======= Date Modified 01 Nov 2012 11:55:23 =======

I'm sorted in so much at least I have a job. However, the below was a career path changer. That said, it was a while ago so yes I've moved on but such happenings do have a long term affecton people. Cases I've read on here in the past are far worse than mine and when someone needs counselling years later, that tells you all you need to know about the affect on the victim's self worth. If the bullying or harrasment could be dealt with at the time and the bully 'moved on' (yes, this behaviour should result in dismissal), then the victim should at least be able to move forward and put it behind them.

There are procedures set down at all Universities to deal with such situations, however, they seem to be a paper exercise only as the University will almost always protect it's own reputation with the perceived troublemaker (normally the victim) 'moved on' instead. It's not just individual cases either as I know for sure of two cases of 'institutional' bullying, where rather than make a surplus member of staff redundant they freeze them out until the member of staff moves on under their own steam. There is no paperwork and no awkward questions as a result.

One was a maths lecturer at my PhD University. The other had to go abroad due to family reasons and other members of staff made a decision to close the research institute he ran whilst he was away. 10 people ended up looking for other jobs.

I know of a more amusing story with respect to the above (and Uni. wanting to protect reputation) at another Uni. I was told six years ago, however, for various reasons I'll not post on open forum. Suffice to say a failing PhD student happened to be at the right place and right time and was awared his PhD plus post-doc position, no questions asked. :-)

Ian (Mackem_Beefy)

======= Date Modified 31 Oct 2012 13:11:35 =======
EDIT: Advert - avoid.

I've told this tale quite a lot now, but here goes again, split into three parts as there's alot to tell. But I tell it again as a warning.

PART 1:

I'd avoided almost all the politics and posturing during my PhD and first post-doc period (at PhD Uni.) and in the end (bar the stress of write-up) had a quite pleasent experience during this time. I knew of issues but did not make them my concern.

My second post-doc at a different Uni. had what you would call a 'personality' professor in charge. He also put a post-doc in direct charge of me where there was a clear personality clash. Everything at interview went okay and I was offered the job on the spot. However, the day following I got wind of a story in the press where he'd been up in front of a tribunal for bullying and it was sufficient to make me consider turning the job down. However, well meaning relatives persuaded me not to be so hasty as it was a prestigious Uni. I was moving to and I thought I needed a new start anyway.

He actually phoned me out of the blue to pay no heed to the story and I responded it was none of my business and not to worry. So I took the job.

I should have listened to the voice in my head screaming "No!!!". His phone call in itself should have set the alarmbells ringing.

I didn't get to meet the Prof. again until the second day of my contract. It sums it up when in the kick-off meeting on day two of the contract, he mutters to my mentor-to-be that I was "very much a second choice, a stop gap measure, we'll just have to make do". From other pieces of information I picked up, he'd already lined up a first choice with a skills set he wanted and this first choice had turned the job down. I believe I was then drafted in to cover as my mentor's workload was too much to for her to cope with.

The correct course of action would have been to interview further people and leave me out if I was not suitable, however, I was hired in a move I now believe was an error on his part and one that cost me dearly. I could have stayed at my PhD Uni. a little longer whilst I sorted out other employment and kept my reference record intact.

======= Date Modified 31 Oct 2012 11:27:48 =======
PART 2:

I admit I made mistakes during the year and for one there was no excuse (a verbal error made in front of the actual final customer). However, in most cases there was a root cause I could trace back to information I was not given, notably by the girl I started privately calling the dementor (INCLUDING the big mistake I have just mentioned). I never felt as though I was actually wanted there and throughout, there were instances of bizarre behaviour including me being hauled over the coals for me not assessing a report from another University when I'd already said three weeks prior I felt the report contained data of insufficient quality to help us. I ended up doing a report on this report for him if that makes sense. There were also mood swings with both the Prof and the (de)mentor, which meant I never knew where I stood. Whilst they were both top of their fields, their people handling skills were next to non-existent. In the case of the (de)mentor, it felt as though she never had a downtime period after she completed her own PhD and had remained in hyper mode over the few years since she completed and that didn't help tension levels.

Examples include:

1) The (de)mentor supervising my technique on a test rig, where I momentarily had to stop myself to ensure correct procedure was followed and turned round to find her ranting and raving behind me. I had followed the procedure I was given but she still went off on one.

2) The Prof. having a go at a technician after I reported an equipment fault. The Prof. claimed he should have had it fixed a week ago, which was impossible as I'd only just reported a fault that had just appeared. I was then witness to a blazing row between the two of them, ending in front of the technician's boss and workmates. I realised it wasn't just me he was likely to have a go at from that experience. The technician's boss and workmates all agreed that the altercation should have happened privately, however, it was clear that when the bust-up happened others would stay out of the firing line and not get involved. In otherwords, everyone would look after themselves.

I heard from others that his mood swings were well known about and two members of secretarial staff that worked in adjacent office said they could tell on the looks on people's faces who was due to go into see him.

======= Date Modified 01 Nov 2012 13:07:56 =======
PART 3:

I did find out that there were contacts within the Uni. that 'dealt' with personality characters like him, however, it was meant for students and I couldn't really use it.

As for the effect it had on me as a person, it was quite negative. The PhD and first post-doc had given my confidence a big boost, however, I could feel this draining away from me due to the poor working environment. There were times I was in tears and I just wanted to quit and actually twice served notice to quit, however, I had to see out the year for the simple reason if I left I would have had no income. In the UK, you cannot claim unemployment benefit for six months if you leave a job out of your own choice without an alternative.

There were knock-on effects in that as I'd left without a reference (though I later obtained a job description from Uni. human resources), it took me a year to find alternative employment and that further knocked my confidence. One reason I was given was that I was overqualified for jobs I was applying for. Another was the lack of the reference from the second post-doc Uni. My PhD Uni. gave me some unpaid work assisting in writing a book chapter based on my PhD data, which allowed me at least to improve my reference situation. Word had got back to them there'd been problems, though I never fully disclosed what had happened.

I did want to complain and a harrasment action was discussed (as per the bullying case I mentioned at the beginning), however, in a completely independent conversation it was made clear that Universities close ranks and any complainant would either face a wall of silence or a 'version of events' putting the Uni. in a favorable light (though avoiding directly defamitory comments about the complainant). I felt at the time there was nothing I could do, as any witnesses would remain quiet for the sake of their own jobs and careers. It's also possible my name was somehow blacklisted at least with local Universities, but I have no proof of this.

The experience has affected my career longterm in that over five years later, my career is on a different path to that I had imagined. I'm basically back to where I started before I took the PhD and despite a good publication record and good working record apart from that one post-doc year, it would be difficult to redirect to where I was after my PhD.

I don't regret doing the PhD as I've said elsewhere as that and the first post-doc were very positive experiences. However, as I found out during my second post-doc it takes very little and just one or two people being against you to undo years of good work. Whilst the remarks can also apply to the real world, my experiences are one reason I suggest to people they have a good look around the deprartment (both PhD and post-doc) and meet the people you'll be working with before you sign any contracts or agreements. If possible, stick your head round the door a second time as meeting your potential supervisor under a different set of circumstances can tell you alot more about them. That working relationship above all can make or break a PhD or post-doc position.

EDIT: With time I can say the rawness of the feelings over what happened have definitely faded away. However, one thing that still sticks with me is knowing that they have moved on from this with their reputations intact and not so much as a repremand over errors and omissions that were down to them. I still feel justice has not been done.


Ian (Mackem_Beefy)

I remember your post from a year ago. When I reappeared here, I remember someone posting that they'd been three years in the same predicament.

I myself was unemployed for a year after the 'failure' of my second post-doc and yes, I did wonder what the point of everything was. Like you, I also had family reasons why moving out of the area was not an option (my region is a well known unemployment blackspot - my username is a clue to roughly the area I'm from). However, a job did eventually come along and whilst it's not perfect I've been in that job now for five years.

Don't give up hope and keep trying. Something has to give in the end. I know many people frown on removing PhDs from CVs in order to enhance job prospects, but don;t be afraid to do this if it at least finds you a job. With the agreement of your former supervisors, pass it off as a fixed term Research Assistant position.

If you want to talk some more, by all means send me a PM.

Ian (Mackem_Beefy)

I went into a PhD with Masters and 2(ii). A PhD means you undertook a research topic that led to an original finding that added something new to your chosen field. It doesn't mean you're a certified genius.

I think I'm going to echo what others have said in that it helps to be interested in your subject. However, there are others on here where the match was not sopt on and they've done okay. The PhD is about you and the effort you put in to achieve your aims. Do accept it's going to be hard work. The skills and techniques you need, you learn as you go along and no new started will have the complete skill set they need at the very beginning. We all have a phase where we're playing catchup with other members of the group, so don't worry about this. As regards background knowledge, that's what a literature review is for.

The big one for me is being able to get on with the supervisors and the rest of the team. The supervisor relationship to me can be the real make or break factor and I consider it important to ensure you've met your new potential supervisors (especially the primary), had a good look around the department and met other PhD students working under him without the potential supervisors being around so they can tell you honestly what it's like working under them.

I got a good supervisor for my PhD - he had his quirks, everyone does - allowing me nearly the right balance of contact and space to get on with my work. I stayed in my PhD department for my first post-doc and that worked out okay too. However, the supervisory academic and direct subordinate for my second post-doc in a different University had a very different set of personnel skills with at times outright hostility and I think I would have failed if I'd taken up an option to do a PhD in that University instead. I had a miserable time of it during that latter second post-doc period.

I would try meeting the supervison team more than just the once as catching on a different day under a different set of circumstances can reveal alot about mood swings and temprement. Everyone puts on their best faces in an interview situation as I found out to my cost for my second post-doc.

As regards at least giving it a go, I agree fully with Screamingaddabs in it's better to have a go and at least know you've tried rather than shyed away and never known. If you like, it's better to have loved and lost rather than never to have loved at all. :-)

I put together a blog after I finished, which gives you my perspective on a PhD and covers a few other issues not covered by your questions. It is written in an honest style, so don't let the negatives put you off. If I had my time over again, yes I would still opt to do a PhD. The boost it gave at the time to my self-confidence and the new skills learned is something that cannot be underestimated.

http://www.wearthesis.talktalk.net

As regards doing a PhD abroad, I can see your argument about it perhaps being better for your CV. I'm not sure it makes that much difference and believe the working environment to be more important to give yourself the best chance of seeing through the process with the correct level of support. Three to five years is a long time if the environment is not right for you.

Ian (Mackem_Beefy)

======= Date Modified 25 Oct 2012 09:36:30 =======

A ten page PhD thesis?!!

It would have to be:

a) Very succinct;

b) Drawing from a very small pool of available literature;

c) Drawing on a pool of data that does not require a large amount of discussion to deliver the original, new contribution to knowledge required of a PhD.

Any physicist on here that would care to explain? :-)

The shortest credible one I've found is (thanks Google) "An unstable Adams spectral sequence" by David Lee Rector at 9 pages at MIT.

http://library.mit.edu/item/000612341

The longest in contrast is "ARCHAEOLOGY AND HISTORICAL PROBLEMS OF THE SECOND INTERMEDIATE PERIOD" (I've no idea what that means) by Bruce Williams at 2143 pages, plus 31 pages for contents etc., coming out at 2174 pages total at University of Chicago.

http://oi.uchicago.edu/OI/DEPT/RA/BBW/BBWIntro.html

Ian (Mackem_Beefy)

======= Date Modified 24 Oct 2012 11:42:03 =======
1) Have you tried contacting her former supervisor?

2) Have you tried a quick trace on the author to try to contact her? Is there any trace of the author on Linkedin, Academia.edu or Facebook?

3) Have you contacted the University library and explained your situation?

There's also the Australian National Thesis Service:

http://trove.nla.gov.au/


Ian (Mackem_Beefy)

======= Date Modified 25 Oct 2012 08:57:38 =======

The UK attitude as I see it is the PhD is an achievement, however, as with other 'personal' achievements it is not raised readily in conversation or correspondence unless it is directly relevant to the topic. Even then, it is the content or findings of the work rather than it making up a PhD Thesis / Dissertation that is important. The PhD qualification may be seen as important only on a personal level rather than to society in general, an afterthought if you like. The same applies to other academic qualifications.

The only situation where you might want to promote the qualification is in applying for a job that needs the qualification or impressing on students in an academic setting that you have excelled in your field and are therefore qualified to teach or supervise them.

Beyond that, trying to deliberately stand out from the crowd can be seen as arrogant or elitist. It's let slip rather than announced I guess.

A historical precedent as regards the UK attitude to achievement was set by the Arthur Wellesley, 2nd Duke of Wellington when he became a Duke. In a personal letter to his brother, it was mentioned only as a postscript - "I believe I forgot to tell you I was made a Duke" (22nd May 1814).

Also, by announcing something like a PhD, you're seen as being 'clever' and you can set yourself up for a fall if you're unable to answer a given question in the eyes of the public even though it might not be your field. That may relate alot to public misunderstanding of what exactly a PhD is. Additionally, the title "Doctor" is firmly linked with medicine in the eyes of the general public.

Yes, some do see it it as a "superfluous", "geeky" qualification and only those who really understand it see it as the achievement it is. But to repeat myself it is your personal acheievemnt and no-one else's. :-)


Ian (Mackem_Beefy)

======= Date Modified 23 Oct 2012 12:26:32 =======

I disagree. You might say you're research in a certain area has indicated findings X and Y without having to mention the doctorate.

Mentioning the doctorate just smacks of "Look how clever I am!!!", as mentioned below it makes you look a right twat. :-(



When I watch the documentary channels (Discovery, National Geographic), I see PhD or Dr dropped in occasionally with some very tacky programmes. It really makes the qualification look cheap and almost as though it's been bought off the internet rather than properly earned. I wish they wouldn't do it.

It is more readily mentioned outside the UK. In the UK itself there is still an expectation that you would keep it to yourself and to do otherwise is seen as elitism or arrogance. You'd basically be setting yourself up to be cut down to size.

A girlfriend of a colleague was recently awarded a PhD and there was more issue made of the colour of her shoes matched that of her gown than the fact she'd received the award. :-)


Ian (Mackem_Beefy)

It sounds to me like a mixture of 'look how great I am' (i.e. arrogance) and attempting to add weight to his arguments by mentioning the PhD. In the first instance, that would turn me against the speaker due to said arrogance. In the second, I would ignore the attempt to add weight to the argument by mentioning the qualification and I admit that it would even make me more resistant to the arguments made.

I don't think either speaker is helping themselves.

Ian (Mackem_Beefy)

It sounds like one of the examiners is reading it from cover to cover!!! :-)

You've also resubmitted whilst they were likely to be away on holiday, after which it's conference season before they all return to Uni. end of September.

I remember my viva was delayed to enable my supervisor to concentrate on an EU Project seminar. I just wanted to get it over with, so I know how you feel.

Ian (Mackem_Beefy)

======= Date Modified 18 Oct 2012 15:42:32 =======
Ditto to Delta.

It's a hard world out there and finding work is difficult. Under such circumstances, you have to put yourself first. Apply.

I faced a period of unemployment too and it's not a nice place to be. It's easier to find work whilst in work.

Ian (Mackem_Beefy)

======= Date Modified 18 Oct 2012 15:37:35 =======
I did pretty much as posters did, in that I listed any typos I found and corrected them as I found them.  I provided my supervisor with a list, who promptly said "Don't show it to them or mention it."  Er, okay.  I ended up with three minor corrections, all spelling mistakes.  I will reiterate what others have said, in that clearing up minor typos is fine. 

However, the final hardbound thesis is meant to be an accurate reflection of the document the examiners have reviewed so major unauthorised changes to analyses or findings are not acceptable and can actually in extremis end up with the PhD being revoked.  This is very unlikely and depends on someone spotting a change, plus the University being willing to attract adverse publicity in doing so.  I am aware, however, that my own University was very aware of things like this happening and was very watchful of this (normally due to a candidate replacing something in the hardbound thesis they disagreed with - normally a supervisor amendment).

--------

I'll admit to a minor cock-up here, as I ended up with three versions of my thesis in electronic form. 

1) The first was the submission version (long since deleted as it is not needed anymore). 

2) The second was with the three typos corrected as per the examiners' changes plus the typos I found and corrected. 

3) The third I'd blindly started editing the submission version and ended up a version with examiner typos corrected but my typos not.

How I managed that and didn't spot what I was doing, I'll never know, though I think at different times in my rush to get rid of it I'd sat down and edited one without referring to the other.  :-)

I ended up hard-binding version three at the time (the one sitting in the library) and when my Uni. created it's electronic repository a few years later, I turned the second version into a PDF to be donated to and uploaded to it.  I only realised at this stage what I'd done.

No doubt someone will find the hard bound version three has quite a few more typos in the dim and distant future.  Version two is that I normally point people to.

No thesis is ever perfect and as has been said by plenty in the past, it is brought to the point where it is as it's least damaging when it is submitted.


Ian (Mackem_Beefy)