for either path as that is outsourced to Ph. D. students and post docs on temporary contracts. The path to professorship is long and hard and involves dealing with organizational politics to establish slow progress via post doc positions, an eventual tenure track position to maybe a professorship. Over the course of this career you have progressively less time to do research and you get bogged down in bureaucracy, budgets, and other management stuff.
The alternate track of becoming a teacher seems reserved for those that fail the first path. This has always felt a bit wrong to me as an important function of a university is teaching. But the reality is that as a teacher, you do no research and you report to professors that are mostly interested in doing research and regard you as a second rate citizen. This seems to be more true in Europe than in the US where quality teaching is key to university revenue and thus your career.
I was well on track with the research path having a steady stream of publications and options for continuing. But neither path appealed to me and I found the prospect of dealing with university politics, funding, and publications for the next forty years to be unappealing. Teaching could have been appealing to me but not as outlined above where you are essentially treated like a career failure.
So I left university to work for a small software company (for the first time practicing what I had been preaching) and later rebooted my academic career for a few more years in industry by joining Nokia Research in Helsinki. In there I found myself doing a lot of the same things as a post doc but with a decent salary and career options. I had a lot of fun and worked with some smart people on some cool projects. Unfortunately Nokia did not last and I transferred out into the maps unit in Berlin. After a few years, just before it turned into here.com, I joined the startup scene and have also done some freelancing.
I haven't really looked back. I enjoy building software and learning new things while doing that. I'm currently in a CTO type role and I haven't published anything this decade. So, my academic career at this point is pretty much over. I don't miss it but it is definitely been educational and formative. IMHO the most important function of a academic education is learning to think for yourself and the ability to learn new things. That doesn't really stop when you leave academia and they don't have a monopoly on this. Especially for computer science related fields, a lot of the progress is actually made in industry, not academia.
