Whether your degrees are all from the same university or not is secondary to the quality of your institution, the department you study in, the supervisors/lecturers you had, etc…
I got all 3 degrees from different universities but I'm certain that if I had stayed at my Bachelors institution it wouldn't have made a bit of a difference.
As for the different perspectives argument, you can easily be exposed to different perspectives in the same institution: I had two supervisors during my undergrad years who held completely different views on issues.
Finally, as far as Russell are concerned, they are research intensive universities and so they are held in higher pedigree. A PhD from a Russell Group uni would be more distinctive in that regard. Depends on which Russells you turned down tbh and your field so we can't say whether you're mad or not (I hope you're not though :))

Whether it's more secondary than primary research doesn't really matter IMHO, and if it's not as quantitative I'm sure you can always find other ways/dimensions that you'd develop during the job to make you a better-rounded researcher. Insofar as Fled's comments are concerned,

I agree with you HazyJane that this is quite subjective at the end of the day: I'd appreciate it but someone else may not. Unfortunately there isn't much you can do unless you know who'll review your postdoc application and his/her opinions. What matters most to a postdoc is the ability to perform high-quality research that could lead to several publications if not a book, and in most fields today (social sciences like mine or otherwise), there's an increased predilection towards mixed-methods research (qualitative/quantitative). I have a strong quantitative background but can honestly say mixing that with qualitative methods made my PhD all the better, and I used that as an argument during my job interview and that convinced my unit manager.

Easiest thing to do is
1) look at your field
2) see what kind of skills researchers in your field generally possess
3) see how your job would help you either develop or reinforce some of these skills
4) mention this when you'll apply to postdocs.

That's going to be my plan anyway if I don't stay at my job.

You're in the same boat as myself HazyJane my current job (whilst related to my field) is not in academia, but I intend to keep my options open and return to university afterwards.

I've spent a long time asking people and researching this and the short answer to your question is YES you can take the job and then return to academia. Having said that, it would be desirable if your job is related to your academic field and of course if you have publications out. You won't be frowned upon by subsequent post-docs if you can establish that your postdoc research relates to your work in the quango. As you know, I chose to take the job, and whilst I'm happy so far with my job, I know that it's only a 9 month contract (unless they retain me) and have been considering postdocs. Given that I'm an economist and my job relates to my speciality it wouldn't be an issue.

A current lecturer at one of my old unis got his PhD, worked at a bank for 3 years, and came back to academia and is now an Associate Professor. It can be done. Given what you've mentioned, I say go for it- I went for it and so far 1 month in I'm loving it: it's a different experience and has given me a new means of looking at issues I've investigated during my PhD.

In that case tell him you'll consider it- it seems the fact that you haven't had success so far in other universities could be in fact related to this issue which the Professor has raised. Consider yourself lucky that he actually responded most of them don't. Keep trying and fingers crossed.

Don't worry I had the same issue, and guess what: the paper was written by one of my examiners lol. It's just something I added when I had to do my corrections later. As I said in your other post: chill it'll all go well :)

That's true I didn't do an MPhil before doing my PhD. As TheEngineer said: if it's funded and it's one year MPhil course that's research-intensive (some actually hand out MRes) then I'd say go for it you'll also enhance your research abilities which would clearly suit you during the PhD. You could get in touch with him and ask him/her why he/she thinks the MPhil is a good course to embark upon- this way he/she'll perhaps shed some insight into the programme and the skills you lack at present.

Having said that keep applying elsewhere as well.

You'll pass Dr. Millymoo- I guarantee you! Normal jitters/fears just relax there's nothing wrong with your dissertation assuming your relationship with your supervisor is fine then you have nothing to worry about at this stage. Just prepare responses for the usual questions (why is your work significant, how does it contribute, why this theoretical framework, etc…) and you'll ace it.

1. Shouldn't be a problem switching from MIS to Risk Management or Finance tbh it all depends on what you want to do afterwards. What are your career goals?

2. MFin is more broad in giving you exposure to different elements of the Finance curriculum than financial risk management. All depends on your plans next so figure that out and then we can help you more.

Hi 29200

I'm sorry you feel down- I felt down as well during my first year as I struggled to narrow down my topic. I don't know what's your field, but here's what I'd do:

1. If you feel your topic is too broad now, consider performing a case study. In social sciences, for example, if you're briefly looking at topic X, try to examine X in the context of a country Y, or a specific time period across a panel of countries.
2. In the nat sciences I'm sure there'd be ways of taking an existing theoretical framework and applying to another situation.

Otherwise, try to read on a related topic that can be narrowed down more and for which you can actually find data (I cannot emphasise that latter point more emphatically). As for speed, set yourself deadlines and don't break them!! Wish I knew more about your topic I could've been more specific

Many congratulations!

Dear Giddypig,
There's nothing wrong with you. I know this from experience- I don't have that many friends even now, and when I was working before my PhD in the private sector I had zero social life and zero friends, and would never even go out with my colleagues. Having personal issues that crippled my self-esteem didn't help. Here are a few suggestions:
1. Figure out concretely why you are "very down", since that seems to be the reason why you avoid social situations. When I started my PhD, I did a list of all the things I hated about myself (physically, psychologically, etc…) and used the 3-4 year opportunity to do the PhD and address these problems. You need to figure out why you are unhappy with yourself- the reason why you avoid ppl is because you are insecure about yourself and don't want ppl to find that out; that was the case with me.
2. A PhD (unlike employment) actually does provide you with greater flexibility to manage your time. You don't have to finish in 3 years (I'm assuming no funding problems/issues). So make up some time to exercise, read, listen to music. It doesn't have to be social activities at first, but these things will help you feel better about yourself and this is when you'll have the confidence and desire to interact with ppl more.
3. List all the good things about yourself: remind yourself of your good personality traits, physical features that make you attractive, how you have improved over the years in certain areas to boost your self-esteem up.

Ultimately you avoid ppl to avoid having to expose your insecurities to the world, so only by solving your personal issues will you then be able to mend your social life.

Well I selected the internal with my supervisor but never did I expect him to be so horrid in my case!!! Sometimes you can be taken off-guard by their reaction, which is why confidence and knowing your stuff is important if you want to pass or pass with minor corrections.

Agree with TreeofLife and will also add that if you know what sort of teaching curriculum they use then I'd relate your research to that. Also, if your research involves regular collaboration you can creatively discuss how regular collaboration has helped you both learn lessons and improve your ability to communicate and deliver concepts to others coherently and effectively.

Well I was never asked about my viva let alone examiners in any interviews (postdoc or otherwise). For my current position they asked me about the topic of my PhD, methodology, and findings. Only when I got hired did they ask if I already had received the PhD to determine the starting date! Don't worry about being neurotic you want to make sure that sounds like me a bit lol. The panel will ask you about your work and let's say in the 1/1,000,000 chance they ask you "where are you at now with regards to the PhD", say that you are finalising it for the next few months as I look forward to publishing my work either as a book or chapters in academic journals, and that by then you'll surely get the degree. This way you don't mention the viva or the examiners, and if you project confidence when you say this without stuttering then you'll sell it ;). In my case, I had my job interview post PhD but that's what I would've said had I not finished yet.

Congratulations I'm sure you'll be Dr. Sunflower12 in no time! I myself didn't get this verdict but know others who have in my uni and they were all Drs after 6 months.