Ph.Ds in IT - Good or Bad for a Career? 781
LordNimon asks: "I'm thinking about getting my Ph.D. (I currently have a Master's) in computer engineering. I've heard all sorts of stories about Ph.Ds being less likely to find a job than their less-educated counterparts, but not a lot of credible evidence. So, I was hoping to hear from Slashdot readers on their experience. Do you think getting a Ph.D. in CompSci or CompEng will improve or worsen my career outlook in the industry? Has anyone witnessed someone being turned down for a job because he had too much education? If you're a hiring manager, what is your opinion on someone who has a Ph.D. and is otherwise already qualified for the position?"
Yes, it happens (Score:5, Interesting)
We had an opening for an entry-level or mid-level developer position. Had a fellow apply with 2 masters and a Phd. I couldn't really see that the job would be challenging/interesting enough.
Most employers are not interested in being a way-station on someones career. I figure if I really need a job, tayloring the resume to suit the position is essential.
Higher degrees (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Too much is better than too little (Score:5, Interesting)
Of course if you want a research position then a PhD is the only way to go. You probably need to end up asking yourself what you want to do and figure out the best way to get there. Getting your PhD is right for some paths, going to work is right for others.
From both sides of the fence (Score:5, Interesting)
My PhD was based around networked information systems like the Web and Gopher, back in 1992-1996. My PhD improved my technical skill set a little, with extra programming experience, and early awareness of protocols such as HTTP, and standards such as HTML. But the real advantages came from the other part of earning a PhD - the ability to present your ideas to others, whether that's on paper, or stood at the front of a room. The ability to organise my thoughts, to analyse problems and come up with solutions, to think outside of the already known base of information and come up with new ideas, to manage my own time, these were all the skills that I picked up between graduating with my first degree, and being given my PhD.
As a manager looking to hire someone, I would expect someone with a PhD to have the skills mentioned above. But you can also pick up those skills "on the job", or just have them as innate abilities, so as ever it would come down to how you present yourself at the interview. Having a PhD would certainly not count against you.
Maybe I'm lucky, but I've never come across the "overqualified" argument myself, and I'm very happy that I had 4 or 5 years dedicated to researching something that I found extremely interesting, in a superb learning environment. I think the skills of analysis and logical thinking are very handy in the IT and programming enviroments.
Re:ComEng fo ?IT? (Score:5, Interesting)
- 2003-08-18 19:46:10 Ph.D.: Good or bad for career? (askslashdot,ed) (accepted)
I never said anything about IT in my post, because I don't consider a computer engineering or computer science to be part of IT.On a side note, apparently persistence helps when submitting stories:
Re:Too much education (Score:2, Interesting)
Problem with a PhD I would see is that it narrows your field. Unless you are damn sure your PhD topic is what you want to work on its probably not worth it, but then if you end up working in the University after that you still have considerable flexibility. The problem would be if you want to get into the industry and find a 'job', some companies will invariably consider you to be over qualified mostly due to insecurities of the company (you might leave or be more qualified than your boss and hence have lesser respect for him yada yada..)
I have a master's myself and have been contemplating a PhD, but haven't been able to make the move due to the doubts regarding my need for it
Ph.D. offers no benefit for the company hiring you (Score:1, Interesting)
reason: you expect more pay, but your additional qualification is nothing that would have an added value for the company. they would prefer you to work after you masters and to gain real life work experience (that they can use) rather than additional academic lab-experience (that is of no use for most companies)
Re:A Job? (Score:5, Interesting)
The only valid reason for chosing to do a PhD is that you really want to. Forget career - that should have nothing to do with your decision. Doing a PhD is hard work, and you will almost certainly go through times when you wish you'd never started and wonder if you should just cut your losses. On the other hand, it can be immensely rewarding, and will teach you a whole new way of thinking.
As for jobs afterwards, outside academia at least, it's a lottery. Some companies value them, others don't. So that shouldn't really affect your decision.
As a resume filter... (Score:3, Interesting)
Experience will make more of a difference than your education level. I would rate a masters with the same level of interest as someone who has an MBA - someone willing to continue to learn. A PhD in computer science would scare me, as the time you spent focusing on earning your doctorate does not really constitute real world experience. Experience being equal, I might take the PhD. A PhD in math, bioinformatics, or something where you applied software development is much more impressive. Given the choice between someone who has worked in the trenches, death marches, fluctuating requirements, and knowing how to say good enough, and someone who spent the last four to six years slaving over a doctorate? Not a chance. You would have to show that you were not an academic if you could make it to the interview.
You really want to impress me? Author a programming textbook and get published. I hear you make almost as much as a grad student too... (grin)
Re:well.. (Score:3, Interesting)
In the proper job (a very high-level IT role or in education), a Phd is a valuable asset. In a production shop, it's slow death. Everyone gets sidetracked chasing dreams.
Re:A Job? (Score:5, Interesting)
I would probably be happier as a professor, but I may not find a tenure-track position at a university I like. In that case, I would try to find a job in the industry, but I wanted to see if getting a Ph.D. would close more doors than it would open.
When hiring (Score:5, Interesting)
1. More likely to leave for reasons beyond our control (even if we do our best to make work happy, they may decide to go off and do research or go teach)
2. Less likely to work well in the compromise-heavy environment required in commercial development (prefer an elegant solution; sometimes to the point of a huge productivity loss for everybody else, when all that was needed was a select-sort or some other quick get-it-done-because-it's-late solution)
I've worked with a lot of PhD's despite the two caveats above, and have generally observed that if you can get the right PhD in the right position, you can play to their strengths. This usually means hiring them for an architecture position where they can interact with professional organizations; do long-range planning; write neat prototypes; all that kind of stuff that heads-down developers rarely get to do (and which the PhD might be better at anyways).
However, putting a PhD in a development position has been uniformly disastrous at all three companies (huge, medium, and startup) I've worked at. Even at the senior developer level, there's too much compromising and too much "wiring code" to make most PhD's happy; and their tendency to pursue elegance at the expense of expedience no matter what the situation can slow everybody else down too.
Re:Yes, it happens (Score:2, Interesting)
Awwwww. The poor boo-boos....
I figure if I really need a job, tayloring the resume to suit the position is essential.
I was asked to "tailor" my resume once, and to "put my degree last." I told the obviously highly intelligent HR person "I will not become a liar to impress a cheat."
I didn't get the job, which is a good thing because the thought of working there made me want to projectile vomit my shoes across the office.
I only have two years of college (Score:5, Interesting)
(
I would say that what really matters is how well you perform on the job. A phd may affect your ability to get your foot in the door (whether because a phd would command more respect or, in contrast, reek of "academia") and may affect your starting wages, but that's all moot after your first review.
About the only thing I can say is you may be making a bit less than someone with only a masters because you don't exactly get to use a lot of the theory you picked up. And you may have a catch-22 with the whole "over-qualified" for entry level (because of the PHD) but under-qualified for senior positions (due to lack of practical experience). And in the end, you may be bored a lot of the time with easy work - I know I am.
I have a co-worker with a phd (but not in comp eng) and he's pretty much treated the same as all the others around here. He's not an exceptional programmer, but he never complains about his salary (unlike, say, the guys in PC support
Of course, this is Ask Slashdot, so you're only going to get a bunch of anecdotes anyways =) YMMV
Re:ComEng fo ?IT? (Score:2, Interesting)
Its like the difference between an Electrician and an Electrical Engineer.
Re:well.. (Score:3, Interesting)
Tech Ph.D.s are going to be a differnet matter though, as long as you have some management experience or wish to get into management. The Ph.D. I see in technology tend to be running the show in CIO or CSO positions.
The dotcom boom is over (Score:5, Interesting)
1) There are lots of tech people out of work, so you could very well be over-qualified with a PhD or even a Masters.
2) There are a lot of people out there to work the grunt jobs, and fewer people getting a higher education in IT. This could be an advantage.
It is all going to depend on what companies are around you. If they are all small, private companies doing web work, you may be out of luck. If you are near an IBM office, or some other tech giant who may have a use for someone with a PhD, then you could have a chance.
It is a real issue that people can be overeducated for a lot of jobs.
I used to work at Motorola, and we hired a contractor that was really smart. He was hired to help us test a release of some real-time cellular products. He had worked at NASA for years, and had some good stories. But he was worthless as a "regular" employee. He kept 3 sets of notecards in his shirt pocket, each set being a different color. One color was for process stuff, one was for technical stuff, and the other was for something else. When you would tell him something he would whip out his notecards and write it down on whichever category it fit into. If you ever wanted information from him, he went to his notecards. He was a good guy, and really smart, but he was too smart for the job.
I worked with another guy at a small company who didn't know Unix, but said he could learn it. He had a Masters and was working on his PhD. (I was surprised he didn't know any Unix, but whatever) We thought he was capable of picking it up, but he clearly wasn't. Two months after he started, he still had to refer to his notes to remember how to list a directory's contents. He was a smart guy, but he just didn't get it.
My suggestion? If you go for the PhD, do something in the computer security field. There will always be a need for computer security gurus, and in that field you'll be up against snot-nosed kids for the jobs. :-)
It almost happened to me (Score:2, Interesting)
Caveats: I am Swedish, and I have my degree in Physics, so I guess I didn't really answer the question, but it was fun to talk.
Re:Yes, it happens (Score:1, Interesting)
I've ALWAYS tailored my cv to the specific job application at hand and I have never:
1. been unemployed
2. received a poor performance review
It opens a few doors, and closes none (Score:2, Interesting)
When I arrived at Ga. Tech a fresh Systems graduate student, they made the statement (this was 3 years ago mind you) that about 80% of their students went to industry! That leaves only 20% to academic positions. Even then, I'm sure a good deal of those weren't as much teaching as research with teaching "on the side"
Lest you think that research is your only other choice, you would want to be aware that if you are a researcher at a school, a large part of your time will actually be spent in a managerial capacity. This could involve a good deal of marketing and politics, too, as you jockey for getting your projects funded, or attracting the best grad students to your project. Beyond that, there is certainly a wide world out there in the corporate world. Andrew Grove, former Intel CEO, has a Ph.D.
What you can say that is categorically true about a Ph.D. is that it will separate you from the masses of those with Bachelors and Masters. I think there definitely a huge trend in education of needing more to "get ahead". Thirty or forty years ago, a college degree would put you way ahead of the pack. But now it looks to me that a number of jobs require a Masters to separate yourself from the masses. Will that soon become a Ph.D.? I dunno. But I do know that with a Ph.D. I' m educationally qualified, at least, for every position that requires a Masters, PLUS the ones that require a Ph.D. (like college level) teaching.
In the end, experience, drive, and ambition trumpsall, really. Gates has no degree in business (or anything) but runs a multi-billion dollar (evil?) empire. But I'm sure there are a few near destitute souls with Ph.D.'s, too. If your employer is worried about your education, it is your job, as it is with point on your resume to convince him it's an asset! If your future boss is worried about hiring someone smarter than him- or herself, then you have a Dilbert like problem at that company, don't you think?
Good luck!
Re:$ is all that matters, sometimes. (Score:2, Interesting)
I can type 90+ wpm. That would be pretty good for a secretarial job - but they probably wouldn't hire me as a secretary with a PhD in Computer Science. Yes, my education limits my career options, but would I really want to be a secretary?
That's an extreme of course, but you can apply it to the "average joe programming job" vs "a more stimulating research or development job" situation as well. Maybe I won't be able to get a basic programming job when I finish my PhD, but I wouldn't be happy doing that anyway. On the other hand, there are guys (and girls) I know who hate the stuff I'm interested in. They'd much prefer staying deep in the code a majority of the day. They stopped at a BS or MS, are making good money, and enjoy what they do.
You've got to decide what it is you really want to do - what type of job would you be happy doing? Then pick the education that matches.
The one exception to this that I might add... If you're out of work but have the opportunity to continue in school, that's a no brainer to me. Although many comments here have insightfully pointed out the importance of practical experience over all academics, having been in school with a lack of practical experience is leaps and bounds above sitting on your tail lacking practical experience.
Like the parent post said, you might have to look a little longer, or move farther, or be willing to accept less compensation than what you're "qualified" for, but I don't think you can go wrong with the PhD if that's the type of work you're really interested in.
Re:Too much is better than too little (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:A Job? (Score:2, Interesting)
In terms of getting a job, the story is interesting. When I got my PhD in Computer Science in 1993, the only job I got was a Post-Doctorate. Then when that was finished, all the computer companies that I applied to said that they were looking for entry level positions, so I ended up doing accounting and tax work with my father (I've always been good with numbers
Later, my old university called me up and asked me to teach part-time. Then a friend of mine I worked with during my PhD years called me up and asked me to work with him writing software in a small firm. (It has been very odd that I never got a job I applied for; people contacted me for all my jobs.)
I have no regrets about getting a PhD. I feel a great sense of accomplishment from it, and I have gotten jobs because of the contacts I have made through my academic career.
Re:Degrees? (Score:4, Interesting)
Note that this isn't against all Stanford Ph.Ds. Just the horribly arrogant ones who feel a need to point out they have Stanford (or some other famous school) Ph.Ds every 15 minutes rather than actually doing any work...and I think we've all dealt with one of them at some point...
That said I'll have my MS in 3 years and leave it at that. Maybe I'll go for an MBA at some point.
Re:From both sides of the fence (Score:2, Interesting)
When times were good, being deemed too over qualified for a job was not too much of a problem - because the recruiter (to be fair) was generally right, and it was simply an indication the job was not going to be that interesting.
In the slow down, however, such an attitude has been very difficult to cope with. In this case, you apply for a job because it's one of the only 'reasonably good' jobs in the area, which you know is not at your level, but you need a job, and you're happy with what's on offer. The recruiters, dispite assurances on your behalf, almost always turn you down. I've been told bluntly many times I'm too over qualified, but typically, the answer is a more subtle 'not a good team fit' or you'd want too much money. Very irritating.
In general, from a UK perspective, I believe there is absolutely no career enhancing reason to do a PhD, a PhD has to be done for yourself, in the knowledge it may pigeon hole you to jobs that may be pretty scarce.
I have made a "successful" transistion to UK industry, that transistion, and my employability is fully based on my industrial implementation experience, and certainly not from my PhD. It is, to be honest, difficult to hide the bitterness I do feel towards the UK regarding their attitude towards PhDs.
Re:Yes, it happens (Score:2, Interesting)
While I understand your reasoning, I normally look at an entry-level position as just that - a "way-station on someones career". As an employeer, I would want to keep new hires for an extended amount of time. I would also want to hire competent, capable people. The problem is, competent, capable people are going to quickly outgrow the entry-level job (as you pointed out). On the other hand, though, hiring someone with less experience/education to better match the job may not accomplish my long term goal of staffing quality workers. You have to find a good balance somewhere.
Re:Degrees? (Score:5, Interesting)
B.S. EE - $47/yr
B.S. Computer Science - $43k/yr
B.S. Computer Engineering - $48k/yr
B.S. EE/B.S. Comp E - $52k/yr
B.S. EE/B.S. Computer Science - $48k/yr
M.S. EE - $73k/yr
M.S. Comp. E (this was a new program)- $69k/yr
M.S. Computer Science - $65k/yr
PhD CS - $67k/yr
PhD EE - $55k/yr-$75k/yr wildly varying based upon specialty. Those specializing in control or power systems were at $55k, those specializing in Semiconductor Fab related stuff were up at the $75k.
Most IT salaries I knew were BS only and fell around the $45k mark. This was over the period 1996-2001, around New York City. New York is not exactly a hub of geekdom, I work at Bell Labs (aka Lucent - We outsource/resell the things that make communications work) which is about the only major technology company in the area, and was in the middle of all offers I received. (Am I wrong? Who else is in the area...) New York DOES have a lot of banks and hired a lot of IT guys in it's time, however I hear those jobs are in india now
My opinion formed on this data is that a PhD has absolutely no financial value regardless of degree. It is a research degree however, which means if you want to do research and you don't want to be someones lab assistant, you MUST have it. This agrees with how things should be. You do not want people getting PhD's for the money.
That said I can't imagine that there is a lot of active research in IT, and I think if I had that degree and was considering a way to boost my career viability I would consider an MBA. I take my own advice and that is the degree I will pursue next fall. There is such an intense lack of technically competant businessmen in the world, and contrary to popular opinion, it really is hurting everyone.
Re:Degrees? (Score:5, Interesting)
I've never been asked to prove it.
I have a Ph.D. in both Comparative linguistics and Paleoanthropology, I've never been able to get a job at either!
The question to ask now that I'm coming to the end of my working lifetime is, Was it worth while?
I think that the answer is YES!
Degrees are overrated (mostly) (Score:3, Interesting)
One thing that the recent economy has taught me is that a four-year degree in a specialty--or worse, a graduate degree in a specialty--can be like a ball and chain regarding career changes. What would be better is for high school graduates to not commit to an expensive four-year degree program (unless, of course, they are unusually motivated) without a clue regarding their major; rather, they should enter the workforce, go to a very cost effective associate's program, or do the Mormon thing and take two years in South America or something. Kids need some time to discover themselves, and I'm not convinced the rush-em-through Universities are appropriate for this learning process, especially given that Universities are very very expensive.
I can't stress the cost of a four-year program enough. Unless a student can get by without loans (via a trust or scholarship), they should strongly--very strongly--consider the alternatives. It is way too common for students to graduate in some default generic major due to not knowing any better, yet ending up paying for it for the next ten years of their lives. Student debt levels now-a-days are simply insane.
Sure people claim that a college degree will pay for itself, but I'm not so sure. The best values are state-supported colleges, but it is still common to come out with $20,000 worth of debt. How many $60,000/year jobs are there? Certainly not enough for all graduates. I wonder if that $20,000 would have been better applied towards a down payment on real estate--perhaps the most sound investment most people will ever make in their lifetimes.
What would you rather have, $20,000 towards a home that you can defend with a gun, or $20,000 in debt living in an apartment with a family of 10 above and the rock star below? Even if you don't end up with a lot of money in the long run, raising a family in a real home with a back yard has a value that is hard to measure.
And, no one says you can't go to college later, after seeing the way the world works and knowing what direction is the right one for you.
Hire a Ph.D. first but no extra money. (Score:1, Interesting)
I won't pay them a larger salary because of it.
My Input (Score:2, Interesting)
Hasn't hurt me. (Score:1, Interesting)
Everyplace else (call it 95+% of the world) it was viewed at least somewhat positively, because it meant that you had enough dogged determination to -finish- what you started. It also has an implication that you have _some_ brains.
Now it's true that in terms of NPV (Net Present Value) that a PhD is not financially worthwhile (because the PhD means that you don't make any money for the 4-8 years it takes to get through grad school, while the Masters takes only a year or so and then you start making big money. So, the PhD ends up making more per year, but only after a period of enforced poverty). The exception is if the PhD means you get or keep a job when the Masters is out of work, the situation quickly flops over and the PhD is financially worthwhile.
The total difference over lifetime earnings is less than two year's salary; many less-than-PhD's have been out at least that long in the current economic malaise. So, you need to factor in what you think the job market will be at the end of your grad school career when you make your financial calculations.
As a backup plan, realize that a PhD can always get a job teaching college as "adjunct", it's not a lot of money but it's still better than running out your unemployment coverage and being stuck at zero.
Bottom line advice: if you're in it for the money, stop with the Masters (or possibly a double-masters- technical and an MBA). If you genuinely like to do really intense things, especially things that have _never_ been done before, go for the PhD. That basically includes _all_ research, and more and more includes startups.
Re:Too much education (Score:1, Interesting)
That should only be a factor in a company that has an official pay scale based on degree level, but I'm sure that word of that sort of thing gets around.
Mostly, though, having temped at various companies for a couple of years, the main concern I heard from hiring managers was that someone who was overqualified wouldn't stick around for long enough for them to spend the time and money training them. Most companies (although it seems contrary to the evidence these days) don't like high turnover and would rather invest in someone who they think will stick around for a while.
I've seen the evidence at my current job. We have had quite a few former dotcom-ers pop in for just long enough to get trained, and then bail, because they were continually job hunting for something better from before they were even hired. Not that I blame them, but it's hard for the companies, too.
PhD not a good way to get a job (Score:3, Interesting)
My brother got his PhD from the University of Minnesota. He is now a professor at Tulane University in New Orleans. He teaches 3 classes a year, and the remainder of his time is performing research and writing papers. He does get paid very handsomely for it, I must say. He stated that when he was going to school, that he was basically dedicating his life to one of working in academia.
Outside of Academia, a PhD in Computer Science is not a very valuable degree.
However, :)).
I once had an employee that had dual masters degrees in Geology and Information Systems. He got his degree in Geology, then realized that he couldn't feed a family as a geologist (unless he wanted to feed them rocks) So he got his MIS degree. He couldn't find a job ANYWHERE (so I hired him
It wasn't long before I got him in touch with someone from Texaco Oil Corp. where we got him an interview and now he is working for Texaco, making 6 figures, helping them develop new methods for using computers in searching and drilling for oil.
So, my advice would be that if you get a Ph.D be prepared to work in a research role. A second degree in a complimentary field might work better for you. If you choose a second degree, use that degree to get you into the IT industry in a particular field you're interested in.
Managers, ARM, and such (Score:3, Interesting)
Ph.D. have a reputation of being not good team players. This comes from working alone on your thesis for a number of years, often independantly and not in a team of close knit research group. All real world companies need team players, because no one person can (or should) do everything.
Hiring staff (HR or the technical manager) avoid PhD for low/entry level positions because of the bordom and leaving factors. They worry that you will leave at the first better job offer. The best way to fight this is, if you really are excited about the job, show your excitment, and try to only take interviews with jobs you plan to stay at.
Once upon a time I had an interview at ARM [arm.com] the microprocessor design company, they were looking for a couple of IT positions (security and development) and my CV interested them. When I got into the interview, the fact that almost got me hired was that I was a licensed amateur radio (ham) operator. Since hams tend to have a boat-load of practical hands on experience with building and fixing things, they were very keen on this. I wasn't going to touch a MPU design, or even work on embedded systems, but it was this practical experience that they looked for.
If you want to work for AMD, Intel, ARM, IBM Research, Microsoft Research, or AT&T Research, then get your Ph.D. If you want to muck with designing systems to be build, get your Masters and get experience.
Education is important, but experience is golden.
Re:Degrees? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:well...how do you define inplementation (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Degrees? (Score:4, Interesting)
"how many cotton balls would it take to fill the cabin of the last plane you flew in, assuming you have flown recently"
it is not the *answer* that counts here, it is how you deal with order of magnitude questions.
you would be amazed how many times you're in a huge meeting full of suits and your CTO asks you "so how much would it cost to build a 25TB san from scratch versus buying one from EMC?"
they are interested in an order-of-magnitude answer, and they fully expect it right then, not hours or days after the meeting.
saying $4 million when the price is $5-6 million is FINE for their purposes at that point. not being able to tell them whether it is $5 million or $500,000 is absolutely NOT okay.
The best years of my life: phD student (Score:3, Interesting)
I recommend you read a book called: A Ph.D. Is Not Enough: A Guide to Survival in Science
by Peter J. Feibelman. It is a little bit biased towards the academic jobs, but it has a chapter on the "real world" jobs too. I wished I had read it many years before.
About me? I finished school and got a job at the Big Blue. I proved to myself I was able to create software in the Major Leagues, but then I realized I was being under employeed (my research skills were underutilized). In Canada there are few places better than them to go to, so my only alternative was academia. I am now tenure track at UVic.
The perfect job exists for few. In my case, I am happy and I am making the best out of it. My PhD has allowed me to pursue things in my life that might have been impossible otherwise (how many people would "kill" in Canada for a well paid job in Victoria, for example?). I would do it again, for sure, if I had to go back in time.
On the other hand, I have seen many crack under the pressure. You can be made to believe that you are an ass, with no potential to have a "contribution" to science. Many people struggle to find a thesis topic for years and many fail altogether. I must be very hard to feel the failure of not completing. Many others don't know what to do with the PhD when they finish and end with jobs that they could have gotten with a Ms.
Make sure you heart wants the PhD. Otherwise you might just waste some years until you decide it wasn't for you.