Survey: What education was most valuable to your career?

[Jade.Barker]

I am thinking about getting some more chemistry education and would like to hear what was worthwhile to others.

For my biology classes I really enjoyed genetics and bio-informatics but I'm not using them in my current job.

[Kostas Petritis]

Are you talking about a degree (i.e. MSc/PhD/MBA) or individual classes? The latter would be really depend on each person job function and will greatly differ from case to case, the former is a whole different story...

[Jade.Barker]

Kotas,
To be honest I am thinking about getting a Grad degree, but I don't know many people with an Advanced Degree in Chemistry. My industry is filled with many people with extensive on the job experience, which often translates to a very deep but narrow slice of knowledge.

In my current position I am the "lead" for our HPLC instrument and am really enjoying learning about it, so much that I would like to consider making chromatography a career - but I have a BA in Biology. My school was so small that it did not have a chemistry degree because the labs were not equiped for Organic Chemistry. My education has been adequate for my current career growth, but if I want to go further I need to fill in the gaps.

It would help me so much to know what steps other professionals took to get to their current level. I'm smart enough to know I should ask for help rather than trying to re-invent the wheel myself. I'm really open to gathering advice right now.

Thanks for your interest

[tom jupille]

Some personal background and some (more or less) random observations:

The personal background:

I have a BS and MS in chemistry and an MBA. On the scientific side, almost everything that I *use* was learned in one of two ways:
- from teaching high school chemistry for 4 years.
- via the "school of hard knocks" (books, articles, conversations, etc.).
The MBA (particularly the "organizational behavior" courses) has been much more useful. In part, that's because I have always gravitated to a small-company environment.

The random observations:

The larger the company, the more important the "Ph.D" after your name. It's not that you can't succeed with a BS or MS, but it's an uphill battle. With smaller companies what (and who) you know is more important.

What you learn in the process of getting an MS can be priceless, but the MS degree (per se) is virtually worthless. Just look at the ACS salary survey and you'll see what I mean.

Most of the tools you will be using in the future don't exist yet. No matter what degree you pursue, what's important is learning how to learn.

[Jade.Barker]

With smaller companies what (and who) you know is more important... What you learn in the process of getting an MS can be priceless, but the MS degree (per se) is virtually worthless.

Tom, Thanks for the perspective.
My current lab is part of a small division of a very large parent company. (Last Feb it was just me plus a manager in the lab.) So I do have the advantage of a lot of autonomy. As long as I get my basic duties accomplished, then I am more or less free to develope projects and experiments to increase the value of our lab/ data for the Sales team.

Now I have been trying to learn everything I can about Ion Chromatography and but I am very humbled by my lack of Chemistry education. I think we could position our lab to be a knowledge leader for Fuel (Corn) Ethanol HPLC, but it will take a little time. It will take more time if I have to teach myself organic chemistry on the job. Even though I am pretty intellegent it is a fairly complex subject, so just reading some textbooks might not be enough.

[yangz00g]

I have a "PhD" in Instrumental analysis.

A PHD doesn't make you a better handon analyst than many non-phd analysts with years of experiences. However, it gives you, if you know how to learn during the program, a systemic way to "observe" a thing in a logic and systemic (???) way, or the ability for critical thinking (that's why I usually don't trust saleman's claims). It helps a lot in how to develop or trouble shoot a method/instrument without wasting too much time trying eveything.

I have seen a lot of experienced no-phd analysts not really understanding how a machine/method works, and being frustrated when method or machine suddently goes wrong. However, I also have seen experienced analysts spent weeks trouble-shooting sth that should be done in a few hours, and still be considered as experts/trouble shooter. Many busy CROs require Master/PHD for entry level analysts, becasue they cannot afford such time-loss as many big companies do. That's the real life.

[tom jupille]

It will take more time if I have to teach myself organic chemistry on the job. Even though I am pretty intellegent it is a fairly complex subject, so just reading some textbooks might not be enough.

Believe me, I understand! There are resources available short of a regular graduate program (ranging from ACS courses through on-line courses and even your local community college). I'm convinced that the only way to really learn a subject is to be forced to use it.

if you know how to learn during the program, a systemic way to "observe" a thing in a logic and systemic (???) way, or the ability for critical thinking

I agree entirely (hence my comment about "learning how to learn"). Unfortunately, neither the degree nor the experience are a guarantee. I'll proceed to insult both camps :

"There is a difference between ten years' experience and one year's experience repeated ten times."

"Getting a PhD consists of learning more and more about less and less until finally you know everything there is to know about nothing".

[tcay584]

I would say that I have really benefitted from a PhD in my career. The time in grad school doing real laboratory research (with a very cheap PI, which I now totally appreciate) forced me to learn a lot about equipment maintenance, repair, experiment design, etc. We didn't have a service contract....we were the service. The plus to that is that I can pretty much diagnose and fix most HPLC and GC problems I come across. I now manage an analytical lab for a medical device company and this experience is priceless because of the cost savings and decrease in instrument down time. The best way to learn is to do...and there's no motivation to do lots like the threat of having to spend another year at grad student pay! HaHa! I would definitely recommend it.

[Kostas Petritis]

There are several things to consider for an advance degree (I speak about PhD):

From a practical point of view, the return on investement is one of the major ones. How old are you, will you be OK with a pay cut for several years to come and do you still have the necessary mentality to go through the next 4-5 years as a graduade student. The older you are, the smaller the return on invenstement, and at one point it might be detrimental from an economic or carrer point of view. I would say that if you are >40 you should think twice before doing it, if you are > 50 I would say not to do it. Of course if you can do it while working at the same time (i.e. your employer allows you to do so and be flexible enough to understand that you might not perform 100% during your "graduate years"). On the other hand, there is (almost) always a good time to do an MBA...

About your concern of changing fields (i.e. biology to chemistry). I did that as well and managed to pull it off. On top of changing fields, I did my PhD in a country that I didn't speak the language (France) so you shouldn't have any problems.

Having a PhD is worthy. It is indespensible if you plan for an academic carrer or a carrer in national laboratories and makes your life easier for quicker and faster advancement (i.e. promotions) in industry (all other things equal).

[Don_Hilton]

The value of advanced education depends entirely on where you want to go. I am one of those who ended with the master’s degree. And, I have had the upmost respect for some colleagues who have a BS and in some cases, less that a full degree. I’ve learned a lot from these folks.

Classes give you information and perspective. If you wish to become a better chromatographer, some detailed knowledge of organic chemistry and physical chemistry can help to explain what you see as you run the instrument. And, if you want to fill in some background - it is not a bad idea to gain an understanding of what the molecules are up to. On the other hand, keeping up with Journals, and attending professional meetings and short courses can fill you in on some things more relevant to the day to day practice of chromatography than you will ever get in a class. It seems that all that stuff in big classes and textbooks remains ink on paper until it gains relevance by being part of a real problem. And, that reality comes in the lab, conversations in the hall, or in seeing someone else work through a problem in a presentation or paper.

If you want to get education to advance your career - get promotions and such. An advanced degree can help to open doors. And, in tough times the degree may help a person survive a down sizing -- or it may leave that person labeled "more expensive" and out the door. If you have a reputation of being a problem solver and getting quality results, that helps too – and perhaps more than the degree in many cases. The effect is only in the circle where you have that reputation, but that circle can be wider than you would expect. People talk. And good, skilled workers can be hard to come by.

Once you are in a position, the advanced degree seems to have less value that your ability to make those above you feel comfortable with what you are able to do. And yes, there are organizations who feel that a PhD is the best person to run an instrument. In others the feeling is that a good PhD wants to do more than that and that person will be wasted by being an instrument operator. The degree is largely about being able to tackle a problem and work through to a solution, making a contribution to the body of scientific knowledge. (And many of us have seen the PhD who is best kept away from instruments lest they be mysteriously broken – and away from our data, lest it show up in his slides without acknowledgement.)

But, in the end, do what you do for your long term benefit. How does this affect the life you live? As I look back - all the extra time that I put in trying to get places I never got to is gone. And, I've forgotten how to enjoy sitting with a fishing rod in my hand - I'm not getting anything done! And some classes I've taken along the way for my own interest have enriched my life. I never became a division head - or rich. But, I do have some people who look for me at meetings and see what I have to present. And I have family and friends -which will go with me into retirement (if and when I ever stop showing up for a paycheck - and having fun with what I do).

I think it was Steve Covey who told us to "Begin with the end in mind."

[Pragmatist3]

I have a "PhD" in Instrumental analysis.

A PHD doesn't make you a better handon analyst than many non-phd analysts with years of experiences. However, it gives you, if you know how to learn during the program, a systemic way to "observe" a thing in a logic and systemic (???) way, or the ability for critical thinking (that's why I usually don't trust saleman's claims). It helps a lot in how to develop or trouble shoot a method/instrument without wasting too much time trying eveything.

Except by the time the PhD has sat and figured out on paper just what this compound is going to do I could have already tried everything.

I have seen a lot of experienced no-phd analysts not really understanding how a machine/method works, and being frustrated when method or machine suddently goes wrong. However, I also have seen experienced analysts spent weeks trouble-shooting sth that should be done in a few hours, and still be considered as experts/trouble shooter. Many busy CROs require Master/PHD for entry level analysts, becasue they cannot afford such time-loss as many big companies do. That's the real life.

I am not going to argue the merits of an advanced degree but if you find the right company you can relatively easily enter this field with a 4 yr degree.

I have been a chemist/chromatographer/study director for a private GLP contract lab for about 16 years. I routinely develop and validate analytical methods for clients in the pharmaceutical and agrochemical industries and then apply those methods to support the physchem, tox or residue studies that ensue. I used to do a lot of GC and LCUV but the past 5-8 years have pretty much been solely running LC/MS/MS projects.

I have a BS degree in a biological science. I don’t have a chemistry degree but I can take an 1100 apart and put it back together and I can do the same with an API 3000. I can also take a compound from infusion to chromatogram to validated method. There are no PhD’s where I work that can do either. It’s probably why when they realize they aren’t going to achieve a 50 ppt LOQ in the UV they come to me for their analytical support.

[HW Mueller]

At the time I was studying there were often some "old" persons partaking in "class", most of them did not go for a degree, but were there to "brush up". This sort of thing should still be possible? Also, chemical societies, industry, etc. are offering all kinds of serious courses, sometimes expensive, though. If one "sits in" on a course one should make sure that the background is there, for instance taking physical chemistry without a good mathematical background might be useless.

[Jade.Barker]

The best way to learn is to do...and there's no motivation to do lots like the threat of having to spend another year at grad student pay! HaHa! I would definitely recommend it.

May I ask how many years your Phd took? Also how did you identify a good counsilor/mentor?

[Jade.Barker]

There are several things to consider...
the return on investement is one of the major ones. How old are you ...The older you are, the smaller the return on invenstement... Of course if you can do it while working at the same time...

Kostas, You bring up a good point about the invenstment aspect of the education. I am fairly young (see my LinkedIN picture) so I should have plenty of time for the investment to pay off. Additionally I am lucky enough to have a spouse that is well compensated in his job, so I could go back to school full time. Although I really enjoy working, so maybe I could continue working while in school. My hope would be to finish a Grad degree while continuing to gain industry experience? I still need to investigate further, but my company may offer some education benefits also...
Does anyone have any experience regarding working and doing PhD at the same time? Or the importance of industry experience for new Grad students?

These are all very good points, Please keep them coming.

[Jade.Barker]

I am one of those who ended with the master

Don, is your degree in Chemistry or Chemical Engineering? I have been considering Masters in Chem Engineering too since it seems like more jobs are open for Masters vs. PhD for chem only.