We need more permanent researcher positions at universities
In considering career options, students may see a binary choice between academic and non-academic jobs. A “job in academia” is usually meant as a stand-in for a tenure-track faculty position. A non-academic job refers to a career in “industry”, which may include government, non-profits, or a for-profit company.
Data from the National Science Foundation released in March noted that fewer U.S. scientists were pursuing postdoctoral positions after completing their PhD. These findings align with the fact that we produce more PhD graduates each year. Traditionally, a postdoctoral position was the pathway to a tenure-track position at a university. I think scientists are justified in seeking alternative careers to tenure-track positions. Postdoctoral trainee fellowship stipends have historically been low. I understand why it doesn’t seem worth it to bounce around and move every 1-2 years for postdoc positions. I’m glad PhD students expect more of their jobs after graduation.
However, with these changing expectations, I am concerned we are losing a lot of talent from academia. Many PhD graduates may still prefer a job in academia but feel forced out. I believe we need to reshape universities with a significant increase in permanent researcher positions.
Can a researcher currently succeed in academia? In general, I think the answer is that it is very difficult. A common university-based research position is research faculty. Research faculty members typically operate on soft money, meaning they're tasked with securing research grants to fund their salary and associated research costs. While they may receive some institutional support in the form of start-up funds or partial salary coverage, they're primarily reliant on external funding. In return, they gain access to university resources such as administrative support, physical facilities, and specialized equipment. In many respects, a research faculty position resembles that of an independent consultant, bolstered by the resources of a university. However, the sustainability of these roles can be precarious due to the fluctuating success of grant applications. A research faculty with a salary of $100,000 would need to bring in ~$190,000 a year in grants to cover their salary, benefits, and university overhead.
There are some, albeit few, permanent researcher positions within universities. Sometimes permanent roles may exist within a research center or associated with a collection where the university recognizes that a full-time person may be needed to run the group. We have these positions for species collections and our field stations. More commonly, researcher positions are tied to specific grants.
I think a shift to having more permanent researchers would encourage folks to apply for these jobs instead of tenure-track lines or those outside the university. Permanent researchers would be housed in traditional academic departments or within research centers. A workload distribution could be 70% research and 30% service (there could also be a small teaching component). I think many faculty in traditional tenure-track roles would prefer a permanent researcher position.
We've observed a comparable shift for another role. Some universities are increasingly relying on lecturers or teaching faculty. Specifically, I'm referring to faculty positions primarily dedicated to teaching, which are either permanent with tenure-like security or stable with multi-year contracts. These roles offer an attractive pathway for PhD graduates seeking a career in teaching at research universities. Teaching faculty emerged as an approach to accommodate a growing student population and to alleviate the workload of tenure-track faculty members.
What are the major obstacles to hiring more permanent researchers? Universities aren’t used to paying for research directly. The dynamic has been that universities pay tenure-track faculty members to do a bit of everything and the faculty manage to fit in some research. Thus, there needs to be a good return on investment in researcher positions. As I noted above, a full-time researcher would have to bring in a lot of money for the university to have a return on their investment. Permanent lecturers are a great return on university investment given how many tuition dollars can be produced. I think we also need to reexamine how we assess faculty. There is lot of good work on how we should rethink the assessment of individual faculty members. With a shift to additional teaching- and research-focused faculty, I think we could also move some of our assessment to a department level. We would examine how much a department produces overall with a mix of different faculty roles. I think enormous gains could be made by allowing faculty to focus on what they do well.
In my current position, I will shift my funding from producing more graduate students to supporting more researcher positions (including those at the BS, MS, or PhD levels). These roles would pay more than graduate student or postdoctoral stipends. I can’t offer a permanent position as an individual lab, but I can offer multi-year contracts that I can hopefully string together through various grants. I am curious if this experiment will yield better outcomes for all involved.
Do you have examples of permanent researcher positions at your institution? What barriers exist to have more of these roles?