An insecure start

At the request of the Minister of Education, Culture and Science, the Rathenau Instituut created an overview of the barriers experienced by early-career researchers, specifically PhD candidates, postdoc researchers and researchers at universities of applied sciences. We gathered the insights from existing studies and explored these in depth in six focus groups with early-career researchers who indicated they experienced barriers in carrying out their ambitions. The present report sets out what they enjoyed about their work, what barriers they experience and what solutions they envision. The conclusion will focus on the barriers. We have summarised the main differences and similarities between the groups and offer six points of attention for policymakers and institutes for higher education and research. 

Our research shows that job insecurity and unclear expectations and requirements are important barriers for early-career researchers. Under these circumstances, they must determine which tasks to prioritise, keeping in mind both their current position and their future career, resulting in mental pressure. Effective support, strong embedding in the organisation, a socially safe working culture and a diversity of possible career paths could help early-career researchers cope with this uncertainty. The realisation of these conditions is currently hindered by the competitive and hierarchical culture at research universities and the small volume of research at universities of applied sciences. 

Although there is considerable overlap in the barriers experienced by early-career researchers, there are also differences between the various positions. The insights we have gained per group are summarised below. Our research shows that the position of postdoc researchers is especially precarious.

PhD candidates

PhD candidates appreciate the creative and intellectual freedom associated with the PhD track, as well as the inspiring work environment and the opportunity to contribute to finding solutions to societal challenges. However, the work environment of PhD candidates is also challenging and limits their freedom. For example, they frequently run up against a hierarchy with many unwritten rules. Over the course of their work, they discover there are unspoken expectations they must meet. They are also subject to pressure to publish. Many PhD candidates find it difficult to balance these two extremes. The degree to which their supervisor supports them varies. This affects not only their well-being, with issues like high mental pressure and a skewed work-life balance, but also their work. For example, a group that is strongly motivated by the societal relevance of their work may find that relevance diminished by having to make adjustments based on the expectations of others. They experience pressure from their work environment to adjust their research or their publications to better fit the academic consensus, the publication needs of their supervisor or the requirements of the journal in which they are publishing their results. The main solutions PhD candidates envision to the barriers they experience are drawing up a clear framework for obtaining their PhD, broad awareness of the unwritten rules and effective supervision in the process of developing skills and learning to deal with work pressure, from supervisors and independent support centres.

Postdoc researchers

Postdoc researchers value the same aspects of their work as the PhD candidates, with an additional emphasis on the opportunity to carry out groundbreaking research. The interaction with students also plays a greater role for them.

The bottlenecks that postdoc researchers experience paint a picture of an uncertain situation resulting from temporary contracts and strong competition to obtain research funding. The risks for their career and their private life associated with this uncertain situation are fully borne by the postdocs themselves, despite the fact that they experience limited control over whether or not their project will succeed and the potential next step in their career. 

In the experience of postdoc researchers, whether they will succeed in making the next step in their career is only to a limited degree based on their own merits. In their eyes, luck plays a significant role, and mention was also made of nepotism. Many focus group participants saw research universities as unreliable employers that offer little support as regards personal circumstances, career development and in obtaining the necessary resources for their research. 

These working conditions result in high mental pressure and in the researchers putting off important developments in their private lives, including the decision to have children. This applies in particular to international postdoc researchers, whose residence permit depends on their having a job. Additionally, postdoc researchers indicate that the considerable turnover results in time, financial resources and academic talent being wasted. They would love to continue in academia, but many postdoc researchers indicated that this would also depend on whether they were offered a permanent contract.

The postdoc researchers offered the following possible solutions: increasing the amount of funding available and adjustment of the Work and Security Act (Wet werk en zekerheid) so they can continue to work for the same employer for a longer time while still on fixed-term contracts. They also find it important to make decision-making within institutes, for example in relation to HR decisions, more transparent, and they would like to receive support specifically geared towards their situation, for example in the form of postdoc offices.

Early career researchers at universities of applied sciences

Practice-oriented researchers who have previously worked at a research university feel the working conditions at a university of applied sciences are very positive on the whole. They experience more equality, more room to develop different products and less pressure to publish. Achieving societal impact is often a key motivator for their research. 

The bottlenecks experienced by practice-oriented researchers are mainly the result of the relatively short history of practice-oriented research. Early-career researchers often experience that there are different schools of thought about what practice-oriented research is, even at their own university of applied sciences. Other problems mentioned were the lack of research facilities, opportunities to request funding and job profiles. A major concern of the researchers in our focus groups was the underappreciation of practice-oriented research, both within and outside of the university of applied sciences. This underappreciation affects not only their opportunities but also their motivation. 

The experiences of young practice-oriented researchers paint a picture of research that has yet to establish itself as fully fledged, both within universities of applied sciences and in the broader knowledge ecosystem. Practice-oriented researchers envision possible improvements in the development of a national vision on what kind of research we want to see in the Netherlands and the role of practice-oriented research. They believe a larger portion of research funding, both from the central government and within projects, could be allocated to universities of applied sciences. Moreover, they believe it would be good if the universities of applied sciences themselves could see research more as one of their core tasks.

Points for consideration

Based on the insights from this study, we offer six points of consideration for policymakers and knowledge institutions.
 

• It is important that early-career researchers engage in conversation with their supervisors about mutual requirements and expectations. Clarity for the researchers becomes even more important when taking into account the focus on differentiated career paths at research universities, university medical centres and research financiers. Making the different career paths, as well as the recognition of different tasks associated with them, clearer can result in better defined frameworks. At the same time, this could also lead to further diversification of the standards with which early-career researchers must comply. This applies in particular to the stage in which these career paths are in development. 
• Postdoc researchers require more support. Their position is very vulnerable, but they barely receive any support from their employer based on their needs.
• PhD candidates should take more space to orient themselves towards a career outside of academia. Research universities are doing a number of things to break the strong focus on an academic career. Graduate schools and HR departments play an important role in this. However, it appears that PhD candidates make insufficient use of these services, either because they are not aware of them or because they feel that they do not have the time. Their supervisors could take on a key role in this regard, by encouraging a broad orientation.
• A cultural change at research universities and university medical centres is essential to remove the bottlenecks experienced by many early-career researchers. Due to the competitive and hierarchical work environment, they find it difficult to stand up for their interests and their personal and professional needs.
• Attention to knowledge management is key. In part because of the barriers they experience, turnover of early-career researchers is high, resulting in the research organisations losing knowledge. This also gets in the way of the development of their replacements, who are frequently expected to repeat the work of their predecessors. That is why it is important for policymakers and institutes to think of strategic ways to retain knowledge, skills and continuity within the academic community. 
• Universities of applied sciences need to pay attention to better embedding of and recognition for researchers. 

In this study, we mapped out which challenges early-career researchers in different positions run into in their work, as well as the consequences of these challenges. To this end, we gathered the findings from previous studies and talked to early-career researchers who indicated they experienced barriers in carrying out their ambitions. We looked at PhD candidates and postdoc researchers at research universities and practice-oriented researchers at universities of applied sciences. Each of these positions has its own challenges. Nevertheless, we noticed some degree of overlap when it came to specific bottlenecks and needs. In this chapter, we discuss the main differences and similarities, based on the overall picture that emerged from the focus groups and previous studies. Based on the conclusions, we offer six points for consideration to strengthen the position of early-career researchers.

Early-career researchers find themselves in an uncertain situation. They often work on temporary contracts and realise that their opportunities for moving up in the sector in which they work, especially at research universities and university medical centres, are limited. Many early-career researchers do have the ambition for this, especially once they have taken the next step in academia after obtaining their PhD. Another aspect of this insecurity is that, for many early-career researchers we talked to, it is not always clear what their supervisors and the institute where they work expect from them. In some cases, this is because the research task of the group or institute where they work is not yet fully developed. This is the case at universities of applied sciences in particular. In other cases, the expectations are not communicated clearly and explicitly. Formal requirements are only drawn up late in the research process or are formulated too vaguely. Even when tasks are clear, early-career researchers sometimes fail to realise how much time they will take. For PhD candidates, it can also be difficult to get a good understanding of how to structurally work towards long-term goals. A third source of insecurity for early-career researchers is that it is unclear how and on the basis of what achievements they will be able to take the next step in their career within academic or practice-oriented research. This applies to postdoc and practice-oriented researchers in particular.

Even while dealing with this uncertainty, early-career researchers must still make choices, because their tasks outweigh the time available to them. They must choose which tasks to focus on, with a view to both their current job and their future career. This leads to continuous uncertainty: am I doing the right things, both for my job and for my career? Am I doing enough? Am I doing it right?
This combination of unclear tasks, uncertain career opportunities and academic ambitions creates considerable mental pressure, especially among PhD candidates and postdoc researchers. Everything you do better or beyond what is necessary increases your chances of taking another step in your academic career. That is why many PhD candidates and postdoc researchers suffer from mental health symptoms. This also has an impact on their private lives. For many PhD candidates and postdoc researchers, their work-life balance became tilted at a certain point, leaving them unable to find an equal partner and no time for their hobbies. Because of their uncertain situation, they postponed important milestones in their life, such as having children, buying a house or becoming a citizen of the country they work in. This applies to postdoc researchers in particular. The underappreciation of their work experienced by early-career researchers contributes to this mental pressure as well.

Our research has identified factors that could help early-career researchers deal with the insecurity of their position. First, we saw that effective supervision makes a big difference for how early-career researchers experience their work. A good supervisor focuses not just on the content of the work but also helps early-career researchers bring structure to their work and helps consider their personal and professional development. Second, we saw that effective embedding in the organisation is important for early-career researchers. This includes:
 

• the feeling of being a full-fledged member of an organisation; 
• sufficient access to resources for research; 
• support with personal and professional development appropriate to their position; and 
• contact with other research in similar positions. 

Third, it helps when the dominating culture makes it possible to raise issues for discussion and try to find a solution together with the immediate environment. Finally, a greater diversity of career paths and greater recognition of achievements apart from research (research universities and university medical centres) or education (universities of applied sciences) would give early-career researchers more career prospects and result in more appreciation for the different tasks they take on. Research universities and university medical centres hope to achieve this through the Recognition and Rewards programme. However, in 2021, half of the early-career researchers at research universities and university medical centres were not familiar with this initiative. 

A number of bottlenecks stand in the way of realising these conditions. Within research universities and university medical centres, the hierarchical and competitive culture is the main issue. Early-career researchers experience a political environment with numerous unwritten rules. PhD candidates find it difficult to stand up for their own interests, are not always sure whether this is even ‘allowed’ and are worried this might harm their position. Postdoc researchers named several consequences of this culture: a toxic work environment, sexism and unequal treatment. They also indicated there is insufficient transparency on how staff decisions are made. The main obstacle at universities of applied sciences is that the volume of research is still small compared to education, and not everyone sufficiently recognises the value of this research.

The ways in which these bottlenecks manifest and their effects are of course not the same within the groups of early-career researchers we studied. Below, we provide a short, summarising conclusion of the three groups’ situations, focusing on the main, distinctive bottlenecks and consequences.

PhD candidates

PhD candidates are often at the very start of their career. They work towards their dissertation over a period of four years. After that, their future is open. Although many PhD candidates aspire to continue in academia, previous research shows that a dissertation also provides added value outside of academia.  Despite working towards a clear final product, PhD candidates often have difficulty figuring out exactly what is expected of them. PhD candidates receive considerable freedom at the start, but they run into unspoken yet strict expectations over the course of their PhD track. At this point, they still lack the experience to know how much time and effort certain requirements entail, such as publishing an article. In their direct environment, they notice that the requirement that a dissertation must be of high quality can be interpreted differently by different doctoral thesis supervisors. They also find it difficult to incorporate planning and structure into the space they are given. The extent to which their supervisor offers them support with this varies. 

In relation to the three groups of early-career researchers, pressure to publish is the largest problem for PhD candidates. Many PhD candidates still feel that they are being pushed to publish in journals with a high impact factor. Related to this, there is little recognition of their efforts in other aspects of their work, such as achieving societal impact. Multiple PhD candidates were told that the Recognition and Rewards programme was not intended for them. They themselves view this differently and would also like to develop skills other than research skills.

Postdoc researchers

Based on our research, the position of postdoc researchers is the most poignant. Postdoc researchers are further along in their career than PhD candidates and have already committed to a career in academia more strongly. The need for a solid foundation to support their private life is also more important for them: many postdoc researchers are at a stage in their life where they are settling down in one place and considering having kids. Personal ambitions and social and economic security are at stake for this group, more so than for PhD candidates.

At the same time, postdoc researchers find themselves in the most precarious position: they work on temporary contracts and depend on research funding to advance in their career, while dealing with fierce competition. At the end of their PhD track, PhD candidates have a dissertation that will improve their chances on the labour market outside of academia. Practice-oriented researchers can often fall back on education if there is too little funding for their research. Postdoc researchers have fewer options to fall back on. Some indicate that their work is so specialised that there are practically no other places where this could be practised.

Moreover, in the experience of postdoc researchers, whether they will succeed in making the next step in their career is only to a limited degree based on their own merits. In their eyes, luck plays a significant role, and mention was also made of nepotism. Experiences with sexism also came up in the focus groups. Many of the postdoc researchers in the focus groups considered the research university an unreliable employer. They provided painful examples of promises that were not kept by the institute they worked for, claimed there was a lack of transparency around promotion decisions and said they did not feel the research university was investing in them. 

This has considerable consequences. Postdocs experience a constant sense of pressure: doing more is always better. Previous research has shown that postdoc researchers are more likely to suffer from mental health symptoms than other highly educated persons. The focus groups gave poignant examples of important life decisions that postdocs had postponed or discarded entirely because of the considerable uncertainty they experienced, such as obtaining Dutch nationality or having children. This also happened among PhD candidates. 

The consequence for the institutes is that talent and knowledge are wasted. When postdoc researchers leave, they often take knowledge with them that has not been adequately stored in the organisation and is therefore not retained. Postdoc researchers say they regularly spend time retrieving this knowledge or working on tasks that could also have been performed by support staff. In their experience, this means their capacities are not used optimally.

Practice-oriented researchers at universities of applied sciences

Practice-oriented researchers at universities of applied sciences face a different situation. Whereas research is the dominant ingredient for a career at research universities, this is education at universities of applied sciences. There is not yet a beaten track for practice-oriented researchers to follow – and the vision on practice-oriented research is consistent neither between universities of applied sciences nor within them, in the experience of the focus group participants. Early-career practice-oriented researchers furthermore state that facilities for research are often lacking: from spaces to work to access to academic journals and from training to clearly defined career paths with associated rewards.

On the other hand, practice-oriented researchers who have also worked at a research university indicate that they experience more freedom to create impact in practice at universities of applied sciences. This direct link to practice is an important source of motivation for many of these researchers. They also experience more equality, less pressure to publish and more room to develop different types of products. Although practice-oriented researchers also have a considerable set of duties, with an imbalance between education and research and the resulting mental pressure, the consequences for their mental health and their private lives seem smaller for this group. The working conditions appear to be more open to discussion. 

A specific bottleneck that early-career practice-oriented researchers have to deal with is the underappreciation of practice-oriented research, both within their own organisation and in the broader research community. Within the institute, some see practice-oriented research as ‘a playground for smart people’, and in the research community as well, they experience that practice-oriented research is considered subordinate to research carried out at research universities, whereas they themselves would mainly describe their research as different. An example of this is the experience of practice-oriented researchers that applications for funding in which no research university is involved are hopeless. This underappreciation affects not only their opportunities but also their motivation. 

International early-career researchers

Finally, the study shows that international PhD candidates and postdoc researchers face even greater insecurity. For those from outside the European Union, their residence permit is also at stake. This will expire as soon as they lose their job. Participants in the focus groups with PhD candidates voiced their concerns about international PhD candidates on research grants, whose income is often very low. Previous research shows that international PhD candidates and postdoc researchers are at an increased risk of developing mental health symptoms.

Based on the above insights, we offer six points for consideration for policymakers and knowledge institutions.

Expectations should be made more explicit, especially considering the focus on diverse career paths. 
This study shows the importance of early-career researchers and their supervisors engaging in conversation about their mutual requirements and expectations. In doing so, it is important that they focus not just on the content of the work but also on the personal and professional development of the early-career researcher. 

This is extra important considering the Recognition and Rewards movement, which was introduced in recent years.  This responds to the need for diverse career paths, which we also identified among early-career researchers. This should give academics greater opportunity to have a career based on achievements in education, valorisation and management. At the same time, Recognition and Rewards should help reduce the competition among researchers, giving them more room for team science and open science. 

Making the diverse career paths more explicit, along with the associated rewards for specific achievements, could lead to clearer requirements and expectations. At the same time, this could also lead to greater diversification. Not only will career paths become more diverse, the way in which this is implemented can also differ between institutes, faculties and departments. This makes the conversation about requirements and expectations, which can be initiated by either the supervisor or the early-career researcher, even more important. This applies in particular to the stage in which these career paths are in development. 

The position of postdoc researchers is vulnerable: support is necessary.
This study shows that the position of postdoc researchers at research universities and university medical centres is vulnerable right now. Their interests are barely represented, and they feel that the support they receive from the employer is barely aligned to their needs. This needs to change. 

Knowledge institutions could provide this support in different ways, for example through a postdoc office, coaching or mentorship, to guide researchers in their personal and professional development. Supervisors have a role to play here as well, by focusing on these aspects in their supervision – as also recommended by researchers Teelken and Van der Weijden and by the KNAW.  Additionally, research universities could offer more postdocs contract renewal when their projects run into delays due to pregnancy or illness, for example. Finally, better representation of this group’s interests would be welcome. Whereas PhD candidates are well organised and represented both within knowledge institutions and at the national level, the group of postdoc researchers is still relatively invisible. The postdoc researchers are responsible for this as well: the focus groups show that postdoc researchers who are members of postdoc councils find it difficult to fill these councils, because people are quick to leave again. 

PhD candidates should take more space to orient themselves towards a future outside of academia.
Our analysis shows that many PhD candidates take the perspective that PhD research should in the first instance be preparation for a career in academia. They talk about taking on a position outside of academia as a second choice, the option you pick when you fail to become a postdoc or when you do not want to engage in the competition for a postdoc position. 

Research universities have taken several steps to get rid of this limited view. They offer PhD candidates opportunities to explore different careers, develop skills unrelated to academics or do a work placement during their PhD track. Graduate schools and HR departments play an important role in this. PhD candidates appear to make insufficient use of these services, either because they are not aware of them or because they do not have the time.

Supervisors could play a key role in encouraging PhD candidates to take a broader view. Doctoral thesis supervisors and co-supervisors naturally offer a limited view as role models. After all, they themselves are also very academically oriented. They may not always be aware of the various opportunities in the labour market. Besides, it may be to their advantage if PhD candidates focus – for as long as possible – on an academic career, since this will encourage them to try their best to gain academic achievements, which in many cases also reflect well on their supervisors (such as co-authors of publications).

A cultural change at research universities and university medical centres is essential to remove the bottlenecks experienced by many early-career researchers.
Our study also shows that the working environment at research universities and university medical centres is competitive and has a strong hierarchy with many unwritten rules. This environment makes it difficult for early-career researchers to stand up for their own needs and interests and could encourage unequal treatment. These results endorse the importance of recommendations from the KNAW opinion on social safety in academia.  These concern, among other things, actively encouraging the discussion about behaviour, focusing on the responsibility of supervisors for the welfare and effective functioning of their employees in the selection and development of supervisors, teaching employees to open behavioural issues for discussion and making sure that social hygiene becomes an organisation-wide focus point.

Not only will measures such as these increase social safety, they will also help early-career researchers stand up for their interests and set out their personal and professional needs. 

Attention for knowledge management is crucial: how do we retain knowledge and talent?
The focus groups revealed signals that knowledge and investments in talent are leaking away and being wasted in academia. Postdocs in particular indicated that the high turnover of researchers is leading to knowledge being built up within the organisation but then not being retained. The limited availability of laboratory technicians and other technical support staff means they can only cushion the consequences of this to a limited extent. Several postdoc researchers indicated that they waste time repeating or retrieving work done previously or performing work that could also have been done by people with less academic knowledge and experience. 

To prevent knowledge and talent (and the associated investments) being wasted, policymakers and knowledge institutions should strategically consider ways to retain knowledge, skills and continuity within academia. The postdoc researchers in the focus groups also indicated that some of them might be interested in continuing to work as university researchers without following the academic career path to becoming a professor.

At universities of applied sciences, attention should be paid to properly embedding practice-oriented researchers and offering them appropriate rewards.
This study shows that effectively embedding early-career researchers in the organisation is important for them, and this is still lacking for practice-oriented researchers at universities of applied sciences. Universities of applied sciences could contribute to effective embedding and rewards for practice-oriented researchers by drawing up clearer job profiles. In the Practice-oriented research monitor,  many universities of applied sciences indicated that they had revised the job classification system in 2022. They gave better descriptions of research positions and added descriptions for positions that had previously not yet been defined, such as professional doctorate and associate professor. Even so, our research shows that this is not enough. For example, universities of applied sciences could bring the importance of research and its connection with education to the attention of the managers within their own organisation. In the experience of practice-oriented researchers, the extent to which universities of applied sciences value research is crucial for the freedom and support they receive. Demonstrating the impact of practice-oriented research to other knowledge institutions and society remains important as well.

The source reference is included in the full report.