Any success when leaving PhD off resume?


by nickyrtr
Tags: leaving, resume, success
nickyrtr
nickyrtr is offline
#1
Mar9-12, 11:17 AM
P: 87
While searching for a job, a number of people have suggested that I leave the PhD off my resume when applying for positions that don't require it. I haven't tried that yet, but am considering it. The alleged benefit is that fewer employers will be scared off by the "overqualified" PhD label. The down side is, it's hard to explain what I did for a few years in graduate school without mentioning the PhD, and of course the emotional downer of hiding an achievement I'm proud of.

Has anyone tried leaving the PhD off their resume and had successful results? I'm wondering if the benefits are real, or just an urban legend.
Phys.Org News Partner Science news on Phys.org
NASA's space station Robonaut finally getting legs
Free the seed: OSSI nurtures growing plants without patent barriers
Going nuts? Turkey looks to pistachios to heat new eco-city
leright
leright is offline
#2
Mar9-12, 11:47 AM
P: 1,194
Why get a PhD to get a job that doesn't require it? You should probably be applying for jobs that require a PhD. What is your PhD in?
Pyrrhus
Pyrrhus is offline
#3
Mar9-12, 01:28 PM
HW Helper
Pyrrhus's Avatar
P: 2,280
Quote Quote by leright View Post
Why get a PhD to get a job that doesn't require it? You should probably be applying for jobs that require a PhD. What is your PhD in?
because there are no or very few jobs that may appreciate a PhD. This depends on the PhD itself and employer's attitude.

gbeagle
gbeagle is offline
#4
Mar9-12, 01:39 PM
P: 53

Any success when leaving PhD off resume?


Who is telling you to leave your PhD off your resume?

I'm about to graduate with my PhD in physics, and that didn't seem to hurt me in the job search at all. It probably depends a lot on the sorts of jobs you are going after. I was looking at software development positions in Silicon Valley. I constrained my search to the Bay Area because of family reasons, so I don't have any first hand experience of interviewing in other job markets.

Most of the jobs I applied to said something in the job requirements like "B.Sc in CS, EE, Math, or related technical fields required. MS/PhD preferred." Not all had the MS/PhD preferred part. Though I guess if it has that wording it implies they don't consider a PhD overqualified, so this might not apply for the sorts of jobs you are pursuing.

What sort of jobs are you applying for?

Note also that at some point in every interview process I had to fill at an official application for the job that always had a section like: “Please list all educational experience” or something to that effect. Also the legalese on the application would have something stating that lying on the this form could constitute grounds for dismissal.
nickyrtr
nickyrtr is offline
#5
Mar9-12, 03:15 PM
P: 87
Quote Quote by gbeagle View Post
Who is telling you to leave your PhD off your resume?
A couple of people who work in human resources suggested this. Also I had one job interview with a small company where the "budget guy" said something to the effect of ... what are you doing looking for a job with us when you could be a physics professor? They didn't hire me, though I can't be sure that's the reason.

I'm about to graduate with my PhD in physics, and that didn't seem to hurt me in the job search at all. It probably depends a lot on the sorts of jobs you are going after. I was looking at software development positions in Silicon Valley. I constrained my search to the Bay Area because of family reasons, so I don't have any first hand experience of interviewing in other job markets.

[...]

What sort of jobs are you applying for?
Software development jobs, like you, though not in the Bay Area. I am also constrained by location due to family ties, in an economically depressed "Rust Belt" city, which doesn't help. Very few jobs around here say "MS/PhD preferred" unless it's an engineering degree.

In answer to the person who asked why start a PhD program knowing it won't help get a job, it's mainly because I didn't know. Having started grad school before the 2008 financial meltdown, job prospects looked much rosier back then. In fact, I turned down a job offer to go to grad school. Also, I never imagined a PhD would be seen as a negative in hiring.
ParticleGrl
ParticleGrl is online now
#6
Mar9-12, 09:28 PM
P: 669
My phd is theoretical physics. I spent well over a year looking for work, during which time I played various games with my resume. For intro type jobs at engineering (I was determined to find a job where some physics knowledge was value added) companies, I had a much better response/interview rate without the phd. I left the phd off, but left "researcher" in as the job I held during the period. Strangely enough, I also had a much better response when I stripped out the various teaching and research awards I had won during graduate school.

Also, one effect to look out for- everyone outside of science thinks that its really easy to find a job in science. The zeitgeist seems to be that we have a shortage of scientists, and there are all these great science jobs going begging. They expect you to jump ship for one of these science jobs. They don't and won't believe the science job market sucks, so you are better off convincing them that while doing your phd you developed a deep passion for whatever you are interviewing for. This might be a tough sell (it was for me). The exception might be fields already loaded with phds, who better know the reality (finance).

Also, I'd suggest looking in the health insurance industry. The companies are all over (everyone needs to be insured) and they've started to do a fair amount of data modeling which requires in-house programmers and data specialists.
MathematicalPhysicist
MathematicalPhysicist is offline
#7
Mar9-12, 09:35 PM
P: 3,175
Quote Quote by nickyrtr View Post
A couple of people who work in human resources suggested this. Also I had one job interview with a small company where the "budget guy" said something to the effect of ... what are you doing looking for a job with us when you could be a physics professor? They didn't hire me, though I can't be sure that's the reason.

Did you explain to them that chances of being a proffesor are less than some arbitrary positive epsilon?
ParticleGrl
ParticleGrl is online now
#8
Mar9-12, 09:39 PM
P: 669
Quote Quote by MathematicalPhysicist View Post
Did you explain to them that chances of being a proffesor are less than some arbitrary positive epsilon?
Doesn't work- after all "everyone knows we need more scientists." You are more likely to convince them that you've fallen in love with whatever you are interviewing for. i.e. "While working on my phd, I found I was enjoying developing and debugging code more than the science I was involved in... "
Choppy
Choppy is offline
#9
Mar9-12, 09:52 PM
Sci Advisor
P: 2,561
Having been on the other side of the interview a few times now, the real concern I think for a candidate is communicating their true interest in the position.

If you have a PhD and you're applying for something that doesn't require it, the white elephant in the room is whether you're actually interested in the position, or just using it as a place holder until something better comes along. As ParticleGrl said, it doesn't work to argue that the chances of getting a professor position are slim - because that still means that if one ever comes along, you'll drop that position like ahot potato.

One possible approach that can help is to style your resume so as to focus on skills and project accomplishments rather than assaulting the reader with the letters PhD and the title a complicated sounding thesis right under your name and address. You can still include the information - after all, people are going to find out about it eventually, but in some cases you can shift the focus away from it.
ParticleGrl
ParticleGrl is online now
#10
Mar9-12, 10:21 PM
P: 669
Quote Quote by Choppy View Post
As ParticleGrl said, it doesn't work to argue that the chances of getting a professor position are slim - because that still means that if one ever comes along, you'll drop that position like ahot potato.
Of course, the chance of a professor position coming along is 0 (its like being worried a potential employee will jump ship to go on tour with Boston (look up Tommy Decarlo), it COULD happen but its not worth worrying about), but the average non-scientist is unlikely to understand that and probably likely to believe the opposite. You aren't going to convince them during an interview.
twofish-quant
twofish-quant is offline
#11
Mar9-12, 11:04 PM
P: 6,863
Quote Quote by nickyrtr View Post
While searching for a job, a number of people have suggested that I leave the PhD off my resume when applying for positions that don't require it.
Are these people employers, since I don't it will work at all.

The first thing that an employer will look at when they see your resume is to see if there are any time gaps. If you have a five year to seven gap in your resume in which there is no explanation, that will doom your resume.

Now, I do have a resume which I was for computer positions in which I put the fact that I have a Ph.D. near the bottom. In my programmer resume, the name at the top says Twofish and the first section is working experience and the second is education. In my quant resume, the name at the top is Twofish Ph.D. and the first section is a technical description of my Ph.D. research.

The reason I mention I have a Ph.D. is so that no one thinks that I was in jail for armed robbery.

I haven't tried that yet, but am considering it. The alleged benefit is that fewer employers will be scared off by the "overqualified" PhD label.
Don't see the point really. One thing to remember is that if the employer isn't going to give you a job at the end, then it's better that the reject you at the start of the process so you don't waste your time.

One other thing to remember is that the employer may be *right* and you are overqualified for the job, and someone else should get it.
twofish-quant
twofish-quant is offline
#12
Mar9-12, 11:07 PM
P: 6,863
Quote Quote by Pyrrhus View Post
because there are no or very few jobs that may appreciate a PhD. This depends on the PhD itself and employer's attitude.
That's not true. There are lots of jobs that appreciate a Ph.D. The trouble is that they tend to be centered in a few cities (i.e. Silicon Valley, Austin, NYC) and a few industries. For me a Ph.D. has helped a lot because in every case, the person making the hiring decisions also had Ph.D.'s.
twofish-quant
twofish-quant is offline
#13
Mar9-12, 11:16 PM
P: 6,863
Quote Quote by nickyrtr View Post
A couple of people who work in human resources suggested this.
One thing to remember is that people in HR do not make hiring decisions for technical positions. HR's role is to do the initial screening, and if they trash your resume because you have a Ph.D., you weren't going to get the job anyway.

Software development jobs, like you, though not in the Bay Area. I am also constrained by location due to family ties, in an economically depressed "Rust Belt" city, which doesn't help.
Geography is a pain, but it turned out that what worked for me was to work in NYC Monday to Friday and then fly to Texas on the weekends. The scary thing was that lots of people were doing that.

Having started grad school before the 2008 financial meltdown, job prospects looked much rosier back then. In fact, I turned down a job offer to go to grad school. Also, I never imagined a PhD would be seen as a negative in hiring.
It is, but sometimes it's a good thing. After I went through several interviews by people that told me that I should looking for a job in NYC, I took the hint. One thing that on the employers mind is what happens in a year if the economy improves. If you have skills then you'll leave.
twofish-quant
twofish-quant is offline
#14
Mar9-12, 11:35 PM
P: 6,863
Quote Quote by ParticleGrl View Post
I left the phd off, but left "researcher" in as the job I held during the period.
I've done the same thing. In my programmer resume, I listed "research assistant" as one of the jobs, so I could (legitimately) claim work experience. I kept the Ph.D., although it got moved to the end, because Austin is a high tech area have respect for Ph.D., and even if I couldn't sell myself as a physics Ph.D., it doesn't hurt to sell yourself as a "UTexas Austin" alumni when looking for jobs in Texas.

Strangely enough, I also had a much better response when I stripped out the various teaching and research awards I had won during graduate school.
Not surprised that this is true. It's impossible for some outsider to know the value of a teaching and research award, so including a lot of those makes you look like someone that is 1) obssessed with awards and 2) padding their resume. Something that does happen with HR people is that they get flooded with a ton of resumes from business majors that treat every minor award as if its the Nobel prize.

Leaving off awards, unless it's something that you'd expect the interviewer to be familiar with is something that you should do for even Ph.D heavy positions.

One thing about resumes is that even when you are dealing with Ph.D. heavy industries is that you don't look too academic.

They don't and won't believe the science job market sucks, so you are better off convincing them that while doing your phd you developed a deep passion for whatever you are interviewing for.
One big problem with convincing people of this is that it might not be true. I've found reading about drama and theatre to be useful in job interviews, because there is a lot of role-playing here.

That's one thing that makes interviews Kafka-que.
twofish-quant
twofish-quant is offline
#15
Mar9-12, 11:49 PM
P: 6,863
One other thing is that resumes need to be targeted for the audience. For some jobs, you want to play up the Ph.D., and one annoyance of mine is to get a resume from someone that has taken the standard HR advice which is *wrong* for Wall Street firms. If you are applying for a job in NYC, one thing that you need is a technical description of your research which makes sense to someone else in your field.

One other thing that helps is do not think of your resume as your autobiography. Think of it as a 30 second commercial. If you think of your resume as an autobiography, then you are going to emphasize what is emotionally important to you rather than what matters to the reader. If you think of it as a 30 second movie trailer that put you in the right mind set to get rid of stuff that isn't important.

A resume is a commerical. Typically what happens is that someone gets a stack of resumes and scans through them very quickly, and you are lucky if someone spends more than one minute looking at your resume.

Something that helps writing a resume is to have you or someone else look at the resume for ten seconds, and then figure out what you remember from it. This is useful, because looking at a resume for ten seconds approximates how they are scanned in industry. The process for scanning resumes is intentionally impersonal, because you have a 100 people and one job, and you *can't* make decent decisions if you develop a personal attachment to anyone looking for a job.

Some other random things:

* include citizenship and work status and/or security clearnances

* use clean fonts with decent margins. Remember that your resume is likely to be faxed, scanned, printed, rescanned etc. etc

* .pdf is generally the preferred format. If you send your resume as an attachment, call it something like myname.pdf. If you call it resume.pdf, it's going to be a minor annoyance to the person that saves the file and has to rename it. First of all, don't want to annoy the person reading it. Second, if someone has to do something by hand, that increases the chances that someone is going to rename it something that causes it to be lost. One thing that makes the process even more Kalfkasque is that if the resume gets lost for "random reasons" (i.e. some photocopies and it falls behind the desk) no one will care.
twofish-quant
twofish-quant is offline
#16
Mar10-12, 12:18 AM
P: 6,863
It also occurs to me that geography makes a big factor, and that there is a lot of similarities between an "ethnic enclave" like Chinatown and Little Italy and cities with "physicstowns." Even if you aren't applying for a job in Austin, Texas that involves a physics Ph.d., it's likely that the interviewer knows someone that knows someone in physics department, and things like how difficult it is to find an academic position are "common knowledge".

Off the top of my head, cities that are friendly to physics Ph.D.'s include Silicon Valley, Austin, NYC, Boston, Research Triangle NC. In China, the physics Ph.D's tend to hang out in either Shenzhen/Hong Kong or in Beijing.
Mépris
Mépris is offline
#17
Mar10-12, 12:18 AM
P: 826
Quote Quote by twofish-quant View Post
That's not true. There are lots of jobs that appreciate a Ph.D. The trouble is that they tend to be centered in a few cities (i.e. Silicon Valley, Austin, NYC) and a few industries. For me a Ph.D. has helped a lot because in every case, the person making the hiring decisions also had Ph.D.'s.
Then would it be a better idea if one would want to work in NYC, to get a PhD from a university in that area - Stony Brook, NYU, Columbia, etc - and likewise for California (Stanford, USC, the UCs, CalTech, etc) and then UT Austin for well, Austin? Instead of say, one getting their PhD elsewhere...in France or Germany or maybe Louisiana.

Quote Quote by ParticleGrl View Post
Also, I'd suggest looking in the health insurance industry. The companies are all over (everyone needs to be insured) and they've started to do a fair amount of data modeling which requires in-house programmers and data specialists.
Could you tell us more about your job? In which area is it? Are your co-workers all PhD graduates?
nickyrtr
nickyrtr is offline
#18
Mar10-12, 04:24 AM
P: 87
Thanks for all the replies, lots of good advice in there. I especially like the idea of putting less emphasis on the PhD, without actually omitting it.

Quote Quote by twofish-quant View Post
[...] One other thing to remember is that the employer may be *right* and you are overqualified for the job, and someone else should get it.
If you are talking only about employer self-interest, I don't agree. The theory is that the overqualified person will quit as soon as a better job comes along, but this is a risk for all employees. In my experience, the most common reasons that people quit jobs are conflict with superiors or due to family concerns, which have nothing to do with qualification.

If you are talking about what's good for society, you could be right in that the person who is just barely qualified for the job needs it more than someone with a PhD, but where does that leave most PhD's? If there are 1,000 unemployed PhD's and 100 jobs that require a PhD, what should society do with the other 900?


Register to reply

Related Discussions
The Keys to success? General Discussion 18
A new way to success? Academic Guidance 31
Success Demands what? Academic Guidance 18
Searching for the best way to the success Academic Guidance 0
The philosophy of success General Discussion 15