People judge you based on what you do or say as well as mental models (really, prejudices) they have about you. These mental models could be positive (PhD = smart) or negative (PhD = arrogant). To be honest, what I have seen in industry is that people tend to have a positive (i.e PhD=smart) prejudice. The worst I have seen is that advanced degree holders are seen as impractical (i.e interested in theoretical questions and not necessarily "getting things done"). I have seen this tendency in some candidates with advanced degrees who displayed a lack of knowledge of practical issues so this prejudice is not entirely unwarranted. That being said, it was understood by all who interviewed them that this lack of knowledge was due to the fact that they had never worked in industry and so it was not held against them. I think offers were made to at least one although I don't know if he accepted or not.
People have tried to give you advice and you interpreted it in ways that they did not intend. Let me point out a few more in your response here:
Diracula said:
I'm actually attempting to relate this to the original question in the thread; it's just difficult when you have a swarm of loonies accusing you of being paranoid or outright fabricating stories for no reason.
"swarm of loonies" is not exactly a friendly term to describe people who are trying to give you the benefit of their experience. I also saw no accusations of being paranoid - only that you are drawing incorrect conclusions.
My point is basically know your audience, and realize it is an extremely typical human emotion to feel threatened by people that you perceive could be more intelligent than you.
I disagree. People feel threatened by people who act in threatening ways. I have NEVER encountered the phenomenon of people being threatened by advanced degree.
I actually enjoy meeting people who are more intelligent than I am but I do not consider the holding of any degree to be proof that the person is some sort of genius. I have met a lot of average (and a few dim bulb) PhD holders.
See elkement's story of how someone relayed to him that everyone thought he was arrogant before even meeting him simply by virtue of having a Ph.D. in physics (if, for some reason, you think I'm hallucinating or lying with my anecdote, there's another one for you).Probably the easiest way to make someone feel intellectually inferior is to go in great detail about a field that's really abstract and esoteric and that a huge portion of the population could not hope to understand. Do you really think making a hiring manager feel dumb in any way will help you get the job?
I don't see why that would make anyone feel intellectually inferior. People know that the PhD holder spent anywhere from 4 to 8 years post-bachelor's studying this stuff. Of course that person would KNOW more about physics than someone who maybe only studied it in high school, if at all but that does not confer intellectual superiority. Just means you spent a few years studying one field. Most people understand this and will not hold your knowledge of physics against you.
Basically, I would distill this down into the following advice: minimize the technical details of your physics Ph.D. thesis (both on your job app/resume and during the interview) if you know that job is not related to your thesis or you're pretty darn sure the details are irrelevant.
But why confine this advice to just Ph.D physics? You should minimize conversation about anything that does not give the interviewer the idea that you can do the job. You only have an hour or so to convince that person that you are perfect for the job. Why waste it on anything else?. So don't go on about your vacation, your homeowner association meetings, your hobby of building model trains in the nude ..etc (unless asked..even then steer the conversation back to the matter at hand)
This, conveniently, somewhat mirrors the advice of others saying to focus on what you can do for the company (don't talk about what you did during your Ph.D. that no one understands, focus on your programming skills, for example). Try to shift the focus away from your Ph.D. work. Hell, omit the Ph.D. entirely if necessary to get the job (some say this is unethical, I say that's hogwash. If you need a job you need a job).
I think instead of trying to "shift focus away from your Phd work", you should "shift focus to" the skills you have that they need.
Just trying to present an alternative to "all these uber talented physicists can't find a job because the market is flooded with a bunch of Alan Turing clones". Be aware of how you may come off to those that don't have a background in a field like math, physics, or engineering. I've seen enough instances of people feeling threatened (or automatically assuming Mr. Math Guy is arrogant) that I know people are not always rational about this.
If you are an uber talented physicist with a modicum of social skills you will find a job because you are an uber talented
anything you will find a job. However, physicist=talented is not always true and people know this.
One last thing: a lot of times people are reluctant to hire someone who spent years studying subject A and now wants to work in area B. The question is: will this person be happy doing this? Will they leave first chance they get? People have a perception that an advanced degree opens doors so they may fear that you are just waiting until you find the job that you really want.