Engineering Many rejections - Not knowing why

[ProbablyNotMe]

I have a PhD in ECE, and since 2018 I applied to 100s of positions in my field, and all my applications were rejected from the onset, except for a handful of phone interviews, and one technical interview when I skipped the phone interview, after which my applications were also rejected. I don't know why this is happening and what I am doing wrong. I tailor my resume and write cover letters to most positions I apply for. How can I get a feedback about why my applications are not being considered? I worked in the academia for a couple of years before, but is this a strong reason not to consider my applications in the industry, for example? Now I have gap in my resume and things are getting harder and harder for recruiters to notice my resume.

 

[Paul Colby]

If you know anyone in the industry, they are often given bonuses for finding good applicants. Someone who already knows you is a great leed in.

 

[Jody]

I don't have a PhD.

Would it be okay if you said which field or concentration? There can be so many reasons it might not be just you although I think that's a good place to start. If you're getting to the phone screening or interview part then usually I get a vibe as to where things felt right or wrong during the interview. What kind of questions are they asking you and how do you feel about it?

 

[Astronuc]

applied to 100s of positions in my field, and all my applications were rejected from the onset, except for a handful of phone interviews, and one technical interview when I skipped the phone interview, after which my applications were also rejected.

Does one ask for feedback, even though it seems to be negative?

How would one's research (PhD topic and publications) and experience help a company solve a problem or contribute to their products or processes?

It would help if you know someone in the companies to which one is applying.

When I interviewed for my first job in industry, I talked about my research, which was relevant to work in which the company was involved. I could also talk about the market, i.e., their customers and potential customers. It also helped that the company was desperate to hire someone who knew a particular computer code, and I just happened to be one of the few graduate students (from the only program) in the country who had experience with the code. I got a job offer the morning after my interview. Otherwise, the subsequent times I've changed jobs, I was recruited based on my experience and reputation.

 

[ProbablyNotMe]

If you know anyone in the industry, they are often given bonuses for finding good applicants. Someone who already knows you is a great leed in.

I know a couple of people who studied with me during my PhD, and they referred me to their companies. I got a couple of phone interviews because of them, but my applications were rejected immediately after the phone interview (the technical interview I got was a direct online application via the company's website). Their subsequent referrals was basically ignored and my applications were rejected from the onset. I reached to my PhD supervisor multiple times, but he doesn't seem interested in helping me. He tells me not to give up and keep applying. I know I need some connections, but my connections are limited. I tried to connect with people on LinkedIn, and although they usually accept my invitation to connect, they are less eager to respond to my messages asking for their experience in transition to the industry and if they have any advice for me. I understand that I am just a random person to them. I feel myself invisible to companies. What else can I do?

 

[ProbablyNotMe]

I don't have a PhD.

Would it be okay if you said which field or concentration? There can be so many reasons it might not be just you although I think that's a good place to start. If you're getting to the phone screening or interview part then usually I get a vibe as to where things felt right or wrong during the interview. What kind of questions are they asking you and how do you feel about it?

My specialty can broadly be categorized as digital signal processing.

The number of phone interviews are very few relative to the number of applications to start with. I would say from each 150-200 applications I got one phone interview. That makes me wonder there is something fundamentally wrong with my applications/me, but I cannot put my finger on what that might be with the lack of feedback. The interview questions are usually "tell me what you are doing now or about yourself?" "why did you apply for this job/this company?" "what's your salary expectation?" Something like that.

 

[ProbablyNotMe]

Does one ask for feedback, even though it seems to be negative?

How would one's research (PhD topic and publications) and experience help a company solve a problem or contribute to their products or processes?

It would help if you know someone in the companies to which one is applying.

When I interviewed for my first job in industry, I talked about my research, which was relevant to work in which the company was involved. I could also talk about the market, i.e., their customers and potential customers. It also helped that the company was desperate to hire someone who knew a particular computer code, and I just happened to be one of the few graduate students (from the only program) in the country who had experience with the code. I got a job offer the morning after my interview. Otherwise, the subsequent times I've changed jobs, I was recruited based on my experience and reputation.

My major issue is to land my first job. To break into the industry. With no experience I feel companies don't give my PhD a significant weight. I was told by a recruiter once we don't look for PhD but for experience. I have applied to research positions in the industry in my field of study where I meet most the requirements, but nothing.

 

[Astronuc]

With no experience I feel companies don't give my PhD a significant weight.

Well, one's PhD research is some kind of experience. How would that benefit the companies to which you applied?

Again, ask oneself, "How would one's research (PhD topic and publications) and experience help a company solve a problem or contribute to their products or processes?" In other words, what to do you and your research bring to the company?

I often read the literature and contact authors of papers about the research and applications. I once read an article about a utility that had a specific problem, so I called them up, discussed the problem, made some suggestions and developed a nice little project. Later, on a different problem, the same utility invited me to join their team involved in resolving the problem.

 

[Jody]

My specialty can broadly be categorized as digital signal processing.

The number of phone interviews are very few relative to the number of applications to start with. I would say from each 150-200 applications I got one phone interview.

For comparison I have a bachelors in electrical engineering with about 3 years of full-time work experience and many many many internships + part-time positions during my entire undergraduate career. I'm currently working on a masters degree. I'm not sure if the number changes much for folks with a PhD seeking a DSP role, but 1 call out of 200 ish applications seems about right maybe even on the good side from my perspective.

 

[ProbablyNotMe]

Well, one's PhD research is some kind of experience. How would that benefit the companies to which you applied?

Again, ask oneself, "How would one's research (PhD topic and publications) and experience help a company solve a problem or contribute to their products or processes?" In other words, what to do you and your research bring to the company?

I often read the literature and contact authors of papers about the research and applications. I once read an article about a utility that had a specific problem, so I called them up, discussed the problem, made some suggestions and developed a nice little project. Later, on a different problem, the same utility invited me to join their team involved in resolving the problem.

I do this in my cover letters. Talking about what I worked on during my PhD, and how this can help addressing the problems they are working on. Didn't do much.

Now after 4 years not working in my field, I feel I am in a very bad place to get a position in my field of study, and that's why my applications in the past 2 years got no positive responses. Now I am thinking to change careers to get any decent position to live by as if I hadn't ever finished a PhD, but again I will have no experience in the new field, and the same thing will be repeated again. At my age getting internships I imagine is not easy to gain experience in a totally new field in which I have no professional training like software development, but I am willing to do it to start my career paths.

 

[ProbablyNotMe]

For comparison I have a bachelors in electrical engineering with about 3 years of full-time work experience and many many many internships + part-time positions during my entire undergraduate career. I'm currently working on a masters degree. I'm not sure if the number changes much for folks with a PhD seeking a DSP role, but 1 call out of 200 ish applications seems about right maybe even on the good side from my perspective.

I once watched a YouTube video of someone who tried was switching careers to Data Science, and he said he sent 100 applications, got 30 interviews, 3 technical and one offer. I know the fields and places are different, but the discrepancy is huge to get 1 phone interview for every 150-200 applications.

 

[Choppy]

It's difficult for us to say what it is that's not working. There could be a lot of different factors at play.

For one, in a lot of places in the world, the economy is really suffering. Lots of people have lost jobs due to the pandemic and of course this bumps up the number of applications for any position out there. So the fact that you're having a hard time could have very little to do with you. But of course that's not much comfort.

One thing you might be able to do is go to your school's career and placement services office. Often they will have career and job-search counseling services available to alumni... cover letter workshops, resume critiques, interview skill development and even leads on jobs. Sometime they even have workshops for people who are trying to make the transition from academia into the industrial world. They can at least give you some very specific feedback if there's something obvious that you're missing in your search.

For what it's worth, I've never been a fan of the shotgun approach to job applications.

 

[ProbablyNotMe]

It's difficult for us to say what it is that's not working. There could be a lot of different factors at play.

For one, in a lot of places in the world, the economy is really suffering. Lots of people have lost jobs due to the pandemic and of course this bumps up the number of applications for any position out there. So the fact that you're having a hard time could have very little to do with you. But of course that's not much comfort.

One thing you might be able to do is go to your school's career and placement services office. Often they will have career and job-search counseling services available to alumni... cover letter workshops, resume critiques, interview skill development and even leads on jobs. Sometime they even have workshops for people who are trying to make the transition from academia into the industrial world. They can at least give you some very specific feedback if there's something obvious that you're missing in your search.

For what it's worth, I've never been a fan of the shotgun approach to job applications.

I called the career counselling services in my University a couple of years ago (after 3 years of graduation), but they told me they provide services for new graduates only (1 year from graduation).

I am not asking to diagnose my problem here. I am asking what actions I can take to know what's going on, or how to improve my chances.

What do you mean by "shotgun approach"? and what is a better approach?

 

[CrysPhys]

I know a couple of people who studied with me during my PhD, and they referred me to their companies. I got a couple of phone interviews because of them, but my applications were rejected immediately after the phone interview (the technical interview I got was a direct online application via the company's website). Their subsequent referrals was basically ignored and my applications were rejected from the onset.

<<Emphasis added>>

I don't know whether too much time has passed from these interviews for this to be useful. But you should have contacted your colleagues after the failed interviews to find out what went wrong. That's one of the great advantages of real networking (with people who actually know you, rather than random contacts you look up on the Internet). Your colleagues should be able to get the inside scoop from the people who interviewed you. Over the course of my career, I've served many times as an inside contact to help colleagues interviewing with my companies; and colleagues have served as inside contacts to help me interviewing with their companies.

 

[CrysPhys]

I called the career counselling services in my University a couple of years ago (after 3 years of graduation), but they told me they provide services for new graduates only (1 year from graduation).

I am not asking to diagnose my problem here. I am asking what actions I can take to know what's going on, or how to improve my chances.

What do you mean by "shotgun approach"? and what is a better approach?

<<Emphasis added>>

At this point, you do need one-on-one help diagnosing your specific problems. That, though, would involve disclosure of more personal details than would be appropriate on a public forum. I recommend that you enroll in a mentorship program. I personally served as a volunteer mentor in one organization for ~15 yrs. Various professional societies have launched such programs; e.g., the American Physical Society (APS). For your field, I would suggest looking into the IEEE Mentoring Program (https://www.ieee.org/membership/mentoring.html). Some alumni associations (e.g., MIT) have also launched mentorship programs; check with your previous schools. Good Luck!

 

[Dr Transport]

With no experience I feel companies don't give my PhD a significant weight.

Having a PhD, the companies usually require that they pay you significantly more to start and most places I know are hiring at the bottom of the pay scale.

 

[Choppy]

What do you mean by "shotgun approach"? and what is a better approach?

The shotgun approach to the job search: applying to hundreds of positions with minimal investment into researching and preparing for each position. It's one end of a spectrum where people just put their name in, submit a generic resume to a position they may or may not be qualified for with minimal to no follow up. The probability of landing any given job using this approach is low, but in theory if it's not zero, you just keep increasing your number of applications until you're successful.

To be clear, I'm not saying that you're necessarily doing this. But whenever I read about people submitting hundreds of applications and complaining about minimal feedback, I do start to wonder how much preparation is being put into each application.

At the other end of the spectrum is what I think of as the "sniper approach." Some characteristics of the sniper approach...

• You do detailed research into the specific industry. You learn the trends, which companies are doing well, which are barely managing to stay afloat. You understand how the companies make money. You learn what the likely changes are coming down the pipe so that you can make as good a prediction as anyone what the next 5 to 10 years are likely to hold in store for the industry.
• You know what an entry-level position in that industry looks like, what the mandatory qualifications are and what the desirable qualifications are. You're not afraid of a salary negotiation because you know what the salary distribution looks like.
• You specifically prepare yourself for a position in this industry. You take relevant courses and earn any necessary qualifications that are going to get your resume onto any short-lists. This can require a substantial investment of time and can be particularly tough for someone who has already invested years in an advanced education.
• You build up a network specific to that industry. You do this through internships, volunteer work, job shadowing, attending conferences, interviewing people who work in the industry, taking on relevant projects, making friends with other people trying to break into the industry, etc. I understand that a lot of this kind of thing is more challenging now with social distancing restrictions in place, but it's not impossible. I know someone in my field who every once in a while hosts an online "social hour" open to anyone in the field, for example.
  
• When a position opens up that you're interested in, because of all the preparation work you've done above, you know about it before it's advertised to the general public. You identify the key individuals responsible for the hiring decision. When you apply, you apply both officially through human resources and by submitting your cover letter directly to the manager responsible for the hiring.
• You know what your competition looks like and you can readily identify any traits you have that make you stand out as an ideal candidate.
• You follow up. If you're not successful for the position, you solicit critical, constructive criticism. At minimum, you use that contact as another node in your industry network. You build bridges.

 

[Vanadium 50]

I am not asking to diagnose my problem here. I am asking what actions I can take to know what's going on, or how to improve my chances.

If we don't diagnose what is going wrong, how can we give advice on how to improve things?

 

[ProbablyNotMe]

The shotgun approach to the job search: applying to hundreds of positions with minimal investment into researching and preparing for each position. It's one end of a spectrum where people just put their name in, submit a generic resume to a position they may or may not be qualified for with minimal to no follow up. The probability of landing any given job using this approach is low, but in theory if it's not zero, you just keep increasing your number of applications until you're successful.

To be clear, I'm not saying that you're necessarily doing this. But whenever I read about people submitting hundreds of applications and complaining about minimal feedback, I do start to wonder how much preparation is being put into each application.

At the other end of the spectrum is what I think of as the "sniper approach." Some characteristics of the sniper approach...

• You do detailed research into the specific industry. You learn the trends, which companies are doing well, which are barely managing to stay afloat. You understand how the companies make money. You learn what the likely changes are coming down the pipe so that you can make as good a prediction as anyone what the next 5 to 10 years are likely to hold in store for the industry.
• You know what an entry-level position in that industry looks like, what the mandatory qualifications are and what the desirable qualifications are. You're not afraid of a salary negotiation because you know what the salary distribution looks like.
• You specifically prepare yourself for a position in this industry. You take relevant courses and earn any necessary qualifications that are going to get your resume onto any short-lists. This can require a substantial investment of time and can be particularly tough for someone who has already invested years in an advanced education.
• You build up a network specific to that industry. You do this through internships, volunteer work, job shadowing, attending conferences, interviewing people who work in the industry, taking on relevant projects, making friends with other people trying to break into the industry, etc. I understand that a lot of this kind of thing is more challenging now with social distancing restrictions in place, but it's not impossible. I know someone in my field who every once in a while hosts an online "social hour" open to anyone in the field, for example.
• When a position opens up that you're interested in, because of all the preparation work you've done above, you know about it before it's advertised to the general public. You identify the key individuals responsible for the hiring decision. When you apply, you apply both officially through human resources and by submitting your cover letter directly to the manager responsible for the hiring.
• You know what your competition looks like and you can readily identify any traits you have that make you stand out as an ideal candidate.
• You follow up. If you're not successful for the position, you solicit critical, constructive criticism. At minimum, you use that contact as another node in your industry network. You build bridges.

These hundred of applications span a period of years. I invest time in preparing for most positions, but to be honest, after spending 2 hours for each application and then being rejected for many applications, I have become less invested in the process, but I still prepare about the position and company. I think I am failing mainly the HR part. The only technical interview I did was after I was initially interviewed by an engineer and skipped the HR. But I still answer the HR's behavioral questions appropriately. I did research on these questions and how to answer them. But for some reason I still seem to fail them. I suspect that my resume doesn't reach the hiring manager for the most part.

 

[ProbablyNotMe]

<<Emphasis added>>

I don't know whether too much time has passed from these interviews for this to be useful. But you should have contacted your colleagues after the failed interviews to find out what went wrong. That's one of the great advantages of real networking (with people who actually know you, rather than random contacts you look up on the Internet). Your colleagues should be able to get the inside scoop from the people who interviewed you. Over the course of my career, I've served many times as an inside contact to help colleagues interviewing with my companies; and colleagues have served as inside contacts to help me interviewing with their companies.

I thought if they knew anything they would let me know, but now thinking about it I probably should have asked them to ask even if they weren't told by the recruiter or hiring manager. It's been years since the last phone interview I did. Now I think it's too late to investigate.

 

[ProbablyNotMe]

Having a PhD, the companies usually require that they pay you significantly more to start and most places I know are hiring at the bottom of the pay scale.

Whenever they asked about my salary expectation, I say something at the lower end of the range for the position in the area where I am living. Because I know I will be an entry level. I am not sure if this is the main issue.

 

[CrysPhys]

Whenever they asked about my salary expectation, I say something at the lower end of the range for the position in the area where I am living. Because I know I will be an entry level. I am not sure if this is the main issue.

You need to be careful about the term "entry level". It typically does not apply to positions for which a PhD (or equivalent degree and experience) is required, since the years spent during your thesis research are counted as experience. Are you applying for the right level jobs? Are you applying for jobs for a fresh PhD? But if you are applying for lower level jobs in your field of expertise (e.g., those that require only a BS with either no experience or a couple of years experience), your applications will typically be tossed because you are over-qualified. Different approaches apply if you are switching fields, however.

 

[ProbablyNotMe]

You need to be careful about the term "entry level". It typically does not apply to positions for which a PhD (or equivalent degree and experience) is required, since the years spent during your thesis research are counted as experience. Are you applying for the right level jobs? Are you applying for jobs for a fresh PhD? But if you are applying for lower level jobs in your field of expertise (e.g., those that require only a BS with either no experience or a couple of years experience), your applications will typically be tossed because you are over-qualified. Different approaches apply if you are switching fields, however.

I applied for jobs the didn't require a PhD, but for the most part I have applied to positions that require at least a master, and a PhD is preferred.

I avoid positions like staff or senior engineer, otherwise I apply. Two years ago I applied for an internship in a major telecom company as a researcher to work on 5G technologies which required a PhD (my PhD thesis was in the same context), and although they interviewed me with an engineer for about an hour, and I subjectively felt I did well by answering the technical questions, they rejected my application afterwards. When I asked the recruiter for a feedback, I was told my background is impressive (ironically usually said along with many rejection letters ), but they felt I was overqualified (this should have been obvious before the interview, though! )

Which confuses me. I am overqualified for internships, and not qualified for full- or part-time positions because I don't have "practical experience".

 

[Jody]

You could probably apply for senior or staff.

Is aerospace & defense something you might be open to? I'm not sure if it's common at all aerospace & defense companies, but the ones I worked at credentials were highly valued. I saw multiple PhD applicants get hired directly to senior or staff roles with little to no work experience.

I also noticed you mentioning switching fields. I felt like my work in each of the aerospace companies was much more broad than the current company I'm with. I got to try so many different things while I was in aerospace. They also work with really high frequency and value people who understand architecture a lot better, which I would imagine is more up the alley for someone who studied DSP.

 

[TeethWhitener]

You could probably apply for senior or staff

Second. Senior usually denotes entry PhD level (or shortly thereafter). But it’s best to try to figure out what job titles entry-level PhD’s are being hired for in a given company. Websites like Glassdoor make this process significantly easier (and may also elucidate the often-confusing structure of senior scientist 1, senior scientist 2, etc.—do the numbers run from high to low or vice versa? It differs from company to company).

 

[ProbablyNotMe]

You could probably apply for senior or staff.

Is aerospace & defense something you might be open to? I'm not sure if it's common at all aerospace & defense companies, but the ones I worked at credentials were highly valued. I saw multiple PhD applicants get hired directly to senior or staff roles with little to no work experience.

I also noticed you mentioning switching fields. I felt like my work in each of the aerospace companies was much more broad than the current company I'm with. I got to try so many different things while I was in aerospace. They also work with really high frequency and value people who understand architecture a lot better, which I would imagine is more up the alley for someone who studied DSP.

I think in the US things are different. Actually the only technical interview I had was in the US. Where I live the job market is smaller, and they seem to focus too much on experience (which must be local, too) as opposed to education, credentials and the theory, and thus employers are very selective. Many said PhD is considered as experience and I agree, but I didn't feel that way with my applications and interviews. I am sure things would be much easier after the first job, but breaking into the industry has proven to be extremely difficult for me, and more so now in my situation with years of gaps and not working in my field.

 

[CrysPhys]

I think in the US things are different. Actually the only technical interview I had was in the US. Where I live the job market is smaller, and they seem to focus too much on experience (which must be local, too) as opposed to education, credentials and the theory, and thus employers are very selective.

OK, so where are you, and where are you looking? That would have been a key piece of info to disclose in Post #1, rather than Post #26. Proper guidance for careers varies a lot with different countries. Usually I can tell from the vocabulary and grammar of the posts whether the writer is US or not. But in your case, I didn't spot any tell-tale signs. You will probably get more targeted advice if you would clarify your circumstances.

 

[ProbablyNotMe]

OK, so where are you, and where are you looking? That would have been a key piece of info to disclose in Post #1, rather than Post #26. Proper guidance for careers varies a lot with different countries. Usually I can tell from the vocabulary and grammar of the posts whether the writer is US or not. But in your case, I didn't spot any tell-tale signs. You will probably get more targeted advice if you would clarify your circumstances.

I live in Canada where I got my PhD, and I mainly apply within Canada. I posted before and disclosed this information.

 

[CrysPhys]

I live in Canada where I got my PhD, and I mainly apply within Canada. I posted before and disclosed this information.

It would have been far more efficient if you had referenced your previous thread in Post #1 of this thread; and at least include some basic background in your profile. I will typically click on a poster's profile, but not hunt for previous threads.

ETA: The following comment is not meant to be snarky, but hopefully enlightening. You should closely critique how effectively you communicate. Effective communication is key to the success of many endeavors, including landing a job.

 

[Zap]

In my opinion, hundreds of job applications over a span of approximately three years is not a lot. It should be in the thousands. That's just my opinion.

 

[Zap]

I once watched a YouTube video of someone who tried was switching careers to Data Science, and he said he sent 100 applications, got 30 interviews, 3 technical and one offer. I know the fields and places are different, but the discrepancy is huge to get 1 phone interview for every 150-200 applications.

Do you believe that? I don't.

You should have filled out like 5 thousand applications already.

I can make a bot to fill out applications for me. When that happens, it will be 1000 per day.

You can just use Selenium and an html parser to do it.
Requires minimal coding ability.

I say this all the time, and many don't believe me, but I could fill out 100 applications per day manually. This was my strategy. Try to apply to 100 jobs per day, and then see what happens after two weeks. If you can't find 100 jobs to apply to per day, then you're looking in the wrong industry.

 

[symbolipoint]

I can make a bot to fill out applications for me. When that happens, it will be 1000 per day.

You can just use Selenium and an html parser to do it.
Requires minimal coding ability.

I say this all the time, and many don't believe me, but I could fill out 100 applications per day manually. This was my strategy. Try to apply to 100 jobs per day, and then see what happens after two weeks. If you can't find 100 jobs to apply to per day, then you're looking in the wrong industry.

Just incredible! The reliability is much of what is difficult to believe.

 

[Zap]

I haven't made the bot, yet, if that's what you're referring to. I suspect it will only actually work about half the time, and it's bound to run into all kind of errors, but after a considerable amount of debugging, and depending on the speed of the headless browser, I'm thinking I could knock out at least a few hundred applications while I sleep. This is just a hypothesis as of right now, though. I'm not really looking for a job at the moment, but this is in the pipeline of personal projects I intend to complete by next year. I would program it to string match on certain html tags so that it does not apply to completely random jobs. I don't think mass applying to completely random jobs is productive. You should have a few targets.

 

[symbolipoint]

I haven't made the bot, yet, if that's what you're referring to. I suspect it will only actually work about half the time, and it's bound to run into all kind of errors, but after a considerable amount of debugging, and depending on the speed of the headless browser, I'm thinking I could knock out at least a few hundred applications while I sleep. This is just a hypothesis as of right now, though. I'm not really looking for a job at the moment, but this is in the pipeline of personal projects I intend to complete by next year. I would program it to string match on certain html tags so that it does not apply to completely random jobs. I don't think mass applying to completely random jobs is productive. You should have a few targets.

If that is something that YOU do, then at least you could use the work as a way to impress prospective employers during any resulting interviews.

 

[Aanantharajasingam]

I have a PhD in ECE, and since 2018 I applied to 100s of positions in my field, and all my applications were rejected from the onset, except for a handful of phone interviews, and one technical interview when I skipped the phone interview, after which my applications were also rejected. I don't know why this is happening and what I am doing wrong. I tailor my resume and write cover letters to most positions I apply for. How can I get a feedback about why my applications are not being considered? I worked in the academia for a couple of years before, but is this a strong reason not to consider my applications in the industry, for example? Now I have gap in my resume and things are getting harder and harder for recruiters to notice my resume.

You may not be in a pool of applicants or any for instance for a company to hire but also fall in a normal applicant pool so you normally wouldn't find something as quickly as you would, there could be other qualifications to each specific job

 

[Zap]

Try 100 applications per day for two weeks and see what happens lol.

You can even take the weekends off. So, that will be 1,000 applications in a very short span of time.

Let's look at the job hunt statistically. Let's say applying for a job is like sampling a random variable from some probability distribution, where some value of the variable corresponds to a job offer. The thing is, you're sampling a new distribution every month or so, because job posts only last about a month or so. So, you have to rapid fire applications so that you're sampling from a pseudo-static distribution, which will greatly increase your chances of getting the job offer. What it sounds like OP has done is sample 1,000 times from 1,000 different distributions.

The faster you sample, the more static the distribution becomes. Of course, the quality of your application will tend to decrease as the sampling frequency increases. So, that's something for you to try and manually optimize. I would focus on trying to make the job hunt as fast and efficient as possible without sacrificing too much of the application quality. Although, you must sacrifice some of the quality in order to increase speed and efficiency, I think that this is the optimal way. No application will be perfect, no matter how much time you spend on it, and you simply must move on with your life.

I realize that this is a crude model, but I stand by it.

 

[symbolipoint]

The faster you sample, the more static the distribution becomes. Of course, the quality of your application will tend to decrease as the sampling frequency increases. So, that's something for you to try and manually optimize. I would focus on trying to make the job hunt as fast and efficient as possible without sacrificing too much of the application quality. Although, you must sacrifice some of the quality in order to increase speed and efficiency, I think that this is the optimal way. No application will be perfect, no matter how much time you spend on it, and you simply must move on with your life.

I realize that this is a crude model, but I stand by it.

The part I made into bold is the part I think is the best.

 

[Zap]

You wish to put more weight on the quality and sacrifice efficiency and frequency. That's fine, if that works for you. It didn't work for me. That's why I am only suggesting that OP try different strategies, since he has went 3 years of his life with no success. Why not spend just two weeks testing a different strategy? It takes just two weeks to see if this works or not. If it doesn't work, then try something else. But doing the same thing for 3 years and getting nowhere with it is crazy.

In my opinion, the sacrifice in application quality is minimal, and the benefit of hyper efficiency is enormous. But I've spent a lot of time optimizing this strategy, so it works for me.

 

[russ_watters]

That's why I am only suggesting that OP try different strategies, since he has went 3 years of his life with no success. Why not spend just two weeks testing a different strategy? It takes just two weeks to see if this works or not. If it doesn't work, then try something else. But doing the same thing for 3 years and getting nowhere with it is crazy.

The risk is from the fact that you can only shoot one gun at a target. If you shoot the shotgun at 1,000 targets, now you can't shoot them with the sniper rifle.

However, what you could do is identify targets to shoot with the sniper rifle and then shoot everything else with the shotgun.

 

[Vanadium 50]

I like your analogy. Can you work in a bazooka?

 

[Office_Shredder]

I don't think you can even shoot a sniper rifle at most job applications. Your understanding of what they are looking for in a candidate is imperfect at best (and as evidence, simply observe the fact that if you have spent a year or more trying to get jobs and failing, you probably felt you were the perfect candidate for at least one and you still didn't get it), so at some point trying to spend time differentiating your applications for different jobs is just you wasting your time. It's easy to say sure I have a generic application, but if I spend a bit more time I could make two applications, and send one to the jobs that case more about my physics degree and one to the jobs that care more about my programming experience, but if you are only able to identify which is more important with 50% accuracy then there is not a lot of value in trying to do this.

 

[Jody]

I don't know how true this is, but I heard some places they don't like when you apply there multiple times especially in a short amount of time. Could that be risky to apply to a bunch of places... that many places?

 

[analogdesign]

You're in a tough spot. Being years away from your research with no work experience is hard. Typically a PhD finds work through his or her network. I've never hired a PhD who wasn't either referred to me or who I was already aware of their group or advisor (at least). It could happen, but it hasn't.

Have you considered looking into a postdoc to get you back in the game? Have you reached out to your advisor? An advisor benefits when their students succeed so he or she is incentivized to help you.

Are you focusing your applications to the US? The US electronics industry is booming. I know multiple Canadians who are working as EEs in the US and they have all told me the Canadian EE market pales in comparison to the opportunities in the US.

It's a sad fact of life that it is much harder to get a job when you don't already have one. I would start treating applications like a job. You should be doing several thoughtful, targeted applications a day.

 

[ProbablyNotMe]

You're in a tough spot. Being years away from your research with no work experience is hard. Typically a PhD finds work through his or her network. I've never hired a PhD who wasn't either referred to me or who I was already aware of their group or advisor (at least). It could happen, but it hasn't.

Have you considered looking into a postdoc to get you back in the game? Have you reached out to your advisor? An advisor benefits when their students succeed so he or she is incentivized to help you.

Are you focusing your applications to the US? The US electronics industry is booming. I know multiple Canadians who are working as EEs in the US and they have all told me the Canadian EE market pales in comparison to the opportunities in the US.

It's a sad fact of life that it is much harder to get a job when you don't already have one. I would start treating applications like a job. You should be doing several thoughtful, targeted applications a day.

Can I ask why you have never hired a PhD without referral or knowing their advisor?

I did 2 years postdoc also in Canada immediately after I graduated 6 years ago, and after that it was difficult to keep getting postdoc positions as there is a maximum limit when you graduated before applying for most universities. Also, I was interested in a more stable job, than keep having 6-12 months contracts all over the country, and keep moving cities.

I reached out to my PhD advisor (with whom my relationship was good during my PhD) more than once, the last of which was just a couple of months ago, but his response has always been "I cannot do anything. Keep applying. Don't give up". He didn't even help me get my first postdoc position, didn't give me any career guidance towards the end of my PhD, and he didn't help me whatsoever in my PhD dissertation other than editing it. I also asked him to introduce me to his former students who work in the industry in Canada, but he just ignored my request. I did the same with my 2-year postdoc advisor, with the same results. They all seem to think you need to earn it yourself without help.

I know the situation would have been different in the US had I graduated from a US university. The US job market is larger and more diverse than the Canadian job market, but currently I am applying in Canada.

 

[StatGuy2000]

Can I ask why you have never hired a PhD without referral or knowing their advisor?

I did 2 years postdoc also in Canada immediately after I graduated 6 years ago, and after that it was difficult to keep getting postdoc positions as there is a maximum limit when you graduated before applying for most universities. Also, I was interested in a more stable job, than keep having 6-12 months contracts all over the country, and keep moving cities.

I reached out to my PhD advisor (with whom my relationship was good during my PhD) more than once, the last of which was just a couple of months ago, but his response has always been "I cannot do anything. Keep applying. Don't give up". He didn't even help me get my first postdoc position, didn't give me any career guidance towards the end of my PhD, and he didn't help me whatsoever in my PhD dissertation other than editing it. I also asked him to introduce me to his former students who work in the industry in Canada, but he just ignored my request. I did the same with my 2-year postdoc advisor, with the same results. They all seem to think you need to earn it yourself without help.

I know the situation would have been different in the US had I graduated from a US university. The US job market is larger and more diverse than the Canadian job market, but currently I am applying in Canada.

I live in Canada (Toronto to be specific, so my experiences will likely be biased in that direction), and I can offer my perspective on the job market here:

1. Many immigrants, particularly those who come from outside of English-speaking countries (or, in the case of Quebec, from French-speaking countries) experience difficulty breaking into the job market in general. Some Canadian hiring managers place a great deal of importance on communication skill and "cultural compatibility" (i.e. someone who talks and acts like you, and have similar interests), and therefore many immigrants who come from other parts of the world face a barrier immediately. The upshot is that people who were born/raised in Canada have a much easier time being hired in any field.

2. Reaching out to your PhD advisor is, under most circumstances, a waste of time in Canada. Most PhD advisors here in Canada (outside of those in very specific fields at specific universities, e.g. University of Toronto or University of Waterloo) do not have sufficient connections to industry here in Canada.

3. As an immigrant, among the better ways of seeking employment would be to set up a start-up business, especially those that specifically cater to those in your immigrant community. After all, why is it that so many immigrants, for example, start up grocery stores or restaurants, regardless of what they were originally trained or educated in?

4. If you don't want to follow #3 and stay within your technical field, then you have to develop connections with those outside of your ethnic community. You stated that you asked one of your professors to introduce you to his former students. Why not just find out who his former students are, and search for them online and reach out directly? Networking directly (without going through intermediaries) will be crucial.

5. You did state that you were looking exclusively at Canadian employers. In this age of remote work, why are you restricting yourself only to Canada? Apply to employers from, say, the US, the UK, or mainland European countries (e.g. France, Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, etc.). Or if you are fluent speaker of non-European countries, consider applying to companies based in those areas (e.g. Chinese companies if you are a fluent Mandarin speaker; UAE or Saudi Arabia if you are fluent Arabic speaker, etc.).

 

[analogdesign]

Can I ask why you have never hired a PhD without referral or knowing their advisor?

Because they've never worked out. It isn't that I have anything against anyone who applies out of the blue, but most PhDs work in rather niche fields. I'm in the semiconductor area but I work in a niche. So, I know a good portion of the people who do what I do. So, if I don't know your advisor, you are likely switching subfields, or coming from industry. That's totally ok, but you have to have a story. Why would I hire someone who is switching fields over an available candidate who could hit the ground running? The cover letter is a good place to address this.

I did 2 years postdoc also in Canada immediately after I graduated 6 years ago, and after that it was difficult to keep getting postdoc positions as there is a maximum limit when you graduated before applying for most universities. Also, I was interested in a more stable job, than keep having 6-12 months contracts all over the country, and keep moving cities.

That's good you did a postdoc. The limit where I work is 5 years I think, but it varies. And, unfortunately, research is a worldwide job market. I had to move 3000 miles to get my current role (changed coasts of the US).

I reached out to my PhD advisor (with whom my relationship was good during my PhD) more than once, the last of which was just a couple of months ago, but his response has always been "I cannot do anything. Keep applying. Don't give up". He didn't even help me get my first postdoc position, didn't give me any career guidance towards the end of my PhD, and he didn't help me whatsoever in my PhD dissertation other than editing it. I also asked him to introduce me to his former students who work in the industry in Canada, but he just ignored my request. I did the same with my 2-year postdoc advisor, with the same results. They all seem to think you need to earn it yourself without help.

I'm very sorry to hear that. It is quite different from my experience. I'm still in relatively close contact with my advisor over 15 years on. As StatGuy2000 indicated this may be a cultural thing, as in the US this would be considered bad form on the part of your advisors.

I know the situation would have been different in the US had I graduated from a US university. The US job market is larger and more diverse than the Canadian job market, but currently I am applying in Canada.

The job market (right now) is better in the US than anywhere in the world. I think you're making a mistake limiting your job search to Canada. I work in a major institution and a huge percentage of the research staff is from outside the US. Some of them attended US universities but a lot of people attended US in other countries and moved to the US for the opportunity.

Especially in EE fields like DSP there are massive opportunities in Silicon Valley and Southern California (depending on what your focus is).

 

[symbolipoint]

3. As an immigrant, among the better ways of seeking employment would be to set up a start-up business, especially those that specifically cater to those in your immigrant community. After all, why is it that so many immigrants, for example, start up grocery stores or restaurants, regardless of what they were originally trained or educated in?

Amazing statement! How do we explore that suggestion more completely?

 

[Zap]

The risk is from the fact that you can only shoot one gun at a target. If you shoot the shotgun at 1,000 targets, now you can't shoot them with the sniper rifle.

However, what you could do is identify targets to shoot with the sniper rifle and then shoot everything else with the shotgun.

That's pretty much what I do. I just didn't go into that much detail. During the job hunt, you'll find posts that stand out that you really would like to put extra time in. The main point I was trying to get across was that most people don't send a lot of applications and give up, because they think you should find a job after sending 100 out. I want to stress that it took me at least a thousand before I started even getting call backs, and a few hundred is nowhere near enough, in my opinion.

 

[f95toli]

That's pretty much what I do. I just didn't go into that much detail. During the job hunt, you'll find posts that stand out that you really would like to put extra time in. The main point I was trying to get across was that most people don't send a lot of applications and give up, because they think you should find a job after sending 100 out. I want to stress that it took me at least a thousand before I started even getting call backs, and a few hundred is nowhere near enough, in my opinion.

I suspect this depends on the job. When we hire people as researchers we generally look for fairly specific (and sometimes unusual) skills, meaning a CV which hasn't to some extent been tailored to the role we are advertising is extremely unlikely to go down well.
Also, our HR department will always do the initial screening meaning any any incomplete/or "strange" CVs will get rejected by them before they ever reach me.
I guess the "shotgun" approach might work if you are applying to more "standardised" job roles, but probably not for R&D positions.

 

[StatGuy2000]

I suspect this depends on the job. When we hire people as researchers we generally look for fairly specific (and sometimes unusual) skills, meaning a CV which hasn't to some extent been tailored to the role we are advertising is extremely unlikely to go down well.
Also, our HR department will always do the initial screening meaning any any incomplete/or "strange" CVs will get rejected by them before they ever reach me.
I guess the "shotgun" approach might work if you are applying to more "standardised" job roles, but probably not for R&D positions.

@f95toli , let's say, hypothetically, that someone managed to find out who you are (whether through LinkedIn, or through mutual acquaintances, or possibly through your academic network, or possibly even through PF here) and was interested in seeking employment opportunities at your organization, and gave you their CV directly to you.

Then it would be possible for a "strange" CV to still reach you without HR automatically rejecting it.