University Affairs

A couple of weeks ago, I posted a piece on ensuring the quality of your reference letters when you’re applying for academic positions. This week I’d like to address the issue of asking for references when you are applying outside academe. This can be a difficult process for both you and your referees – particularly if neither of you have much or any experience in the non-academic workforce.

Unlike academe, non-academic job references are usually given over the phone. Typically, the applicant will be asked to provide at least two references, usually after the first, or in some cases second, interview. Here are a few tips that can help you select and prepare your referees so they can provide the strongest support possible.

• Do your research – Make sure you research the organization to which you are applying – their mandate, priorities and reputation. Also, make sure you thoroughly read the posting for which you are applying in terms of the job functions and how these converge with the qualifications required. This will help you identify who can best speak on your behalf.
• Select your referees strategically – The strongest referees can speak specifically and positively about how well-suited you are for a given position. While your committee members may be most familiar with your recent research activities, you will need to decide whether they can adequately discuss other capabilities you have that may be relevant. If not, it would be prudent to cull appropriate referees from outside academe to help round out your list of references. If that’s not realistic, consider asking a faculty member or university administrator who can speak about your non-research activities. Here are a few questions to keep in mind as you select your referees:
• How supportive is this person of my decision to leave academe?
• Is this person knowledgeable about the position/field/organization to which I am applying?
• Can this person be easily understood on the telephone?
• Will this person be readily available to do phone interviews?
• Support your referees during the process – This point is the same for non-academic job searches as for academic ones. Ensure you provide your referees with the details of the position as well as copies of your CV or resumé. It can be helpful to write down specific aspects of your research activities, knowledge or skills that are most closely related to each position. It is also courteous to keep your referees updated on your progress.

Recognizing the differences between academic and non-academic recruitment processes will help you not only identify who would be best able to describe your strengths to a prospective employer, but ensure they have the information and support they need to do so.

A few articles from the last year:

• It’s Time for a New ‘Normal’ in Academe (April 2, 2009)
• Give Us the Dirt on Jobs (Jan 11, 2010)
• The Big Lie About the ‘Life of the Mind’ (Feb 8, 2010)

Okay we get it – the emperor has no clothes! The regalia that PhD graduates have donned to symbolize the path leading to tenure and a livelihood of security, status and satisfaction has been exposed as idealistic at best. We now know this is an illusion that won’t materialize for the majority of doctorates in Canada.

One of the comments posted to the online version of “Give us the dirt on jobs”, written by a Dr. Weary, voices the frustration of hundreds, if not thousands, of graduate students who have been lured into academe with promises of tenure since the hiring boom of the 1960s. “I grow weary of reading articles that end like this one – ‘be open to other possibilities’. I’m open – let’s hear what these possibilities are.”

Oh Dr. Weary – I wish it were that easy. There is no conspiracy to prevent PhDs from learning about what others have done and how they did it, although it can certainly seem that way sometimes. One of the problems is that by the time PhDs are in the process of leaving academe, they are not very interested in forging strong alumni relationships. In fact, many don’t want to be in touch with their schools ever again. So how are these disenfranchised PhDs to be traced after they leave?

Attempts at surveys, referenced in the articles listed above, aren’t specific enough to identify what the graduate students are now doing. Stories do trickle back to schools through colleagues and faculty, but these tend to gloss over helpful details that could provide breadcrumbs for others to follow.

Books like What are Your Going to Do with That? provide great advice and stories to get the ball rolling, but as print media, it is limited and can lose immediate relevancy in a dynamic labour market.  

There are those, including myself, who have supported graduate students and advocated on their behalf in universities across the continent for years. But until recently our efforts have been hampered by a systemic belief in an impending boom in the market for PhDs, which has contributed to a lack of funding for PhD career support.

The time has come for graduate student associations, student unions, graduate faculties and students to take a proactive approach to this issue. This is how McGill got funding for graduate-student career-support from the Quebec government: the students orchestrated a strategic, targeted lobby.

Increasing graduate student enrolment is a very high priority for both governments and university administrations. This is the perfect time to draw the line in the sand and demand that graduate students receive at least the same level of career support, services and resources that undergraduate students receive. Universities may find that this support will help them become a “school of choice” amongst the brightest new applicants. 

I would strongly urge each of you to start assessing what methods of advocacy would be most effective in your institutions. Identify supporters amongst the faculty and administration. Use whatever venues you have available to you at the national and provincial levels: University Affairs, associations, governments, etc.

Canada’s biggest brain drain is not in losing our brightest to the States – it’s an internal hemorrhage of our PhDs into a labour market where they themselves have no concept of their worth or the contribution they can to make to our society.

One of the most popular career articles on University Affairs has been How to ask for a reference letter. The popularity of this article is evidence of the intense interest, and perhaps trepidation, at the thought of asking for reference letter causes PhDs.

Since asking for references is an activity everyone in academe will have to face at one time or another, I’m sure there are lots or questions, concerns, even horror stories out there. I think I’d like to change things up a bit here and open the floor for questions and concerns about asking for reference letters.

All names will remain confidential unless you choose otherwise, and no one will be able to see your e-mail address when you send your questions and comments. Keep in mind this is a mediated board, so anything sent in will be vetted by the editor before it goes live.

About reference letters
One perennial problem is how to ensure well written letters are submitted on your behalf. I have spoken to many graduate student advisors who have run university dossier services (which collect and archive confidential application materials such as reference letters and official transcripts) and we have all seen letters that are not likely to help a candidate, and in some cases could actually hurt their chances in a competitive job market.

Here are some steps you can take to minimize the chances of one of your letters becoming a proverbial albatross around your neck:

1. Always give your referees a graceful way to decline when you ask for their support: “I realize your plate is terribly full this term. Do you think you will have time to write a letter of support for my applications to XXX? I will understand if there is too much you have already committed to take on another responsibility of this type.” If they agree to write for you, you have a better chance that they will do so conscientiously.
2. If you are concerned about one of your referees’ ability to write a strong letter, make sure at least one, if not two, of your referees are more experienced. You might even ask if they could provide a little mentorship to the potentially troublesome professor.
3. Diplomatically “suggest’” what content would be most valuable in your letters. This should include reminders of particularly impressive work you have done, student evaluations and awards. These suggestions can help your referees focus their letters and avoid overly duplicating each other’s content.
4. If your university has a dossier service (in Canada only University of Toronto and York University do), you will not be able to access your file to read what your referees have written. However, if you do have a serious concern, then talk to the service coordinator about having your referee or another member of your committee read over your file. They can let you know whether the file was acceptable as it was, or even what could be added to it to strengthen it.

Here are a few links to other resources on University Affairs about reference letters. I’ll be interested in hearing your take on it. I’m also looking forward to providing whatever insight and suggestion I can that might help you avoid an unnecessary explosion!

• Reference Letters Revisited
• The Ubiquitous Reference Letter