Three years ago, I started co-running an event focused on research careers beyond academia. Now, I’m not talking about research scientists working in labs ‘in industry’… I’m talking about the many humanities and social sciences PhDs/ former postdocs with research-focused roles (think policy research, social research, qualitative and quantitative research) across all kinds of different organisations.
Compared to the amount of chat about academic scientists moving into ‘industry,’ no-one seemed to be talking about these folks very much. But if scientists’ lab techniques and experimental skills are applicable to research beyond academia, aren’t the investigative, analytic, and people-oriented skills of those of us from outside the ‘hard’ sciences equally transferable? And if so, where? And how?
So, enter, Emma Moore and Maria Pomoni: two PhD holders perfectly placed to shed light on this. Before her current role as Senior Research Manager for independent research provider NFER, Emma moved from academic research (PhD and postdoc) on how musical activities might support literacy skills in children with dyslexia, into research-focused roles in a well-known charity focused on preventing child abuse and neglect. Equally interesting was Maria, who went from a PhD in avoidant eating behaviour in children with autism, to postdoc work on exploitation of vulnerable people, to research and evaluation work in the education sector.
So, I roped both Emma and Maria into telling me more their paths so far, and their top tips for breaking into research beyond academia.
Finding research roles beyond academia: hiding in plain sight
Emma began her job search beyond academia on job boards including the UK’s sector-specific resource for the non-profit sector, Charity Job. There, she says, she realised there were all these organisations outside academia hiring for research jobs that I didn’t know about. In a recent event, Maria had also signposted me to recruitment agencies specialising in research-focused vacancies, like Whiton Maynard and Elizabeth Norman.
HOWEVER… learning point one from Emma’s and Maria’s stories is: **Whilst jobs beyond academia may INVOLVE research, they may not be CALLED research**
Terminology is a big challenge, Emma emphasised. It might not say the word research in a job title, but that doesn’t mean they’re not looking for research skills. You WILL get job titles like Research Officer or Research Manager, BUT… you’ll also get others for which qualitative and quantitative research skills are also applicable. Look out for roles called the following:
- Evaluation
- Monitoring
- Impact
- Accountability and learning
- Analyst (depending on the focus)
- These roles show up in places including charities, government/ civil service, consultancies, Independent research organisations (IROs), and market research organisations.
As Emma noted, it can be hard to go just off a job title, so make sure you read the job description to see what’s in it, and to see HOW this overlaps with things you’ve done as part of research projects and activities in academia. Emma’s advice also reminded me of how many PhDs I see searching for opportunities based on their ‘subject identity,’ e.g. ‘sociologist,’ ‘linguist,’ and so on, and finding very little. However, just because employers beyond academia don’t explicitly advertise for (or call a role) a ‘sociologist,’ a ‘linguist,’ a ‘social historian,’ and so on, doesn’t mean that there isn’t a significant intersection between the methods you’d deploy in a role, and those that you have used as a sociologist, a linguist, and so on.
Officer, Manager, Head of…. Where do I sit?
The next question begging was how to work out what LEVEL of such roles might be appropriate for someone transitioning out of academia. For example, whilst Maria’s first role beyond academia was an Evaluation Officer, Emma started out at Senior Officer level.
Emma offered some pointers:
Different organisations use different terminology for essentially the same role, so it can be hard to untangle from the outside, she explained. The salary band might give you a clue: if it’s similar to a postdoc salary, then that’s probably about right, give or take.
However, rather than getting hung up on what a role is CALLED, go back to that job description and think about how much of it you can show that you’ve done before. As Emma outlined, it was the research methods knowledge that got me my current job. Methods are key because you can apply them in other fields, I’ve switched multiple times, and hired people from different research backgrounds and trained them on the job.
However, Emma’s experience of being turned down for a role more junior than the one to which she was initially appointed suggests it’s worth getting some insider info to help work this out.
Learning point two… **if you’re unsure, TALK TO SOMEONE IF POSSIBLE**
Before applying, I emailed the person named on the job advert and asked for a conversation, said Emma, and ended up having a chat with the hiring manager. It helped me understand what they were looking for beyond the job description. For example, line management experience was listed which I didn’t have at the time, but it turned out this wasn’t their main priority. What they were really interested in was that I’d worked with children, I understood the local area and systems, and I could collaborate.
From Emma’s experience, I saw that there are no hard-and-fast rules about which level of role is ‘right,’ and that being rejected from a more junior role in one organisation doesn’t necessarily preclude your chances for a similar, or even more senior, role elsewhere. What matters is how you align with the organisation’s priorities, plus factors beyond your control like who else you happen to be up against for any particular role.
What does research beyond academia involve day-to-day?
Now, we’ve already mentioned reading job descriptions, but industry jargon can easily leave us asking WHAT DOES THIS LIST OF DUTIES EVEN MEAN…?! So next, I asked Maria and Emma to clarify.
Maria explained, I now work as an evaluator at a government-funded charity, focused on closing the attainment gap for disadvantaged pupils. As with my academic work in psychology, I’m still motivated by working on research that improves the lives of disadvantaged and marginalised groups.
Practically speaking, I use the research skills developed during my PhD and postdoc every single day. For example, I spend a lot of time considering the most appropriate research design for a given question, and supporting researchers to choose outcome measures that really make sense. That includes weighing up things like validity, reliability, sensitivity to change, feasibility, and relevance. So, while the setting is different, the core research thinking and decision-making of what I’m doing is very familiar.
In a perfect exposition of how roles with similar titles can vary across organisations, Emma’s Senior Evaluation Officer role with a children’s charity was different again. Maria’s role focuses on reviewing research proposals and making sure the planned methods and statistics are appropriate for evaluating the impact of educational interventions. Meanwhile, Emma’s involved more hands-on research work.
My first job was working on a project in Glasgow trying to prevent abuse and neglect in families facing adversity. I spent much of the first year going out to community groups, getting to know the area, it was very practical. We were designing surveys, doing interviews and focus groups, looking at secondary data (like child protection statistics) and designing projects to track change over time. I worked on the whole research cycle from design through to reporting.
Learning point 3 then, is… **don’t treat research roles beyond academia as homogenous**
Roles can vary significantly depending on the needs and structure of an organisation, so it’s important to pay attention to detail. For example, don’t go gunning for a role focused on evaluating research proposals by saying that you’re itching to do the hands-on research work… if that’s not what the job involves. Understand what you’re going for, and focus on showing the employer that you can do what they need you to do. As Maria emphasised, the PhDs who really stand out are those who show they understand the organisation and the job they’re applying for. Doing proper research into the institution, its mission, and how the role operates in practice makes a big difference.
Recruitment processes
Pitching your application appropriately leads us nicely on to navigating the recruitment processes for research roles beyond academia. Here, I wanted to know Maria’s and Emma’s take on meeting – or not meeting – selection criteria.
Look carefully at the job specification and separate what’s essential from what’s desirable. If you meet the majority of the essential criteria, that’s a strong starting point, Maria assured. You don’t need to tick every single box. Also, remember that many skills are developed on the job: many organisations expect some level of learning and adaptation. So, I’d say don’t self-select out too early. Focus on the core requirements and think about whether the organisation feels like a place where you’d be supported to grow into the role.
Emma echoed this from both a candidate’s and a recruiter’s perspective. The advert for my first job asked for quantitative and qualitative analysis skills. I didn’t have the qualitative skills, but I applied anyway. If there are one or two things you don’t have, give it a go – particularly if it says something like ‘analysis using X, Y, and Z software packages,’ and you’ve used one but not the others, that’s probably fine. For example, if I was asking for candidates with experience of data analysis using MaxQDA, but someone has used NVivo, I’d still encourage them to apply because I know that the two packages work pretty much identically. Most people I’ve interviewed, particularly for first jobs, don’t tick every box. In fact, I don’t think I’ve ever found anybody applying for their first job who had everything!
That said, both Emma and Maria were clear on one thing: hitting as many of the criteria as possible requires – learning point four – that you **TRANSLATE your research experience in a way that’s really relevant for the role.**
Maria warned: a common mistake PhDs make is focusing too heavily on describing their PhD or postdoc research in detail, rather than translating that experience into the skills they’ve developed. The strongest candidates are the ones who clearly articulate their transferable research skills, things like designing robust studies, critically assessing evidence, choosing appropriate methods and measures, managing complex projects, and communicating findings to different audiences, and explicitly link those skills to the requirements of the role.
At its most basic, this kind of translation starts with remembering what you’ve actually done research-wise, and being able to talk through the PROCESS, not necessarily the SUBJECT MATTER.
Make sure you know what you’ve done! Emma explained. At interview for example, I might ask ‘tell us about a piece of quantitative or qualitative analysis that you’ve done.’ Here, I want to know what you did, what software/ methods you used, how you went about it. Talk me through the process, show you understand what you did and why. But so many people would just say ‘oh, in my Masters, I did a survey…’ then couldn’t say what analysis they’d done, and so couldn’t score any points for those questions!
When research is the bread and butter of what you do every day, you may take for granted the processes you go through to DO that research. It’s therefore easy to fall down at an interview not through being unqualified or incapable, but simply through a lack of practice of walking someone through the process of what you’ve done and how you did it, rather than focusing on subject matter detail.
So, there we have it! A whistle-stop intro to research careers beyond academia outside life sciences and engineering. Focus less on job titles and more on skills, methods, and job descriptions. Don’t assume a “correct” level: check, ask, and take time to understand what a role actually involves. And, above all, translate what you’ve done into methods and processes: in many cases, you’re being hired for these, NOT your subject specialism.