How to find a job: the view from the search committee

1
Career Guidance Session Getting and keeping an
academic position Saturday, 2pm

• Getting an academic job, the view from the Search
  Committee - Chris Wylie
• Getting an academic job, the view from the
  postdoc - Bilge Birsoy (UC Santa Barbara)
• Keeping an academic job, the view from the Tenure
  Committee - Chris Wylie
• Keeping an academic job, the view from the
  Assistant Professor - Doug Houston (U. Iowa)

2
Getting a job the view from the search committee

• Chris Wylie
• Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical center

3
Scrutiny of cv
The conventional timescale of a job search 6
months
invitation to interview
Consultation with referees
Second visit
Fall - Spring
negotiation
4

• But, maximizing your position in the job market
  starts much earlier (which is why you're here)
• Choice of mentors
• Planning what would be the best type of job for
  you
• Being in the right training environment
• Publications
• Gaining independent funding for graduate/postdoc
    research
• Practice interviews/research presentations
• Generating a fundable research proposal

5
Your primary objective is to convince a search
committee to hire you
"The Search Committee"
So, you need to know as much as possible about
them
6
The Search Committee

• Does not necessarily contain the person(s) who
  will offer   you a job!
• Is usually selected by the Dept. Chair(s)
  concerned, or   Head(s) of Center(s) "Hiring
  Authority".
• Will contain a cross-sectional representation of
  the   departments' personnel and activities.
• Can be complex. This is particularly true of Dev
  Biol,   which is a naturally interdepartmental
  discipline.
• Don't be put off by complex-looking ads. Call
  the   contact person and ask about the position

7
Reasons given by search committees for inviting
candidates for interview

• academic track record (clear, concise cv)
• publication record (publish!!)
• independent financial support (always apply for
  grants)
• well-written research statement (get help)
• fundable research plan (must be yours,
  opinions vary)
• outstanding letters (people you know well)
• "fit" with the original plan (point out how well
  you fit)
• or, "so good that we should take a look anyway"

8
Reasons given by search committees for not
inviting candidates for interview

• outside the area we want to recruit into
• poorly presented cv
• poorly written research proposal
• not sufficient quality/quantity of
     publications
• not stellar letters of recommendation

9
Reasons, given by search committee members, for
not short-listing candidates after interview.

• He/she didnt give a great talk, interesting
  subject though, and well-  respected mentor
• He/She didn't indicate what they are going to do
  next (There are many   variations on this
  comment not clear enough future plan,
  couldnt see a   grant application in this
  work, etc etc)
• I wasnt clear how independent this person was.
  Were they his/her own ideas,   or those of the
  mentor
• "It's obvious that he/she can't bring this
  project with them"
• I couldnt get a word out of this candidate in
  our one-on-one meeting. She/He   seemed bored by
  my research absolutely fatal this one
• He wore jeans to the interview!!
• His/her research looked good on paper, but when
  he/she described it, I   couldnt get very
  excited about it
• There were flaws in his/her research, which I
  hadnt spotted when I read the   cv
• Didnt think much of his/her performance at the
  lunch meeting
• Not sure he/she would come, even is we offered
  the job

10
The second visit

• Is hosted by the hiring authority (e.g. Dept
  Chair)
• You will be dealing with different people
• Is very different. In the first visit, they were
  looking   at you, in the second visit, you are
  definitely looking at   them.
• but don't let your guard down, they still
  haven't made a   final decision about you.
• make sure you see housing, lifestyle, other
  potential   colleagues, postdocs and students,
  core facilities you   will need, schools, and
  anything else that will help you   make a
  decision if and when a final offer arrives.

11
The offer

• Is usually negotiable
• But there may be some items they can't change
  (space is an   example)
• Will usually consist of a 3-year start
  up package, including   money to initiate
  staffing of your lab, consumables and   equipment
• Salaries?? http//www.aaup.org American
    Union of   University Professors
•   http//www.aamc.org Association of American
  Medical   Colleges
• How much do you trust the offer/institution? Get
    everything you care about in the offer letter.

12

• Where to get more help
• This book, and    references therein
• Your mentor
• Your colleagues
• Us

13
Keeping a job -the view from the tenure committee

• Chris Wylie

14
TENURE
15
TENURE
16

• The tenure process
• What you can do to maximize your chances

17
The tenure process 1) A typical sequence of
events (big Dept. with Divisions) Step 1.
Division director's letter of recommendation.
This is based on the applicant's tenure
dossier, his/her opinions based on annual
evaluations, and letters from external experts
in the field of research. Step 2. Departmental
Promotions and Tenure Committee discusses the
tenure application, and writes a memo to the
department chair. Step 3. Department Head writes
a letter of recommendation, based on steps 1 and
2, and any other evidence he/she has concerning
the application. Step 4. The College Tenure and
Promotions Committee meets, and writes a letter
of recommendation to the Dean. Step 5. The Dean
makes a decision to support or not to support the
application for tenure, writes a letter to the
Provost. Step 6. The provost approves the
application. Step 7. The president approves the
application. Step 8. And finally it is approved
by the Board of Trustees. NB. The process can be
influenced at any step
18

• Whats in your dossier?
• - evidence of scholarly publication
• - evidence of a national/international reputation
• - evidence of funding for research
• - evidence of teaching ability
• - evidence of service to the institution
• a self statement from you
• NB. Criteria are different in different places

19
Things to think about 1) The snowball
effect 2) Perspectives differ. Think like the
Dean! And do it before you take the job.
20
When you are thinking about your first job, think
about two things success history, and time.
Success History - what percentage of people get
tenure at places where I want to be?
- would I be happy being somewhere
else? Time - what do I need to
do? - when do I need to do it?
21
Work out a timetable. 1) The first six
months - hire a technician - set up your
lab - look for a postdoc - think carefully
about a graduate student - draft out a grant
proposal, and circulate it - identify an NIH
Inst and grants administrator - preliminary
experiments for grant - establish a mentorship
committee - write up any outstanding work from
your postdoc - give a departmental seminar, or
at least reserve a slot
22
2) The second six months - hire a second
technician. Set up pyramid structure - finish
preliminary experiments - write them up as a
paper and send off. - aim for one paper in a
major journal each year - finish grant and send
off - this is the end of your first year. Get a
formal evaluation from your department chair
23
3) The third six months - enhance your grant
before the study section meets - invite yourself
to give seminars (in combination with
the appearance of your first paper) - teaching
commitments usually start - committee work
usually starts - you will get your grant
score - call grants administrator, talk to
mentors
24
4) The fourth six months If you got your
grant - think about your lab personnel
graduate student? postdoc? If you didnt -
talk to mentors, revise grant as per reviews, do
any required experiments, resubmit. In any
case - write up another paper and send it off
(NB one per year is the aim) - get another
formal evaluation from your chair
25
5) The third year - try to get invited to a
meeting - continue to give seminars - if you
are now funded, think about a second grant -
write a review article - write another paper -
get another formal review - this is usually the
time of formal renewal
26
Some general thoughts for the next few years -
perseverance is rewarded - keep working in the
lab - dont be adversarial - continue to
network - dont alienate anyone
27
Points for the academic clinician 1) Protected
time 2) Get clear goals from division
director/department chair 3) Get mentorship, and
if possible, research space, from basic
science lab, if basic science is the goal 4)
Patient oriented research requires a lot of
formal training and approval of
protocols 5) You do get longer, so apply for a
KO8 first