Do postdocs need leadership skills?
In the US, postdocs are often “lab rats” who primarily create experimental data. In Europe, they have more management functions. They are in a sandwich position between the crazy professor, the demanding PhD students, and other staff members. They need a complex set of leadership and management skills to perform well. However, at most universities, there is no specific leadership training to prepare postdocs for their current and future management functions.
Is there really a need for management and leadership skills?
One might argue that management and leadership training for postdocs is expensive for universities and trains them primarily for their job *after* finishing the postdoc period. As a consequence, universities might hesitate to invest in postdocs and leave it to their future employers to train them.
When I suggested such a training to a colleague I got a rather angry reply: “There isn’t ANY need for such a training. Postdocs should work hard in the lab and generate lots of data for high-impact journals. This will make their careers.”
Other colleagues claim that postdocs learn these skills anyway by ‘doing their jobs’ and take over the broad wisdom and well-developed skills in people management from their supervisors.
Interestingly, especially young academic staff in tenure track positions are not enthusiastic about sending their PhD students to transferable skills seminars or postdocs to leadership training. The reason is that their staff members are absent from the lab, and they consequently produce less data.
Nevertheless, young professors often need to follow leadership and management skills training themselves – and, consequently, accept it hesitatingly for their staff members as well.
Why is leadership training for postdocs necessary? Postdocs want it!
One of the most obvious arguments for leadership and management courses is the vital need for postdocs. When we organized such courses, they were always completely booked.
In a survey, we investigated the needs of postdoctoral researchers. We performed this survey in Belgium (Belgian Postdoc Survey 2012). We received feedback from 413 postdoctoral researchers from all scientific domains at Belgian universities.
70% of them never received any training specifically for postdocs. When we asked whether they would like to follow a course in leadership and team building, 51% answered ‘yes’ and 26% ‘maybe’.
Group leaders need well-performing postdocs
Being a group leader for nearly two decades, I do not doubt that a postdoc with strong leadership skills creates a better team spirit and increases the creativity and productivity of the team – because they handle the daily activities in the lab while the group leaders are often absent.
In my experience, it is a clever move from every university to treat postdocs like real staff members and train them in management and leadership skills when they are about six months into their new job.
Then, they got to know the new working environment and had their first challenges in their new ‘leading’ position. Many new postdocs fight with the problem that they are not a member of the PhD crowd anymore and have to develop a professional distance.
They have to solve conflicts and interpersonal problems in the team. If they are supervised to handle this change of perspective and get some theoretical background, for example, in ‘situational leadership’ and ‘team building’, they and the entire team may perform much better.
Postdocs need maximum labour market employability
If postdocs are trained in leadership skills early in their postdoc career, they can train these skills in a safe environment and be better prepared for their future jobs.
Certificates about attending such courses and experience with leadership challenges also increase their future employability in the labour market. One may argue that this makes a university more attractive for better future postdocs.
Society needs well-trained group leaders
Finally, the labour market needs well-educated postdocs. About 90% of all postdocs find a job in a non-academic environment.
Postdocs are the next generation of group leaders. It is very probable that the labour market – and society in general – will profit when our future group leaders are trained well in technical *and* people skills.
Which skills are needed?
Previously, we developed a list of basic and advanced leadership skills essential to becoming a successful group leader in science. We think these skills are critical for most positions in academia, industry and the public sector. Postdocs should get a training in the “basic leadership skills”.
How to control the quality and the return of investment?
From personal experience, I know that many training companies underperform and deliver bad courses, while a few selected companies are excellent.
Thus, quality control is essential. Most universities evaluate leadership skills courses based on questionnaires for participants. Even if the questionnaires are professionally designed, the ‘entertainment factor’ and the professional organization of the courses may skew the results.
360-degree evaluations (often used in companies) make measuring the impact of such courses possible, but they are still not used in any research institution
The degree of participation (courses are fully booked), the evaluations, and a lot of anecdotal evidence suggest that these courses can be very beneficial.
Who teaches leadership skills?
There are substantial differences regarding the possibilities for big, medium or small universities to organize leadership skill courses. Bigger universities can hire in-house staff to give some of these trainings. In contrast, medium and small universities tend to outsource and hire external companies. However, finding excellent providers of such courses is challenging.
How to handle resistance against leadership training for postdocs?
There can be a lot of resistance when introducing the concept that postdocs need leadership skills training. Here are a few reasons:
Can group leaders tolerate postdocs trained in leadership skills?
Group leaders may find it challenging for themselves and their group when postdocs are trained in leadership skills. Postdocs may criticize the leadership style of their supervisor.
Indeed, it takes quite some self-reflection and self-assurance to accept such a critique. A good way to handle the fears of staff members who have NOT received similar training is to be very transparent about the training content and to prepare the postdocs to behave constructively in a conflict.
Who should pay for training?
In many universities, postdocs have an unclear position – they are often considered a ‘hybrid’ between students and “real” staff members.
On the one hand, they are often paid by external grants, similar to PhD students, and still need considerable technical and transferable skills training.
On the other hand, they are fully paid staff members who have to perform well in their jobs. HR departments may resist spending a substantial part of their budget on postdocs who typically have a contract between two and four years – and then leave.
There must be a consensus about the added value when postdocs are trained at the start of their postdoc time. In a political context, universities may argue that this is a substantial element in increasing the employability of young researchers, which deserves additional funding.
Thus, there are solid arguments for and understandable reasons against making management and leadership skills courses part of a structured training program for postdocs.
Should senior group leaders also follow leadership courses?
It might be even better to make it a standard for all staff members to reflect on their leadership skills and challenges.
However, many older staff members consider themselves as ‘experienced enough’ because they did their job successfully for many years.
Others do not like such a psychological approach, which requires considerable openness in a group situation and may be potentially abused by colleagues.
However, if the current generation of postdocs gets used to leadership courses, they will find it normal when they reach the next levels of their career and the older, untrained colleagues will simply retire and lose their influence.
As mentioned before, it may be challenging when their staff members follow such courses. Thus, many will want similar training for their senior management level, which requires different perspectives and skills anyway.
Thus, professors will not want to sit with their postdocs in the same course; this would be awkward for most group leaders.
In addition, in my experience, postdocs have different needs regarding leadership training than tenure-track professors – and senior professors have different needs than tenure-trackers who have just started to build their group.
Unfortunately, this raises immediate questions about financing several courses for the different levels of experience and status.
Is there an immediate benefit of leadership training for postdocs?
Yes!
In my experience, leadership training offers immediate benefits, such as improved communication and project management skills, increased self-awareness and confidence, and improved conflict resolution and time management abilities.
These skills lead to better collaboration, higher productivity, and a more harmonious work environment. Additionally, leadership training provides valuable networking opportunities, boosts strategic thinking, and enhances team leadership, making postdocs more competitive for advanced positions in academia and industry.
These benefits improve the immediate research outcomes and promote career possibilities. Thus, leadership skills training has immediate and long-term benefits.
Acknowledgments
I have used AI systems, including Grammarly, Google Gemini, and ChatGPT, to enhance the English and comprehensiveness of this article.
Recommended reading
The following articles may also interest you:
- 20 Strengths and Weaknesses of Leaders in Science
- Best Books on Communication
- Best books on salary negotiation and getting a raise
- How to become an expert in your scientific field?
- How to create a leadership action plan
- What is a postdoc?
- For how long should I be a postdoc?
- Am I doing enough for my scientific career?
- The emotional phases of your research project and PhD and postdoc stress
- How to choose the best postdoc position?
- Should I become a long-term postdoc?
- Is being a professor worth it?
- What is tenure?
- Assistant professor and associate professor – what is the difference?
- What is a Reader at a university?
- Why salary matters in science careers
- How to ask for a letter of recommendation?
Of course we need training in leadership skills! It is too often assumed that as a PhD you are not only an excellent scientist but also a good project manager, teacher and supervisor, albeit without the necessary training. Fortunately, UGent has recognized the need for post-doc talent management. Starting from this academic year, UGent post-docs can follow training in career development, leadership skills and impact skills (creative thinking, communication and resilience), in addition to participation in mentoring projects. This will surely prepare our postdocs for their future careers, inside and outside of academia.
Long ago (1961), as an MD in a research postdoc preparing for a career in academic medicine, I had a powerful mentor who schooled me not only in bench work but also in navigating the labyrinthine mechanics of dealing with administrative personnel.
Subsequently, the majority of postdocs who trained with me were also MD’s working on the PhD. Recognizing that they too were preparing for careers in academic medicine, I did for them as had been done for me.
All but one did end up in academia, among them department chairmen and two deans. The sole outlier declined a deanship in order to become the senior vice president for research for one of the country’s largest pharmaceutical firm.
So, do I favor training postdoc in matters of leadership and economic importance, you can see that I do.
Frank Nash
This is a great piece and covers almost every point that I could think of. But I think the biggest problem is always going to be academic inertia. It’s very hard to get behind a professional development program if you don’t respect those giving it.
Too many times I’ve sat through mandatory post-graduate career advice seminars, where the speaker was a middle aged woman, who grew up in the same city, went to university at the same place, got a quick bachelors degree, took maternity leave, and then became a career advisory to top up the family income whilst the child is in school.
How do you take careers advice seriously from someone that has had no discernible career, no postgraduate career or industrial experience?
If we maintain the canard that post-docs exist as preliminary next-stage training for an assistant professorship, then postdoctoral activities should include a lighter set of the full responsibilities of a professor: mentorship, grant writing, presentations, research transitioning from the bench to the program planning stage, and professional networking, the answer is simple: YES, YES, YES!
If the community of higher education wants for the PhD to be a degree of respect and value, it should not ignore those students or post-docs that will not be offered a tenure-track faculty position (i.e. the majority of PhDs). The answer again is YES! Many, many companies, when currently faced with the prospect of hiring a PhD asks (a) is their thesis/experience relevant to the job at hand, and (b) are they worth the extra expense, and (c) can I get someone cheaper to do the same job.
Unfortunately, if all you have to offer is an exotic thesis title that is not in line with most companies’ interest, this is a tough sell. If the candidate has experience in leadership, management, budgeting, and project-level understanding, the cost benefit analysis become better differentiated: companies will view these candidates as better prospects worth the additional cost.
To boot, PhD, universities, and academia boosts its regard in the eyes of industry and helps build bridges between these institutions that have been the bedrock of prosperity growth in the 20th century.
Thank you to point out this problem. I can tell about my current experience. I’m a postdoc looking for new job opportunities in industry as project leader R&D. In most of the offers, they ask about having double competencies: Science and management. During the recruitment interviews, I explain that I had some experience in managing students and technicians during my postdoc but it seems not enough! Now I’m paying very expensive training sessions to put on my C.V. And it’s true that in many labs (like where I used to work) postdocs are used as technicians which is too bad!!
Thanks again for making us aware of the fact that training in leadership skills can a be a strong asset during recruitment interviews and for being better qualified as a group leader in the industry!.