It's true, the internal candidate doesn't always win, as Eska's case shows.

I too know of someone who has applied several times to new positions in their department but didn't get any one of them. Then again, they were also told not to apply as the jobs were targeting the American market - in the end the department did get new international people to fill those positions.

I guess you never know if the job is genuinely a new position or intended for an internal person. But there are definite clues ... it's all to do with the details and combination of requirements. Here is an example of an extreme case! Enjoy ...

Thanks for your replies. So I'm not alone. Maybe these past few experiences are a bit unusual as they ALL turned out to be "sham" interviews.

I don't know the people who got the jobs personally, just read their freshly created profiles on the departmental websites. Fled - for the two lectureships, in the first department the person had done their PhD there and had been working as a teaching fellow the last year and in the second department the person had been a teaching fellow there for at least the past year but I couldn't work out where they had done their PhD. For the research job, the person had literally just finished their PhD and has now landed a brilliant post-doc with a PI who is "coincidentally" their former PhD supervisor.

Last year, I saw a post-doc job come up at another university with a PI who I work closely with on research. I said to the PI that I was going to apply as it looked perfect for me, but they told me not to bother, which I thought was weird since we have done lots of similar work together. So I didn't apply and it turned out this job was indeed for their PhD student who of course got it!

We all know how troublesome the academic job market is, so I guess when senior people have the ability to create new positions, it is perhaps not all too surprising they try to keep on those they know well (and who are of course likely to be very well qualified for the positions anyway). Otherwise, these new / recently finished PhDs will struggle on the job market - despite amazing credentials - and could fall out of academia quite rapidly.

It's just agonising for all those people who reply to these "sham" adverts and even worse for those who make it to the "sham" interviews. Perhaps universities could state in adverts if internal candidates are shortlisted or not ... I would certainly save myself the trouble of playing the "sham" interview game.

So another thread moaning about jobs after the PhD (and difficulties getting them)...

OK, I had three interviews in the past couple of months (great) but I didn't get any of the jobs (not good).

Being genuinely very interested in those jobs (and all the others I have spent hours applying to), I check the departments' websites from time to time to see if anything else comes up.

What I came across recently re. the above three jobs isn't anything new in the academic world but it may serve as useful information for those struggling to find a job; perhaps it is even weirdly comforting...

Anyway, I found out who got the three jobs from the departments' own websites a couple of months or so later. Lo and behold ... all three jobs went to internal candidates close to the people in charge of hiring for those positions; for the two permanent lecturer jobs the successful people were both temporary teaching fellows in the respective departments and for the research associate position the successful person was a conveniently just finished PhD student of the PI of the project.

I'm not saying I had no chance in all three cases, but is this a coincidence? I'm sure those three people who got the jobs were indeed the best candidates in the eyes of the people who chose them. I guess it is almost impossible for anyone else to compete and match their very suitable experience.

Rant over. Anyone else experienced this? It makes me think about all those other jobs I've applied to and whether they were "real" ...

Thanks for everyone's thoughts. I guess there could be many reasons why employers use Skype. It seems the main benefit is that it's a lot less hassle. For example, face-to-face interviews are probably quite time-consuming.

As for internal candidates competing for the same job, I guess this is just a fact of life. Fair enough that universities at least allow outside people to compete (even if these people are not as qualified). It doesn't matter too much as there are always going to be people at job interviews who are better qualified than other candidates. It's only good when that better qualified person is you!

Hello everyone.
Wow, it's been a year since I last posted on here. Hope everyone is doing fine and that their PhDs are progressing and their job searches are actually paying off.

Just wondering whether people have ever had a Skype interview for a job and what their thoughts are on WHY employers interview this way rather than conventional face-to-face meetings.

I know a couple of friends and colleagues who have had Skype interviews for jobs. The logic behind these seemed obvious as the potential employers were on the other side of the world and it would be a lot of trouble to fly several people out for interviews.

Weirdly, this hasn't been like my experience of Skype interviews.

Why would you be offered a Skype interview when you're based in the same town as the institution?

This is not the first time I've had a Skype interview from a potential employer who is "just down the road" (needless to say, I got a rejection e-mail a day or two later).

So, why interview on Skype when applicants are local?

Obviously, I'm trying to figure it out and getting paranoid!

Perhaps the institution has an internal candidate in mind, so the real purpose of the interviews isn't exactly to find a person to fill the vacancy (that's been decided), it's just to tick boxes for HR. Skype interviews allow this to be done swiftly and without the fuss of face-to-face "sham" interviews.

Btw, face-to-face interviews can be shams as well. With one interview I had, I subsequently found out an internal person (who had been at the institution over 5 years) got the job.

In all these case, I would have preferred a straightforward rejection e-mail rather than an interview invite for a job you definitely have little chance of getting!!

Satchi - it is worth trying part-time jobs if any come up, as this seems to build up experience as well as pay the bills.

MeaninginLife - there is something seriously wrong. It is well known among academics that there are many many more PhD students than there are academic jobs. The problem is that this is not widely communicated to undergraduates or masters students. This can be easily addressed if the academic community publicised the low chances of getting into academia as soon as students start their undergraduate degrees. This way, the realities are known from day one; students may well be encouraged to drop any aspirations of an academic career very early on and therefore seriously consider other career options.

To be honest - and I'm sure others on here might feel the same - when I was an undergraduate or masters student, advice on the realities of getting an academic job probably would not have dissuaded me from doing a PhD too much. At that age and stage in my life I was just too naive to take on board any advice.

Thank you! Good luck to everyone! I started applying to jobs the year before I finished and spent the current academic year working and continung applying. Has been a long and difficult period, but I guess you just have to keep trying.

So here is some positive news to add to this thread. This week i received a job offer for a permanent full-time lectureship and two invitations for interviews for two more lectureships! From countless lectureship rejections over a period of almost 2 years to an actual offer of employment and interview invitations in a single week is quite incomprehensible! I swear I've not done anything different and I don't have any new publications. Maybe persistence is important and someone somewhere might be willing to employ you but it's just a matter of time until your paths cross. Anyway, I hope that this post will encourage those drowning in rejections who are feeling so gloomy about their career prospects that it is possible to get an academic job and what you are going through is just temporary. You never know which of those applications might lead to an offer. So don't give up!

Hi Satchi,
2 interviews seems to be pretty good going. So keep going! Don't forget part-time jobs too.

FYI, I've submitted in excess of three dozen applications. Also applied to many many more non-academic jobs.

The job market is really competitive, despite having good publications and over a year of work experience.

Hi Giardin,
I think if you are feeling a lot of pressure and are struggling in any way, arrange an appointment with your supervisor to discuss your concerns with him. Say you want to talk to him about something in private. Be very clear in the meeting what you're concerns are and what you would think would be best for you (i.e., you might need more time or help).

Your supervisor is probably asking you to get stuff published as it is good for you and it also will make him and the department look good by having a star student. Also it is normal during a PhD to think you are doing your research badly and to find it quite stressful. That is actually part of the learning process!

If you feel you cannot talk to your supervisor in a private and confidential capacity, or you feel like he is going to react badly, you can always talk to a mediator, e.g., your postgraduate tutor or another member of staff who you feel like you can talk to and who in turn can communicate your concerns to your supervisor.

I would personally suggest talk to your supervisor first - as nobody likes someone sneaking behind their back talking about them because it can be perceived as someone making allegations or complaints. If you get nowhere talking to your supervisor, talk to your postgraduate tutor. Just remember to always be reasonable and try and see both sides of the story.

Hope that helps!

Hi dancingintherain,
From what I can tell, it doesn't seem like you are being treated harshly. I undertand you feel like you are being treated differently because you were told specifically by an administrator the postgrad head and head of department will do your review because you are a member of staff. It might not be university-wide policy, but it could be something that is typical in your department and has been done before for other people. There is probably a sensible reason behind it - why not ask administrator who told you the news if it is really worrying you.

To be honest, I don't think it matters too much. Annual reviews are attended by people who don't really know your work so they can impartially judge whether you have made sufficient progress. I wouldn't worry who these people are unless they have a reputation for being incredibly harsh in such circumstances! Just prepare for your annual review and do your best - most people pass them so you probably don't have much to worry about.

Hi everyone,
I am currently getting by with two part-time temporary academic jobs in an area of science. For whatever reason (not going to get into that now!), some people have tremendous difficulty securing employment in academia. What has been hard to figure out is just HOW HARD is it, as people tend to be a bit hush hush about their job search (fair enough, it's private business) or seem to mysteriously get jobs really quickly.

So here are some figures on my job search to enlighten those who are finishing their PhDs / looking for jobs to see what the chances are for one particular job seeker who has been looking for at least a year and a half. I've split it into full-time and part-time jobs. Obviously this is going to be different for different people.

- Chance of full-time job interview: 21%
- Chance of full-time job offer: 0%
- Chance of full-time job offer out of applications that resulted in interview: 0%

- Chance of part-time job interview: 80%
- Chance of part-time job offer: 30%
- Chance of part-time job offer out of applications that resulted in interview: 38%

So what my experience shows is that full-time jobs are impossible to get and the chances of getting an interview are slim. Nothing shocking there, I guess. I applied to 40% more full-time jobs than part-time jobs as full-time jobs are more numerous.

When starting out looking for jobs, my advice is to seize the part-time jobs - the chances of getting an interview are vastly greater - and if you can get two jobs at the same time you can survive financially. Maybe the experience from part-time jobs is eventually paying off. Since January, my chances of getting interviews have jumped to a whopping 40% for full-time jobs and 100% for part-time jobs! Still no job offer though ...

How about other people?

Hi ShahSeville,
I hope I have correctly understood what you are asking!

In most cases, I would *not* recommend using means and SDs to describe raw data from Likert scales. This is because the data is not continuous (it is either interval or ordinal, depending on how you interpret it). More appropriate descriptive statistics could be the median or modal ratings across the five questions to report an average rating and the range, interquartile range etc. to report the dispersion of ratings.

But if you did want to get the SD ... Maybe when you are running the descriptive statistics, you are getting SDs by item because of the way your data is set out in SPSS. Are the ratings from your five questions set out in five separate columns? If that is the case and you want to get an SD of ratings from all five questions collapsed, then you need to put the ratings into a single column. You can do this by restructuring your data by clicking on "Data" and then "Restructure...". Then you need to select "Restructure selected variables into cases" and select "One" for "How many variable groups do you want to restructure". Next move the five questions in the box "Target Variable" and keep any other variables you want by moving them to the "Fixed Variables" box.

Hope that helps!

Hi everyone,
Just wanted to say, don't read *too* much into the response you get from informal job enquiries. Obviously, making an enquiry and showing your interest never means you will get the job!!

My point is: if an employer bothers to show some real interest in you before you apply, it suggests they will bother to at least consider your application when you submit it and not toss it immediately it in the bin.

On the other hand, if you see an advert for your dream job but after an informal enquiry or two the employer is clearly less than enthusiatic about the prospect of you working for them (e.g. he/she avoids talking to you directly, seems to act all awkward around you and looks like they can't wait to leave - happens to me, true story!), then it's still up to you to apply or not. When the rejection letter arrives, it shouldn't be too surprising.

Hi Satchi,
With the list of jobs you've applied to you can work out what type of jobs and universities/departments are rejecting you and which ones showed interest. Also ask for feedback after interviews, though feedback quality can vary - some people take the time to explain why you didn't get the job and the successful candidate did, while others prefer to be tight-lipped and offer only short generic statements.

Keeping note of your job search experiences and interview feedback not only allows you to improve your applications and interview performance, it also helps you to better judge which jobs you are more likely to be shortlisted for (and which jobs you will just be wasting your time on). Colleagues may advise "apply for everything", but I really don't agree. Applying for jobs is incredibly time consuming and you have to be realistic, otherwise your job search will eat too much into your time spent on getting experience in research/teaching/other work. Many many jobs will come up for which you match or exceed the minimum criteria, but you probably have little chance of being shortlisted, making it hard to know if it is ever worth taking the time to apply! One way is to ask the person in charge of making the hiring decision if they would be interested in you. Most of the time these people say "yes" by virtue of you meeting the minimum criteria. In order to tell whether they are genuinely interested (and therefore likely to shortlist you) is if they actually take the time to show their interest, engage in some meaningful dialogue with you and actively encourage you to apply.

As for replies to applications, in my experience academic employers almost always let you know if you've been shortlisted or rejected, though they sometimes take a very long time. Non-academic employers are generally very awful communicating the outcome! Even when you call to check the progress of you application, they often never ever give you a definite yes/no answer. Weird!