Hi all, this is my first time on the Postgraduate Forum having signed up today. The reason for this thread is due to my indecision regarding the PhD I'm currently undertaking. First, some background:

I graduated with a 1st class degree in 2010 and completed my master's degree in 2011 with distinction. In 2013, I was awarded a fully-funded scholarship at a university to undertake a 4-year PhD course. At this point I was doing bar work and saw the PhD as a relatively good opportunity for me to enhance my career prospects further, potentially going into academia.

In the period between applying for the scholarship and being accepted I took up new job in healthcare (admin). I met some really good people and the pay was decent, especially when increments were added (i.e., night pay, weekend pay etc.,). Additionally, this position also offered me the scope to use my degree effectively in the NHS (my friend from undergrad, for example, got a job in a doctor's surgery on reception; 18 months later she is a research co-ordinator).

I'm currently approaching the 5th month of my first year. This year has primarily consisted of completing compulsory modules in order to make myself "research-ready" and continue with my PhD in the 3 years that follow. HOWEVER, I've been considering my decision since November and I just feel the PhD is not for me. I don't want a job in academia anymore, all I want is to be settled in life and be earning a decent living. The problem is, I'm overqualified as it is for the majority of jobs. I've had 2 interviews this year with no luck. I feel stuck because, on one hand, I want something other than the PhD and, on the other, I can't give it up because it is providing an income. In addition, I feel awful because someone with more desire should be in my position.

Any advice?! It would be much appreciated.

Thank you.

Hello,

The only advice I can give is to be careful that you won't regret your decision if you left. It's nice to be earning decent money, and more difficult if you are not when your friends are, however the job market is tough and there are lots of well-qualified people that want promotions. Furthermore, to get a promotion you probably need to work long hours and deal with stress and people's personal problems. What looks like decent money/good job now, might not be in 5 years time if you can't get ahead, then you might wish you had got a PhD. If you have a PhD, at least it's something you have that other candidates don't. On the other hand, it will make you even more overqualified...Also, you are unlikely to get a job in academia anyway, so not wanting to be an academic is not necessarily a reason not to be doing a PhD.

You're the only one that knows if a PhD is right for you. If you think it's the right decision to make, then leave. But don't do this solely because you think the grass is greener in the job market, because it isn't.

TreeofLife has summed things up pretty nicely.

The only thing I have to add is you've tasted the 9 to 5 then going home and switching off. That is a telling remark in itself if I compare your state of mind with my own back during my PhD days.

I'd come from 9 to 5 to do PhD and loss of money and regular hours didn't bother me. I wanted a challenging project that I could engage in and my PhD gave me that. Whilst the thought of just crashing when I got home was nice (in the early days I did get the chance), that challenge and my motivation to meet it were huge motivators for me. I enjoyed it, even in retrospect the killer stages of write-up later on as I saw the thesis take shape (though I didn't see it that way during write-up).

That difference in motivation may be what brings you through the next couple of years or what makes you decide to call it a day. Chat with a personal tutor, student counsellor or even a trusted friend, just to sound yourself out.

However, if that feeling of wanting the 9 to 5 with your evenings your own is partially influenced by seeing others moving on with their lives or missing out on seeing friends and social life because your having to work at unsocial times, bear in mind a PhD is only for a small portion of your life after which you can move on. It's not for ever.

Although I didn't suffer from mid-term blues or impostor syndrome there are plenty that do. If there is an element of this, it's something that normally passes as you gain more skills and knowledge. A PhD is a marathon, not a sprint and although we start green and inexperienced, struggling with concepts and new knowledge and methods, this does not last with most of us. I felt I grew as a person as I progressed through my PhD.

Ian (Mackem_Beefy)

"all I want is to be settled in life and be earning a decent living." - Forget the PhD.

Despite the many souls who posses this degree, a true Doctor of Philosophy (in my little world) is not motivated by money, comfort or anything generally resembling "the average man's" life. His/Her work is greater than themselves and represents the sharp end of their field. They usually aspire to leave the world a better place. Self confidence bordering on the delusional is a prerequisite.

A true PhD candidate is like a British SAS soldier if you will. A "Teir 1" professional. They are generally HIGHLY motivated, the best at what they do, they ignore the plethora of risks involved, and never, ever.....ever need convincing to carry on with the mission.

If a simple, uncomplicated, relatively low risk, predictable life is what you are after, I beg you to forget that PhD.

@Fled Inspirational. Thanks :)

@ Fled - for the sake of balance, I disagree. Though the essence of a lot of what you say is valid, respectfully, your comments are quite sweeping and would probably alienate quite a lot of people on here reading it.

I think the passion for research, the initiative, the self-motivation and the drive are all vital, yes. So should be very high intellect and creative thinking, which actually seem to be attributes lacking in a surprising number of PhDs. I encountered several-such just in my school.

There is a role for your extreme "go-getters", of course. But as in any field, there has to be a balance. Perhaps the "Tier 1" professionals who often seem to get to the top in academia and peddle their own particular brand of bull**** and bully others into not questioning their eminence might not get away with it if they were surrounded by more of "the others" who might temper their delusions. In addition, these types are surely the individuals often responsible for the large number of threads on here from PhD students and post-docs who have serious bullying problems with their supervisors.

@MurderOfCrows: Fully-funded for four years? Woah! Well, there's something positive that's come out of your PhD, i.e. your decision not to go into academia. Though after just 5 months? Personally, I think you should stick it out for at least a year. It's still quite early days. And there is value in completing it even if you don't want to pursue a career in academia. The achievement, and contrary to popular belief, a lot of jobs outside of academia want or prefer PhDs.

However, it's a decision only you can make. I wish you luck with it.

@Simon - I take your points, and it does sound like you have experienced some bad characters in your experiences. Now make no mistake, what I affectionately call a "Tier 1" professional is not a bully, the heads of dept, or even all senior profs.

Of course the field is plagued with "bads", but that is life. Its always the same. There are those who are successful through luck, charisma, political prowess or outright ruthless... but in the end, they never get the Nobel. Their work is their least celebrated trait. They know how to work the system and get their 80K GBP + a year and that's all.

These however are not the individuals I speak of. Those who really "get the job done" know who they are and need no further explanation from me. However, there is a lot of bellyaching on here, and at least 2-3 "I am not successful because of my supervisor from hell" threads a month.

THAT is the more dangerous kind of BS. The type of BS that allows you to think that all of your woes emanate from some malefic entity, whose life mission is to crush your research aspirations. The kind of BS that shelters you from the truth that you are the only person getting in your own way. Are there obstacles thrown at you? of course. But a lot of people need to stop crying, embrace the suck, and get off their asses and get going.

I am a dissertation coach but I work with clients during all stages of the Ph.D. program. I would say that in my experience, those who struggle with their commitment to the Ph.D. so early on generally do find it harder to make it to the finish line. The best advice I could give you is to get as clear as you can about what you really want, in both the short and long term. If the Ph.D. path is not for you, there is nothing wrong with simply redirecting and pursuing other options. And if you do decide to stay, I would suggest you find something that will be motivating enough to get you through. That can look different for different people, it may even be something as basic as just getting what you came for. Just be clear about what is motivating you, so that you don't end up wondering whether you did the "right" thing.

Back to the OP....

To add... the type of PhD candidate (and subsequent career academic) that Fled describes do exist. To work alongside one can, in some cases, be inspiring as they sweep you along with their enthusiasm. In other cases, however, they can squash and trample those around them in the pursuit of their own vision. So, mixed bag.

I do not think all PhD candidates must have that kind of zeal. In some instances that zeal is misplaced anyhow. It may be an ideal to be a 'top tier' candidate if you want to devote your life to the pursuit of knowledge, but there are plenty of decent PhD candidates who will never make it to Professor and yet whose achievements are not to be discredited. So do not feel like you are only eligible to continue if you meet this description. That said, the "marathon not a sprint" adage is very true, and you will need to be able to keep plodding on even when the motivation starts to wane.

Firstly, thank you for all of your responses shedding light on a variety of issues and considerations, they have been extremely helpful. Secondly, I apologise in the delay of my response.

Moving on.

@treeoflife

Thank you for your thoughtful comments. I agree with you the grass isn't greener on the other side. The job market is really really tough at the moment and its not like I'm going to walk into a position (entry-level or not) with or without a PhD. Hence, why I'm unwilling to drop the PhD without an alternative. You make an important point about employment. Yes, just because I work five years somewhere does not mean I'm going to progress in that position/field and, of course, having a PhD does kind of put you in the minority in terms of qualifications nationally which may help down the line. The over-qualification point is equally important. Some (maybe many, I don't have any evidence as such) people do not consider what follows a PhD (or a BA, BsC, MA, MsC, MBA etc., for that matter). They undertake the qualification, ploughing their way through mountains of work to the submission of their thesis and the successful defence of their work in the viva, without really considering the post-PhD implications. Post-PhD life is something that has weighed on my mind quite a bit. I've already experienced issues of over-qualification already with regards to my "first-class" degree classification (Lord Winston was once interviewed and admitted to intentionally not granting/allocating positions to individual's with "first's" because they are 'most likely middle class and have no person skills'; yet, I'm working class [son of a butcher] and I have worked in bars for 7 years of my life!) and my master's degree. So, I'm worried that the PhD will be a 4-year period in which I gain something I am proud of but experience the same difficulties I have with my master's.

Thank you again.

@Mackem_Beefy

Thank you for your comments.

At the outset I want to say that I did not come from a 9-5 position, or background for that matter. I have never worked 9-5 in my life. My last position had three sets of hours: 0730 - 1530; 1200/1300 - 2100; 2100 - 0800/0900. In addition, I used to work mainly evenings when I was a bar supervisor, whilst doing degrees in the daytime.

I agree with your comments regarding being green and inexperienced. I think we, as human beings, do feel a little anxious when embarking on major projects (be it, new jobs, relocation, PhD). I would be lying to you all if I said I didn't feel a little anxious when I first considered that this might not be for me back in November. Hence why I have taken my time and have really put the effort into trying to see if its for me in order that I can make a somewhat reasoned decision.

As for seeking advice, I have already consulted those closest to me (family, friends, girlfriend) and I have considered talking to maybe a university counsellor or careers service advisor. So, your points are well made.

Thank you again

@Fled

Thank you for your comments.

Before I put forward my response to your comments, I must get a few things off my chest.

(a) Firstly, I do not want to become embroiled in a debate concerning the "goodies" and "baddies" that comprise the on-going soap opera (or so it seems) of academia. To be frank, there are good people and bad people in all corners of the globe (be it, meeting them on the street; in the coffee shop; or working alongside them), therefore I feel that I would be adequately prepared for anything in that regard. Plus, its not like "good" and "bad" are accepted, universal principles in any case.

(b) I found your comment, 'a simple, uncomplicated, relatively low risk, predictable life' to be rather offensive. I think that kind of demeanour represents a certain snobbishness, perhaps a bloated sense of entitlement on your part because you're in possession of a PhD. The truth is, that ALL life is complex. We never have it "simple", its never "predictable" and it is anything but "low risk." With this in mind, I think that maybe you should look at things a little bit differently and understand that people do different jobs and activities, and we shouldn't devalue these jobs and activities just because they don't align themselves with ours.

Nevertheless, thank you again

@DonnaG

Thank you for your comments.

Your reply really stood out to me. It seemed to state the nuances that make up this decision in really logical terms. I agree with you that motivation is a key concern. It is something that has been at the nucleus of my thoughts as of late. I make my way to university with the attitude of it being another day for me to get through and that kind of attitude makes me think "why am I doing this?, Surely I should be going to university full of enthusiasm and desire, right?" We had a talk from a professor the other day and he summed it up perfectly, he said: 'When I look at the list of potential candidates I can supervise, the single most important quality I seek is curiosity, the "fire to know."' This really struck a chord with me, primarily because it is the "fire to know" that is the key to being motivated.

I think the major difference I have experienced is the lifestyle element of a PhD. For example, when I did my undergraduate and my master's they were always an additional activity. I always had a job. The PhD seems to demand you to make it a "lifestyle." This is best expressed in the chats I have had with fellow colleagues who seem to devote entire days (from the time they wake to the time they sleep) to pursuing their research, and what I assume to be their lifelong ambition(s). I don't think I can embrace that lifestyle in the same way, hence my predicament.

Thank you again