Researcher Education and Development Scholarship Conference

Dr Victoria L. Hewitt, Researcher Development Adviser, University of Auckland | Waipapa Taumata Rau, New Zealand.

Every ‘postdoc’ position is a unique experience, but differences between countries present hidden challenges for postdoctoral researchers exploring leadership opportunities. This post draws on my experiences and those of people in my networks from doing a PhD at Monash, Australia followed by Postdoctoral Research positions (‘postdocs’) in Sheffield and Cambridge in the UK and at Columbia, New York, USA. A ‘postdoc’ is a fixed term researcher role, usually in paid employment, within a single established university-situated research group. I come from a discipline where postdoc roles are common and typically have a permanent academic researcher as their line manager (referred to as their Principal Investigator, or ‘PI’).

Now in my role as a Researcher Developer I hope that sharing these experiences can enable other Researcher Developers to help postdocs make the most of leadership opportunities, as they move internationally.

Different types of leadership for research success

One of the most important aspects of leadership for a postdoc’s career trajectory is the extent to which they control their own research direction. This influences their potential and opportunities to work on projects that branch out from the wider lab group’s (PI’s) interests, and it impacts independent funding opportunities. The other very visible leadership component of a postdoc is leadership of people including opportunities, formal or informal to supervise students (Guccione & Stefanatos 2023), manage staff, or drive collaborations. Together these contribute much of the experience that academic hiring committees expect of successful applicants (Fernandes et al. 2020).

Often less well recognised is the kind of leadership that contributes to building research culture and community – whether at the lab, group, department, faculty or discipline level. What is seen as leadership in this space varies hugely by country, as well as by research group and discipline. Examples include being a good citizen by doing communal chores, actively participating in departmental events, helping peers to access funding, and championing your subdiscipline and its methods or people at a conference (Bryson et al. 2024).

Leadership across these areas develops and requires the development of skills that are directly translatable to jobs outside academia and research (Acharya et al 2023) and narrative CVs used by some academic funders in the UK and now gaining traction in Canada and NZ, can be used to showcase these skills. More commonly in the US academic system similar narratives form part of diversity statements and/or teaching philosophies in faculty applications. In every work environment, within and outside academia, being able to articulate your leadership skills with examples relevant to diverse audiences is now vital for career progression (Pizzolato et al. 2023). 

Employment conditions and funding opportunities constrain leadership development

The employment status of postdocs and their treatment and position (as ‘staff’ or ‘trainees’) varies by country. Short and part time contracts can make opportunities for additional paid or unpaid roles that develop the career, but often limit the integration of postdocs into the academic community and thereby stifle leadership opportunities (Model European contract guidance is provided by Marie Sklodowska-Curie Actions). National and international grant eligibility also depends on employment contracts and varies hugely – from being very permissive about who can be a PI, to rigid exclusionary rules. This can mean the ability of a postdoc to define their research direction through contribution to project development as part of grant writing can range from being a great mentored experience, to exploitation, depending on how it is approached. Rules around postdocs being primary or co-supervisors also vary by country, institution and funder and are often very unclear.  

Country by country differences in research priorities (what will be funded), success measures and the roles and availability of students to supervise or mentor, also have a significant impact on leadership opportunities. Postdocs need to be pragmatic about how closely a group’s research area aligns with the funding and job opportunities in the place where they think they ultimately want to live and work. Funding calls force PIs to think about this, but it may not be obvious to the postdocs who work for them they are doing so.

What counts as ‘fundable research’ has huge implications for the opportunities for postdocs to lead research that will result in a sustainable career path. Researcher developers are often closer to these national drivers and their support for postdocs to grapple with these considerations will help empower new types of research leaders, but where they end up may have different priorities, so agile research programs and careful reading of instructions are key. 

Precarious contracts, salary relative to cost of living, and research prospects in and outside academia all feature in ongoing discussions about the structure and purpose of academic training (O’Connor et al 2023). While there are much broader social and financial implications well beyond developing a leadership profile, scarcity in academic positions and dependence on visas also leads to some of the worst abuses of junior researchers. Current pressures to compete enable PIs (and indeed postdocs) to exploit others and to use exploited labour to be promoted and hired into permanent/tenure track roles.

Less personal, but as important for scientific progress, precarious employment alters postdocs’ willingness to lead risky research projects without clear paths to publications that will secure further funding. This leaves us in the position that reasonable pay over many years (which sounds like a good thing) can become a trap for those who do not then actively seek their next or more permanent roles. More information on this can be found in the Action Research on Research Culture ARRC project at the University of Cambridge.

Institutional development opportunities and the role of Researcher Developers

Professional development opportunities provided by universities can be tied to national organisations such as Vitae (in the UK) and CIMER (in the US) as well as more specific disciplinary societies (eg Royal Society, Company of Biologists, American Society for Cell Biology etc) can greatly influence leadership development. Careers, writing and coaching services and training may be available internally in universities or in partnership with these organisations – or it may not. Postdocs who are new to an institution are often unaware of what is available, and whether there is funding and/or time allowances made for training and development activity, which prevents them being accessed. Institutional performance reviews and development plans range from established and holistic, to non-existent, and PI’s or cultural attitudes towards them can have a huge effect on their usefulness for developing competent and reflective leaders. For postdocs, understanding how professional development and review processes are tied to promotion criteria is also worth exploring, even prior to signing a contract.

Leadership opportunities also depend on many characteristics of research groups, including size, composition, funding, and PI experience and vary within and across institutions as much as by country.

Yet, regardless of their role, position, opportunities, training, and the national context there is always scope for postdocs to lead in some capacity, but they may not see this or realise its value if not prompted to – this is where Researcher Developers can really help. Researcher Developers, who often also have first-hand experience of being a postdoc themselves, can support postdocs to recognise and take advantage of opportunities in their own groups and institutions and identify any gaps they may need to address if they change country. By making the norms and rules of academia’s hidden curriculum’ (Elliot et al, 2020) visible, developers even the playing field. By enabling networking and self-reflection, and by providing administrative and financial support to grass roots initiatives Researcher Developers can help postdocs to create their own leadership opportunities in forms and contexts that foster a better research environment for everyone.