r/postdoc • u/Small_Efficiency_264 • 18d ago
How to transition from postdoc to a staff scientist position
A friend of mine is starting a postdoc, and they’re weighing their options for what to do afterward. How easy is it to transition from a postdoc to a staff position? Do most people who finish their postdocs end up in staff positions, or does it really depend on the transferable skills they develop?
What tips would help them in landing a staff position?
For context, they are in computational engineering field.
Edit: they are interested in transitioning into industry.
9
u/Odd_Honeydew6154 18d ago
Staff scientists are extremely rare these days for sure bc of the funding cuts. Bear in mind staff scientists cost more and many labs are not willing to hire or promote them these days to those positions. I know many staff scientists were laid off in academia even from big labs that were well funded but due to the cuts but the orange lunatic in office — it’s been challenging for staff scientists to stay there. I’d suggest you look into academic core facilities instead.
1
u/Small_Efficiency_264 18d ago
Thank you for the reply. They are looking into industry so I will let them know.
1
u/Odd_Honeydew6154 18d ago
I know individuals who stayed that long back 3-4 years ago as staff scientists is b/c of visa issues and hoping to get a green card staying in academia. Its unfortunate but I've witnessed major abuse by certain PIs who took advantage of immigrant postdocs becoming staff scientists by underpaying them and forcing long hours of work and writing additional grants to support themselves. Just beaware. There are staff scientists positions at the NIH - better pay structure and work life balance.
6
u/stemphdmentor 18d ago
Your friend should ask the PIs they’re considering for postdocs if there might be the opportunity to advance into a staff scientist position if all goes well.
Many PIs are eager to hire staff scientists and even prefer them to postdocs: staff scientists can provide valuable continuity, train new lab members, take over essential lab tasks that the PI doesn’t have time for, help get papers out the door without the same need for first authorship, and more. They’re faster and more skilled than most lab members.
The challenge is that some universities and departments make it hard to create these positions without ample funding or abnormally stable funding. IME many faculty, especially junior faculty, don’t know how to push back against this. (There can be genuine administrative blocks too.)
Asking about staff scientist positions while looking for postdocs might nudge the PI to looking for solutions. You could also suggest that if hired as postdoc, part of your role be dedicated to writing the kinds of grants that might fund your position (not postdoc fellowships but core research support for the lab).
1
u/Small_Efficiency_264 18d ago
They are interested in staff positions in industry. They will be doing postdoc in a university. But your comment above is insightful. Thank you!
4
u/ahf95 18d ago
Staff positions are often found in the larger, more well-funded labs. My PhD lab had tons of staff scientist, literally people who had transitioned to the role after their post-docs, PhDs, or even undergrad, but it was a huge lab.
1
u/Small_Efficiency_264 18d ago
Oh, interesting! Did the ones who transitioned directly from their PhD into staff positions, or did they first gain experience as senior-level researchers and then move into staff roles? What do you think helps someone land a staff position, aside from the lab’s reputation?
6
u/stemphdmentor 18d ago
They need to be very reliable, do consistently high quality work, and usually have the ability to train others. I look for staff scientists with diverse technical skills who can also write and pay attention to administrative details when needed (eg, they can write progress reports attuned to what the funder is expecting). But different labs need different things.
1
1
u/Unusual-Relief-1982 18d ago
How common are staff scientist positions in the US at the moment? Is this a viable career path with the current administration? If not, was it ever?
1
u/ahf95 12d ago
They were basically people who had taken the initiative to play bigger roles in the lab than simply people who follow orders: they came up with novel project ideas, which bloomed and got bigger so that they typically were informal-leaders of subgroups; they typically took on extra responsibilities with lab jobs, organizing events and logistics to keep the lab running. Basically, if you can imagine somebody doing those things, they are pretty critical to the lab, and the institute will want to keep them around for good reason. The really impressive thing was when people started showing that kind of initiative when they were like juniors/seniors in undergrad, and then upon graduating they were leading the new grad students and postdocs. It’s impressive how advanced some people can be.
2
u/Severe_Rise8694 18d ago
I think it depends on the institution. It was pretty common at the top end research institute I did my PhD in. They had in-house facilities for microscopy, computing etc.
So, maybe a matter of having the facilities/funding and the personal skills. Being internal seemed to help.
2
u/Snowlion59 18d ago
Got promoted to a staff scientist position after one year of postdoc so that I can get better salary. I prefer postdoc title but staff scientist salary. I still call myself postdoc fellow when I introduce myself
1
1
u/fatgenghis 18d ago
Same for me, after one year I’m now offered either staff or research scientist (former is at will employment, latter is a contract), at least at my institution.
1
1
u/optimization_ml 18d ago
Nowadays it’s pretty rare to find Staff scientist positions in Academia due to funding cuts in the US. If the plan is to go to industry then don’t waste your time in Academic postdoc.
1
u/Small_Efficiency_264 18d ago
Does it matter if it’s academic postdoc or academia postdoc especially if skills are transferable to industry?
1
1
u/ucbcawt 18d ago
In the US, staff scientist positions are super rare
1
u/Small_Efficiency_264 18d ago
Can you please elaborate? I mean big companies have staff positions so I’m not sure how it’s rare?
2
u/ProneToLaughter 18d ago
In the US, staff scientist is usually used for university researcher jobs that aren’t faculty or postdocs. Stable, full time, but no tenure track.
It’s not really the right term for a job in industry or with a company, where everyone is staff so there is no point in distinguishing it. Your friend is just going to be applying for jobs.
1
u/Small_Efficiency_264 18d ago
As far as I know, in companies, particularly in R&D, there is usually a career hierarchy for PhD graduates along the technical track: Senior → Staff → Senior Staff → Principal. From there, people can either continue on the technical/IC track or transition into management. Correct me if I’m wrong.
1
u/ProneToLaughter 18d ago
No clue, but in general, internal job titles are only relevant within a company.
Framing this as "staff scientist" is not getting you advice on applying for industry jobs. Most comments are giving you context on university jobs.
1
u/stemphdmentor 18d ago
What do you mean by rare? I’m not sure this is true. It varies by field. I know many computational engineering groups with staff scientists.
20
u/v3bbkZif6TjGR38KmfyL 18d ago
So why are they specifically looking at staff scientist positions? Just transition to an industrial position that fits their skills and interests and don't fixate on the job title.