New hires

[Consumer Products Guy]

Apparently (once again) my pointy-haired boss and his boss (both PhDs who have never worked in an analytical chemistry laboratory, but since they're PhDs why should that be an issue?) have decided that we MUST fill our position opening with a fresh PhD (even though the specialty and interests of such do not align with our main field - separation sciences) to support customers in product development and support manufacturing. The VP and another director even are "strongly" pushing for directing the search for such fresh PhD to their alma mater. My co-worker and I would rather have someone whom the department at least has a chance to retain, different than the last two PhDs forced upon us (one was released for incompetence, and one was moved into a product development group). Neither lasted two years for us, and even after two years of training was "there" yet. I'd rather have a BS or MS graduate with work experience, but the politics are thick here. I doubt any PhD would even want to do this type of work, that's the big issue, stuff like pH measurements, solids, alcohol solubles and insolubles, nonionic surfactant level by HPLC, etc. Any suggestions how to convince them them that the best candidates for long-term retention are NOT PhD? Especially in this job market I don't want to train someone and have him/her jump ship when an offer in the specialty filed opens up...suggestions please...

[JGK]

Personally, since they've got it into their heads they want a PhD you might be "backing a Loser" here.

Have you got any data on the "cost" of training a "Newbie" and showing how much has been "lost" in the investment of training "the incompetent" and "the transferee". This against the cost of training a BS (Lower wage) might help the argument.

I agree that the job is probably more in the BS level where the trainee can grow into a role rather than shoe-horn a bad PhD fit.

[krickos]

Hi

They seems to have decided but a few tips or supporting comments.

1. Stay with facts so you do not get into trouble

2. I have seem the very same thing within our R&D department, luckely they got over it quickly when they realized that they could not provide all the Ph Ds with enough challeging tasks and as mentioned generally higher wages that not fully pays back to the company.

3. So I support what JGK said comapre cost for the Ph D versus M.Sc/B.SC option including training new staff often/less often or better get your HR department/consults to do it.

4. I understand that certain companies wants to "show off" with a high degree of Ph Ds but if as you mention, they tasks needed to be done can be performed by a mix of degrees, this philosophy will only increase staff cost in the long run and strain the staff that remains (drop productivity) as Ph Ds drops off as soon there are openings elsewhere

[Kostas Petritis]

I sympathize with your situation as we had a similar situation in our group...

First though I have to say that I find it kind of interesting that the two PhD's, after a couple of years of training there were still not there for relatively "easy" tasks like the ones you describe. Assuming that you made an effort to train those people, I can only conclude that they were not competant...

I think that you should use the same argument to your bosses that you are making to this forum... you are looking for someone for the long-run and a PhD won't stick around as the job is not challenging enough...

In our case, the person that didn't want to hire a PhD (and had more saying than you in the matter) didn't fill the position for about a year; after that he was forced upon a non-PhD from another group (as the other group couldn't retain that person anymore due to money issues) who did not fit the job description

[lmh]

A couple of things:

(1) The practical bit: if your boss is determined to hire a PhD, you're Doomed to a Doctor, but you do still have a chance to influence things! Not all PhDs are equal. Rather than trying to oppose your management (something which is probably going to be depressing and take years off your life), go on a hunt for a competent PhD with a genuine interest in learning in your lab. They probably exist. Which leads to point 2:

(2) I have to admit to possession of a PhD (probably still got the bit of paper somewhere). But it hasn't completely blighted my analytical career, and I still get a peculiar pleasure out of checking my pipettes are working properly. Frankly, a good PhD should encourage problem-solving and pave the way to good method development. Depending on the sort of lab you run, this might be a good thing. Of course if you carry out exclusively validated methods in a very QA-aware environment where all change is evil, a person who's inclined to develop methods will get frustrated, but that could equally be true of a person with a BS. I'd be disappointed in any degree level person who hadn't got a good foundation in why gradients work, but if you know how a gradient works, sooner or later, you're going to want to modify one!

There's a real danger of an us-and-them feeling about this +/- PhD business. What I've seen so far is that there are some very good analysts without PhDs, and with PhDs. There are also some people with PhDs who I wouldn't trust in a lab (or anywhere else) and who show very few signs of using what's between their ears.

But lack of a PhD doesn't guarantee technical competence. As a non-analyst who changed career, I always feel a bit inferior to those whose first degree was in analytical chemistry. Nevertheless, one or two that I've met have virtually no grasp of even simple concepts, and frankly they scare me. How can anyone get a degree in analytical chemistry with no clue of why SIM in a single quad is more sensitive than full scan data? Or why isocratic peaks are wider later in the run than at the start?

Nevertheless, it's a long time since I dared use that Dr bit. It upsets people too much.

[Jade.Barker]

Consumer Products Guy,

We had a similar situation:
Our Researcher thinks he needs another PhD to carry out his experiments. The truth is it could be done by a lab tech. About 50% of the job is related to handling corn mash, 25% is prepping materials and the other 25% is gathering data (no interpretation).

I have been helping our researcher so I sent my manager an e-mail with the weekly breakdown of hours per task. I think that was eye opening. When I put "10 hours washing lab ware" I think he realized no PhD is going to want that - And nobody wants to pay 50$ an hour for that either.

I would recommend creating an honest task breakdown. Then encourage your manager to make a good business decision: "How can we cover these job tasks in the most cost effective manner?" This highlights the real issue and keeps it to the facts.

Also get some data from HR about the cost of turnover in your company. It should be about 30% of salary to replace a person. Most people outside HR don’t know this, because it is a hidden cost (job training and lost productivity). Most managers only consider the cost for a job posting.

Pointing out the actual dollar cost can turn heads – i.e. if you pay a PhD $100,000 and they leave in a year or two, it costs you $30,000 to replace them. Most labs would love to have an extra 30K for equipment ect. These numbers probably have to come from HR; otherwise the manager may think you are just exaggerating.

Good Luck!

[Bruce Hamilton]

You have to discover why they want a PhD, is it to enhance their own positions? eg " Drs Pain and Rearend are part of our Analytical Group" ) .
If you understand their motivation, then you can work around it ( eg you could say " Wouldn't the Ph D be better employed as your own policy analyst/researcher?. We could make do with a non Ph D, whilst you can have your own PA ( aka tea maker ) - as upper management probably can't discriminate between different types of analysts" ).

Another possible avenue is to play on their insecurity. You congratulate them on their confidence, and mention that you heard in the tea room than senior management is really, really keen to bring on board some young Ph Ds to fast-track through the hierarchy and replace some dead wood, and ask will there be backup for when the new employees are attending the proposed off-site executive courses?.

Please keep having fun,

Bruce Hamilton

[Consumer Products Guy]

I think our upper management can't fathom why anyone would want to stay working "in the lab". They like to play amateur psychologist on all applicants, trying to map their futures, while we're trying to retain someone in our own department. Update: apparently they all like an applicant with MS and work experience (good) who just interviewed. But they're already planning (person not even hired) for such person to attend school to obtain PhD. I think one director is projecting that this person would be hired then move into his group in a few years. And you think Obama and McCain had the politics.....

Update: company will be hiring the non-PhD !!!

[Consumer Products Guy]

Update: company will be hiring the non-PhD !!!

[Uwe Neue]

Hmm... Are the current economic times changing your boss's haircut? If we can't afford to go to the barber, maybe shoulder-long hair will become fashionable again...

[Consumer Products Guy]

Hmm... Are the current economic times changing your boss's haircut? If we can't afford to go to the barber, maybe shoulder-long hair will become fashionable again...

No, boss still dresses like Ward Cleaver, from the U.S. TV show about 45 years ago, complete with button-down sweaters (where does he find those???).

[WK]

CPG,
I know you are a golfer - I have a DVD of the 1977 Open with Nicklaus/Watson showdown - there's some pretty cool fashion on show there too!!! Why stop at buttoned cardigans - they could go for multi-coloured stay creased bell bottomed slacks.
At least the golf was hot...! Its well worth a look again - Woods and Singh were not a patch on it.
It sounds like at your company you are in a version of the Truman Show!
WK

[Consumer Products Guy]

CPG, It sounds like at your company you are in a version of the Truman Show!

Maybe that explains why I still watch (again and again) the Sergio Leone films, listen to motion picture soundtracks from the 60s and 70s on my cassette player in my 20 year-old truck...

[WK]

CPG,
I didn't mean you - but your colleague! Sorry.
I've still got a waterproof golf hat from the early 80s - Sandy Lyle won the Open when I bought it along with a 1-iron that looks like a butter knife.
Still keeps out water - why buy a new "trendy" one.
My wife doesn't understand why I play Mountain and Fleetwood Mac (pre and post Stevie/Lindsey) videos on youtube all the time - its way better than anything now.
I must get a collection of spaghetti westerns - they're so good - mostly filmed in Spain.
We here are at the other end - we have staff with no degree expected to operate and troubleshoot GC/HPLC. It requires someone with nouse to take it on - but they soon realise you don't fill a vial, press a button and wait for the printer to roll.... Anyone who has nouse will leave pretty quickly... Retention of staff is more difficult than controlling retention in HPLC.
WK

[Jade.Barker]

CPG,
Why stop at buttoned cardigans - they could go for multi-coloured stay creased bell bottomed slacks.

Has anyone looked at Mens Designer fashions lately? All the models are wearing either: 1. Shorts with a turtleneck and blazer. Or 2. Jeans with no shirt. Both are bad options for anyone who *isn't* a model. I think bottom line, be happy the boss is covering himself... it could get much worse...