I have a Ph.D. and used to aspire to a professorship but eventually changed my mind because of the brutal market, work-life balance, and publish or perish stakes.
After a few years of this pivot, I am moving into a permanent Research Director position at a major R1 university research institute. It would be a leadership role overseeing the institute's research program.
How is a position like this generally viewed compared with a tenure-track or tenured professorship?
I know they're different career paths, so I'm not asking which is objectively "better." I'm more curious about prestige, career trajectory, and how each is perceived both within academia and outside of it.
I'd love to hear from anyone who's worked in or around university research institutes.
I don't think it's comparable to a TT faculty position because the responsibilities are largely distinct. IMO, it is perceived as more of an administrative position, which may qualify you for other administrative positions, both within academia and in federal labs.
Thank you very much for this.
Meaning you will be also likely required to conceptualize and direct several competitive proposals, getting some of them funded at the end. Pretty much like a TT professor but in a different level.
Is the job classified as staff or as academic staff or as faculty? Is there an additional faculty director associated with the institute?
This is incredibly helpful, thank you. It's an academic staff appointment. There's a faculty executive director, yes. And I can serve as PI on grants.
viewed by who? I don’t get why you’d care. Isn’t the issue more about your satisfaction? I’m not being flippant just genuinely confused
While I’m genuinely confused by a sociology PhD who doesn’t understand why the way the world perceives one might matter. Do you also ask your professors why anyone bothers to study class or hierarchy?
Spending your life worrying about what people think about you is a great way to lead a very small and insignificant life. Worrying about how you might be perceived in comparison to something you have chosen not to do and likely will never be available to you is beyond futile. You say you aren't asking for a comparison and which one is better but that is literally what you are doing. How does the career opportunities you'll have or how you'll be perceived in this role have anything to do with being a professor? The only way that would be relevant is if you've made professor the default gold standard and now want to see how everything else shapes up to it. By definition nothing else is a professor so it's less good? Why aren't you comparing it to be a partner in a law firm or a bus driver? You should only take this role if it's something you want to do, if you believe it will be fulfilling and you think it's something you should be good at. Don't do it because it has shades of being a professor and might be a bit like it or in touching distance. You absolutely will not be respected and you won't be good at it if that's what's motivating you. People will always respect someone who is competent, thoughtful and effective. Good people value good colleagues - whether they are the cleaner or the dean. Bad people place too much emphasis on particular job titles and roles and judge people by the position and power.
Absolutely. This isn't me trying to approximate a professorship but rather an attempt to better understand how me and my work might be perceived by my current employer, prospective co-authors/collaborators, future employers, etc. I'm doing what I love, just trying to be strategic and plan a few steps ahead, whether at my current job or next job.
"changed my mind because of the brutal market, work-life balance, and publish or perish stakes." I think this is the only perception that matters.
Take the position if it truly interests you. Don’t worry about others view it.
As long as you think you could perform this job. Most directors are responsible for seeking funding (from donors, foundations, etc). Not the greatest climate now, but you will likely feel the pressure from above.
Thanks for this. Exactly the challenge I reflected on in another reply.
If you’ve got the research bonafides, why not try and negotiate a department home? Departments are usually okay with that as long as you’re not a complete shit-heel because they assume you’re going to leave the institution at the end of your stint anyway. Most of our vice-presidents of research (R1) have also gotten departmental appointments despite being administrators. Note though, while you might be PI on big programmatic grants, you’re unlikely to be doing any actual research with them.
This is a great idea. Will explore this. It's actually also my alma mater so I've got connections to a few departments.
In such instances, they tend to have first risen through the academic ranks to full professor before taking on administrative roles.
If you've never been on the tenure-track or a similar independent research focused position, then you'll likely look like a staff member from your CV and career trajectory if you accept a research director position. In particular, do you have you own lab space, your own graduate students and postdocs, and your own research agenda? If not, you're a glorified supporting staff member. Whether that allows you to move somewhere else would have everything to do with your publication record and grant funding success as a PI.
After a few years of this pivot
what did you pivot to?
This. I used to be postdoc->VAP->TT but by the time I got to tenure track I decided I wanted to have a different relationship to the University and to research, so I turned down the TT and opted for a staff senior research position as part of a research institute and now worked my way up to director. While holding that staff research position I adjuncted at another good university nearby to stay nimble in my thinking and in the job market (s). While holding that staff research position I also pulled in/led some big grants/partnerships and contributed a lot to our institutes strategy. Hence where I'm at today.
The brutal market is true, but the "work-life balance" and "publish or perish" stakes are largely self-inflicted problems. It seems like you're very influenced by outside issues, as you also seem concerned about "prestige" and "how each is perceived". Maybe just live your life for you and your loved ones?