Academic Career Path
“Climbing a ladder is a very real thing.”
Igor Peterlik
December 2016
Overview
2
My Ladder Climbing
❖ Czech Republic: Ph.D. at MU & research worker VUT
❖ France: post-doc at Inria, funded by a EU project
❖ Canada: post-doc at UBC, 1 year appointment
❖ France: research engineer at a private institute
❖ Czech Republic: non-tenured researcher at MU
❖ France: tenured researcher at Inria
3
Academic Career Basics
❖ non-tenured — tenure-track — tenured
❖ tenured (tenere): appointment until retirement
❖ associated professors and professors (hard money)
❖ motivated by academic/intellectual freedom
❖ tenure-track: towards the tenure, usually soft-money
❖ assistant professor, time to create publication record
❖ typically 6 — 7 years, not 100% of having the tenure
❖ non-tenured: student level (Ph.D.) and fellowship 

level (post-doctoral fellows)
4
Research Centers
❖ universities: the standard place for doing research
❖ public at different levels: city, community, region, state, country, military
❖ private: created by benefactors, companies, industry
❖ research institutes:
❖ government: e.g. Academy of Sciences, Inria, military research
❖ independent with public co-funding: Max Planck, Fraunhofer institutes
❖ private institues: rather in the U.S., appear also in Europe
❖ industrial research: big companies typically have department for applied research
❖ start-ups: industrial transfer
❖ typically from universities and institutes
5
Academy vs. Industry
❖ border between academy and industry becoming thinner (mainly for
the applied research)
6
❖ Ph.D. does not mean
academic career!
❖ Post-doc does not mean
academic career!
❖ tenure-track and tenure:
still high osmosis
between academy and
industry
Specificities
❖ every country has its specificities
❖ public vs. private sector
❖ length of the ladder
❖ typical age for the “hard-money” position
❖ every disciplines has its specificities
❖ relation with industry strong in engineering, life sciences
❖ quite difficult system (and problems) in social sciences and
humanities
7
Ph.D. @ America
❖ average length: 8.2 year
❖ average age when completing: 33
❖ from 8,611 in 1957 to 48,133 in
2007
❖ 57%: finish within 10 years
❖ 30%: dropped/dismissed
❖ 13%: over 10 years
❖ 85% of engineering Ph.D. goes to
business/industry
8
Ph.D. @ Germany
❖ average length: three to five years
❖ 4,000 graduating per year
❖ two types of Ph.D.
❖ individual: under supervision 

of 1 professor (90%)
❖ structured: team of supervisors 

(thesis committee)
❖ dissertation vs. cumulative doctorate (composed of papers)
❖ dissertation is usually published in form of a book
❖ specialities after defending the dissertation
9
Ph.D. @ France
❖ length: strictly limited to 3 years (from start to defence)
❖ exceptions possible, but difficult (typical for 1/2 year)
❖ different high-education system
❖ universities: “scientific” similar as elsewhere
❖ engineering schools: preparation (bac+3) + engineering (2 y)
❖ PhD is always affiliated to “Ecole doctorale” (part of a univ.)
❖ but research done at research institute (Inria, CNRS, Inserm)
❖ employee: contracts, taxes; 1,200 — 1,500 € net
❖ “industrial theses” (CIFRE)
❖ employee of a company (e.g., EDF, Altran, Airbus)
10
Ph.D. @ Elsewhere
❖ Switzerland, Norway
❖ much higher salary (3,000 € net and higher)
❖ much higher cost of living
❖ Netherlands
❖ very competitive universities (U.S.-style)
❖ typically very solemn defense
❖ Japan
❖ tuition fees for PhD study, possibility of having scholarship
❖ learn Japanese
11
Ph.D. in Population (OECD)
12
After PhD: Post-Doc
13
❖ usually an obligatory step of ladder climbing
❖ forces people to get out and try living somewhere else
❖ not only different work, but different country, culture, society
❖ best time to think about options when you start writing the thesis
❖ often member of PhD committee proposes a post-doc
❖ the idea: “You have something, they have something, you put it together and
start generating papers.”
❖ fellow should be autonomous and demonstrate independent thinking
❖ typically 12 — 18 months, rarely longer (up to 2 years)
❖ sometimes a different type of contract is presented as a post-doc
Post-Doc: My Observations
❖ numerous offers these days
❖ usually project-funded (H2020, national projects)
❖ institutional post-docs,funded by university or institute
❖ steady flow from east to west
❖ paradox:
❖ very important for the remaining career (remembered as the best
part of it by many researchers)
❖ often not very successful in terms of results, publications,
evaluation by fellows
14
Post-Doc: Possible Problems
❖ timing-related problem:
❖ too short: an expertise to be acquired, research to be done, papers to be written
and published…
❖ bad timing: depends on other outcomes, groups, individuals
❖ no “final check”
❖ topic-related problem
❖ topic defined too vague, approximative, generic
❖ too engineering, development oriented
❖ a trap: is there a life beyond… a post-doc…?
❖ post-doc is the latest time when you should clearly define your career 

goals and strategy to achieve them
15
Post-Doc: Lessons Learned
❖ be clear about the topic (time is short but precious)
❖ have a clearly defined supervision (if there is any)
❖ before starting working with someone, talk to their/your supervisor,
visit them in person
❖ have your say (authorship, communication, travelling)
❖ get details about your funding and finances (manage your tax
declaration yourself)
❖ do not neglect social and networking aspects
❖ already plan the life after the post-doc when you start one
16
Towards the Tenure
❖ typical post-post-doc scenarios
❖ coming back to your alma mater after post-doc
❖ turning the post-doc into a tenure-track and/or tenure
❖ leaving the academy (for good…)
❖ scientific results is necessary but not the only one factor
❖ contacts & networking (in any case)
❖ teaching & supervising (mainly if targeting university)
❖ membership in committees, editorial boards (mainly if targeting institute)
❖ popularization of science
❖ already obtained prestigious fundings
17
Towards the Tenure: America
❖ needed for tenure track:
❖ 39% in 5 years after having Ph.D.
❖ 10% still waiting (>40 old)
18
Scientific Career: US/Canada
❖ tenure-track:
❖ 6-7 years (assistant professor)
❖ involved in teaching (9-12 hours), services
❖ individual universities carry out the promotion
❖ tenured:
❖ associated professor: research, teaching (6-9 hours)
❖ full professor: after at least 5 years of associated
❖ directing the research, teaching (3-6 hours)
❖ sabbatical year: 1 paid year after 7 years of “full service”
19
Scientific Career: Germany
❖ Phase 1: PhD student
❖ Phase 2: non-tenured (temporary contracts)
❖ post-doc, typically required elsewhere
❖ staff scientist, research expert (very few positions)
❖ Phase 3: tenure-track (temporary contracts)
❖ lecturer, associate professor, temporary professor
❖ W1 Junior-Professor
❖ Phase 4: tenured (permanent contracts)
❖ W2 & W3 Professor: 2nd class, 1st class, exceptional
❖ W3 proposed elsewhere, not at the actual university
20
ENCEENNDEENEPE
T i l P i f R h
DE
Typical Proportions of Researchers
IN
Typical Proportions of Researchers
CHI
Phase 4
Typical Proportions of Researchers
RC
Phase 1
Phase 4
25%
Typical Proportions of Researchers
EAR
Phase 1
60%
Phase 4
25%
Typical Proportions of Researchers
SE
Phase 1
60%
Phase 2Phase 3
Phase 4
25%
Typical Proportions of Researchers
RES
Phase 1
60%
Phase 2
10%
Phase 3
5%
Phase 4
25%
Typical Proportions of Researchers
R
Phase 1
60%
Phase 2
10%
Phase 3
5%
Phase 4
25%
Typical Proportions of Researchers
Phase 1
60%
Phase 2
10%
Phase 3
5%
Phase 4
25%
Typical Proportions of Researchers
Phase 1
60%
Phase 2
10%
Phase 3
5%
Phase 4
25%
Typical Proportions of Researchers
Phase 1
60%
Phase 2
10%
Phase 3
5%
Phase 4
25%
Typical Proportions of Researchers
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Phase 1
60%
Phase 2
10%
Phase 3
5%
Phase 4
25%
Typical Proportions of Researchers
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Phase 1
60%
Phase 2
10%
Phase 3
5%
Phase 4
25%
Typical Proportions of Researchers
Scientific Career: UK
❖ Phase 1: PhD student
❖ Phase 2: non-tenured
❖ post-doc, (junior) researcher
❖ lecturer
❖ Phase 3: tenure-track (temporary contracts)
❖ independent or senior researcher
❖ senior lecturer
❖ Phase 4: tenured (permanent contracts)
❖ full professor
❖ research professor (professorial fellow)
21
PHASE FOUR
EN
PHASE FOUR
DEENDPEDEPND
Typical Proportions of Researchers
IN
Ph 4
Typical Proportions of Researchers
CH
Phase 3
Phase 4
8%
Typical Proportions of Researchers
RC
Phase 3
12%
Phase 4
8%
Typical Proportions of Researchers
EAR
Phase 3
12%
Phase 4
8%
Typical Proportions of Researchers
SE
Phase 1
55%Phase 2
Phase 3
12%
Phase 4
8%
Typical Proportions of Researchers
RES
Phase 1
55%Phase 2
25%
Phase 3
12%
Phase 4
8%
Typical Proportions of Researchers
R
Phase 1
55%Phase 2
25%
Phase 3
12%
Phase 4
8%
Typical Proportions of Researchers
Phase 1
55%Phase 2
25%
Phase 3
12%
Phase 4
8%
Typical Proportions of Researchers
Phase 1
55%Phase 2
25%
Phase 3
12%
Phase 4
8%
Typical Proportions of Researchers
Phase 1
55%Phase 2
25%
Phase 3
12%
Phase 4
8%
Typical Proportions of Researchers
Phase 1
55%Phase 2
25%
Phase 3
12%
Phase 4
8%
Typical Proportions of Researchers
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Phase 1
55%Phase 2
25%
Phase 3
12%
Phase 4
8%
Typical Proportions of Researchers
Scientific Career: Sweden
❖ Phase 1: PhD student
❖ Phase 2: non-tenured
❖ post-doc, staff scientist
❖ post-doctoral assistent lecturer
❖ Phase 3: tenured (typically permanent)
❖ senior researcher
❖ senior lecturer
❖ Phase 4: tenured (permanent contracts)
❖ full professor
❖ research professor (professorial fellow)
22
EDEENDPEDEPNDINCH
Typical Proportions of Researchers
RC
Phase 4
Typical Proportions of Researchers
EAR
Phase 4
15%
Typical Proportions of Researchers
SE
Phase 1
35%Phase 3
20%
Phase 4
15%
Typical Proportions of Researchers
RES
Phase 1
35%Phase 3
20%
Phase 4
15%
Typical Proportions of Researchers
R
Phase 1
35%
Phase 2
30%
Phase 3
20%
Phase 4
15%
Typical Proportions of Researchers
Phase 1
35%
Phase 2
30%
Phase 3
20%
Phase 4
15%
Typical Proportions of Researchers
Phase 1
35%
Phase 2
30%
Phase 3
20%
Phase 4
15%
Typical Proportions of Researchers
Phase 1
35%
Phase 2
30%
Phase 3
20%
Phase 4
15%
Typical Proportions of Researchers
Phase 1
35%
Phase 2
30%
Phase 3
20%
Phase 4
15%
Typical Proportions of Researchers
Phase 1
35%
Phase 2
30%
Phase 3
20%
Phase 4
15%
Typical Proportions of Researchers
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Phase 1
35%
Phase 2
30%
Phase 3
20%
Phase 4
15%
Typical Proportions of Researchers
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Phase 1
35%
Phase 2
30%
Phase 3
20%
Phase 4
15%
Typical Proportions of Researchers
Scientific Career: France
❖ non-tenured:
❖ post-doctoral fellowship, typically required outside of France
❖ research engineer (typically related to a project), teaching assistent
❖ tenured without habilitation
❖ university: associated professor [maître de conférences]
❖ research institute: researcher [CR2, CR1]
❖ tenured with required habilitation (HDR)
❖ university: full professor (2nd class, 1st class, exceptional)
❖ research institute: research director (DR2, DR1, exceptional),
23
Tenured vs. Non-Tenured (U.S.)
24
Notes: Strategy and Personality
❖ short-term vs. long-term
❖ solving the actual problem is important and motivating but:
❖ define long-term goals and have a strategy how to achieve them
❖ learn what it takes to get there
❖ γνῶθι σεαυτόν [gnothi seauton]: know thyself
❖ when procrastinating, try some typology tests (MBTI)
❖ being an excellent scientist is half of the story
❖ contacts, networking, socializing
25
Notes: Money
❖ money matters (sooner or later)
❖ financial literacy: important not only for writing research
proposals
❖ your income: structure & where it comes from
❖ your environment: cost of living
❖ extremely important if moving to another country
❖ get familiar with the system in details (taxes, insurance)
❖ minimize number of unpleasant surprises (cannot be avoided)
26
Salaries: First Look (rep. 2007)
27
3 STUDY RESULTS
The next table presents the remuneration average per country (average total yearly
salary) obtained in this study.
Country/ Level of
experience
The average weighted
total yearly salary
adjusted
Country/ Level of
experience
The average weighted
total yearly salary
adjusted
Austria 62.406 Italy 36.201
Belgium 58.462 Latvia 10.488
Bulgaria 3.556 Lithuania 13.851
Croatia 16.671 Luxembourg 63.865
Cyprus 45.039 Malta 28.078
Czech Republic 19.620 Netherlands 59.103
Denmark 61.355 Norway 58.997
Estonia 11.748 Poland 11.659
Finland 44.635 Portugal 29.001
France 50.879 Romania 6.286
Germany 56.132 Slovakia 9.178
Greece 25.685 Slovenia 27.756
Hungary 15.812 Spain 34.908
Iceland 50.803 Sweden 56.053
Ireland 60.727 Switzerland 82.725
Israel 42.552 Turkey 16.249
United Kingdom 56.048
Table 8 – The average weighted total yearly salary per country (2006, N=6110, all
currencies in EURO)
Salaries: Cost of Living
28
PPPs. For some countries such as Australia, China, India and Israel, PPPs w
available in Eurostat and the data from the World Bank (2003) was considere
These data are shown in the table below:
EU-25 100 Bulgaria 36,4
EU-15 104,5 Croatia 61,6
Euro area (1)
103,1 Iceland 150,3
Austria 103,1 Israel (2)
71,4
Belgium 104,4 Norway 141,1
Cyprus 89,1 Romania 46,6
Czech Republic 53,1 Switzerland 138,1
Denmark 140,5 Turkey 61,9
Estonia 55,8
Finland 121,8 Australia (2)
102,9
France 107 China (2)
22,9
Germany 105,2 India (2)
20,3
Greece 83,3 Japan 111,1
Hungary 57,1 United States 95,8
Ireland 122,3
Italy 106,1
Latvia 48,6
Lithuania 46,7
Luxembourg 113,5
Malta 69,6
Netherlands 104,2
CORRECTIVE COEFFICIENTS IN EU-25 AND ASSOCIATED
COUNTRIES (2006)
European countries Associated countries
Other countries
Cyprus 89,1 Romania 46,6
Czech Republic 53,1 Switzerland 138,1
Denmark 140,5 Turkey 61,9
Estonia 55,8
Finland 121,8 Australia (2)
102,9
France 107 China (2)
22,9
Germany 105,2 India (2)
20,3
Greece 83,3 Japan 111,1
Hungary 57,1 United States 95,8
Ireland 122,3
Italy 106,1
Latvia 48,6
Lithuania 46,7
Luxembourg 113,5
Malta 69,6
Netherlands 104,2
Poland 54
Portugal 87
Slovakia 50,2
Slovenia 73,1
Spain 89,8
Sweden 118,9
United Kingdom 106,2
Other countries
(1)Countries included: BE, DE, IE, GR, ES, FR, IT, LU, NL, AT, PT, FI
(2)Data from the World Bank, 20034
Table 9 – Corrective coefficients for EU25 and Associated Countries to be used in the
The application of the corrective coefficient selected is explained in the fo
figure:
PPPs. For some countries such as Australia, China, India and Israel, PPPs w
available in Eurostat and the data from the World Bank (2003) was consider
These data are shown in the table below:
EU-25 100 Bulgaria 36,4
EU-15 104,5 Croatia 61,6
Euro area (1)
103,1 Iceland 150,3
Austria 103,1 Israel (2)
71,4
Belgium 104,4 Norway 141,1
Cyprus 89,1 Romania 46,6
Czech Republic 53,1 Switzerland 138,1
Denmark 140,5 Turkey 61,9
Estonia 55,8
Finland 121,8 Australia (2)
102,9
France 107 China (2)
22,9
Germany 105,2 India (2)
20,3
Greece 83,3 Japan 111,1
Hungary 57,1 United States 95,8
Ireland 122,3
Italy 106,1
Latvia 48,6
Lithuania 46,7
Luxembourg 113,5
Malta 69,6
CORRECTIVE COEFFICIENTS IN EU-25 AND ASSOCIATED
COUNTRIES (2006)
European countries Associated countries
Other countries
r some countries such as Australia, China, India and Israel, PPPs were not
in Eurostat and the data from the World Bank (2003) was considered.
ta are shown in the table below:
EU-25 100 Bulgaria 36,4
EU-15 104,5 Croatia 61,6
Euro area (1)
103,1 Iceland 150,3
Austria 103,1 Israel (2)
71,4
Belgium 104,4 Norway 141,1
Cyprus 89,1 Romania 46,6
Czech Republic 53,1 Switzerland 138,1
Denmark 140,5 Turkey 61,9
Estonia 55,8
Finland 121,8 Australia (2)
102,9
France 107 China (2)
22,9
Germany 105,2 India (2)
20,3
Greece 83,3 Japan 111,1
Hungary 57,1 United States 95,8
Ireland 122,3
Italy 106,1
Latvia 48,6
Lithuania 46,7
Luxembourg 113,5
CORRECTIVE COEFFICIENTS IN EU-25 AND ASSOCIATED
COUNTRIES (2006)
European countries Associated countries
Other countries
Salaries: Adjusted
29
Contract number – REM 01
Final Report
Country
The average weighted
total yearly salary in
terms of PPS
Country
The average weighted
total yearly salary in
terms of PPS
Austria 60.530 Italy 34.120
Belgium 55.998 Latvia 21.580
Bulgaria 9.770 Lithuania 29.660
Croatia 27.063 Luxembourg 56.268
Cyprus 50.549 Malta 40.342
Czech Republic 36.950 Netherlands 56.721
Denmark 43.669 Norway 41.813
Estonia 21.053 Poland 21.591
Finland 36.646 Portugal 33.334
France 47.550 Romania 13.489
Germany 53.358 Slovakia 18.282
Greece 30.835 Slovenia 37.970
Hungary 27.692 Spain 38.873
Iceland 33.801 Sweden 47.143
Ireland 49.654 Switzerland 59.902
Israel 59.580 Turkey 26.250
United Kingdom 52.776
Table 10 – The average weighted total yearly salary of researchers of each country in EU25
Salaries: Adjusted Net
30
Hungary 27.692 Spain 38.873
Iceland 33.801 Sweden 47.143
Ireland 49.654 Switzerland 59.902
Israel 59.580 Turkey 26.250
United Kingdom 52.776
Table 10 – The average weighted total yearly salary of researchers of each country in EU25
and Associated Countries (2006, N=6110, all currencies in PPS)
Country
Net Yearly salary
average in terms of
PPS
Country
Net Yearly salary
average in terms of
PPS
Austria 30.603 Italy 22.372
Belgium 26.336 Latvia 18.828
Bulgaria 9.801 Lithuania 13.507
Croatia 20.254 Luxembourg 40.942
Cyprus 39.732 Malta 28.498
Czech Republic 22.252 Netherlands 35.573
Denmark 24.917 Norway 26.088
Estonia 13.777 Poland 14.104
Finland 22.971 Portugal 21.835
France 26.983 Romania 12.500
Germany 28.687 Slovakia 12.173
Greece 24.326 Slovenia 18.211
Hungary 16.723 Spain 27.060
Iceland 22.354 Sweden 22.801
Ireland 28.193 Switzerland 46.432
Israel 37.389 Turkey 23.530
United Kingdom 35.372
Table 11 – Country Net Yearly Salary Averages of researchers in EU25 and Associated
Countries (2006, N=6.934, all currencies in PPS)
Salaries: Selected Countries
31
Country Nominal Adjusted Adjusted Net
Czech Republic 19.620 36.950 22.252
Austria 62.406 60.530 30.603
Germany 56.132 53.358 28.687
France 50.879 47.550 26.983
Switzerland 82.725 59.902 46.432
Slovakia 9.178 18.282 12.173
Money’s not Everything
❖ quality of the research team
❖ extremely important already PhD, even more for post-doc
❖ quality of the scientific environment
❖ competitiveness, openness, fair play
❖ support of university/institute
❖ for doing research
❖ for performing transfer
❖ doing things that have sense and are useful
❖ participating in “something cool and meaningful”
32
Notes: Environment
❖ no place is perfect but there are really good/bad ones
Notes: Leisure
❖ work and home are not the only places to be
Interesting Links
❖ general information portal about academic career in E.U.:
❖ http://www.leru.org/
❖ http://www.leru.org/index.php/public/extra/careermapseurope
❖ academic careers in different countries:
❖ http://www.eui.eu/ProgrammesAndFellowships/
AcademicCareersObservatory/AcademicCareersbyCountry/Index.aspx
❖ “maffia” issue (mainly in social sciences):
❖ http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2013/12/11/how-academia-
resembles-a-drug-gang/
35
Thank you!
36