IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v53y2024i3s0048733323002299.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Miss or match? The impact of PhD training on job market satisfaction

Author

Listed:
  • Lawson, Cornelia
  • Lopes-Bento, Cindy

Abstract

Job satisfaction is vital to being productive and to contribute to society. This paper adds to our current understanding of the job market for academics by investigating job satisfaction of PhD holders leaving academia for the private or non-academic public sector (government, public administration) compared to those who remain in university or public research center positions. We investigate whether a PhD matters for satisfaction by comparing PhD holders and PhD dropouts who hold similar motivations and ‘taste’ for science. Empirically we rely on a unique survey of PhD grant applicants (funded and not) and show that about half of PhD graduates leave academia. In endogenous treatment effects models accounting for selection into sector, we find that despite a preference for the academic sector, PhDs do not experience lower job satisfaction when employed outside of academia and that overall satisfaction is highest in the non-academic public sector. We further find that PhD graduates are happier in their jobs than those that do not complete a PhD, a finding that is mediated by the job content (i.e. the relatedness of the employment to a research activity). These findings are of relevance to employers and policy makers, as they inform about job match of graduates and the value of pursuing a PhD across employment sectors.

Suggested Citation

  • Lawson, Cornelia & Lopes-Bento, Cindy, 2024. "Miss or match? The impact of PhD training on job market satisfaction," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(3).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:53:y:2024:i:3:s0048733323002299
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2023.104945
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733323002299
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2023.104945?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:53:y:2024:i:3:s0048733323002299. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/respol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.