Advice for next course of action - Accepting PhD offer/LSE Masters/Job

[playaa07]

I applied to 19 schools this year (17 PhD in Finance across US and Europe) and 2 MSc in Finance (LSE, Tinbergen). I was rejected without interview from 16, had interview at Michigan Ross and INSEAD and finally got an offer from Bocconi for PhD in Finance.

 

I have a decent profile coming from top schools in my country (Bachelors in Physics, MBA) but have had below average grades in my UG Maths sequence (B-, B, B+). In the first two ones, I simply did not study (please don't ask why). So the rejections (especially from Masters program) fill in tremendous self doubt as to my ability to handle PhD level curriculum.

 

I have worked on 2 research papers during my Masters, cleared CFA Level 2, working in a top US Bank and work with utmost discipline and sincerity.

 

I think my primary motivation for pursuing a PhD was not research rather 2 factors. One, I love teaching, having taught in schools and other people. Second, I hate corporate world and the feeling of having sold myself and my life for big bucks. So being a Professor seemed a good option. But I don't know if I should even pursue this path anymore.

 

Seeking some advice.

Edited April 29, 2021 by playaa07

[BCB]

I am sorry that you had such a poor experience in the application process. However, I hope that you are not too discouraged as it sounds like you have a strong profile since you received interest from some top schools. Remember, these PhD programs are highly competitive and it only take two or three people who have a better day on the interview for it to make a difference between an acceptance or a rejection.

It definitely sounds like you have the drive to be a good academic.

Bocconi is a great placement and a PhD from there will set you up well for the job market. I would say that they are easily on par with top 30-50 programs and could also possibly help you crack top placements if you have a stellar publication record. So I would think hard about going there if you feel that you can make it work.

It sounds to me like your motivations for getting a PhD are not research driven which likely set off red flags for a lot of the top schools you applied to. They care a lot more about research and may have passed over your application in favor of someone who was more research focused. Your interest in teaching is not bad and I think a good number of people who get PhDs are initially motivated by teaching interests. However, if you choose to go through another application cycle, I would suggest emphasizing research interests rather than teaching interests. If you feel like research is not something that you would enjoy (and I mean really enjoy to the point that you are happy doing it 40-60 hours a week throughout the PhD program), then I would also recommend shooting for lower ranking R1s that will create less of a research-centric "pressure cooker" environment. Any R1 PhD program will still be research intensive but some are more ok with students placing in balanced or teaching positions.

[playaa07]

Thanks for the uplifting response @BCB. Appreciate your empathy.

 

It's a risky proposition but I think I will try again in a couple of years with a better profile and RA background. Let's see what life has in store.

 

All the best to you in whatever you do, too.

[BrazilianPhD]

I'm not in Finance, but maybe my experience and perspective can be useful.

 

I applied to 20 programs in the US, I was rejected by 19. PhD applications can be amazingly competitive. Being accepted by 1 is already an amazing feat to be celebrated. Usually, even perfect applicants are not showered with offers.

 

I struggled hard with the coursework. Really. Almost everyone did, including the professors. I always remember when one of the Econometrics professors tried to solve one of the problems from the book, since we still had time left in a class, and he wasn't able to.

 

With my first research project, my advisor said that was just master's level stuff. Not enough for publication, for a dissertation, or anything really.

 

A PhD is no joke, we among the best of the best in the world, and we are expected to become their equal. It's easy to feel small, not good enough.

 

3 research projects later, I'm now in my 4th year. And my advisor recently told me I'm now at a much more advanced stage than 4th-year students usually are. He seems very pleased with my progress, confident I will do well next week when I defend my dissertation proposal. I'm getting ready to search for a job as a professor.

 

I think one without self-doubt during a PhD is one with illusions. As a professor here said, research is an unusual type of job: failing is the standard. We fail to obtain results, we fail to publish, etc. Success is rare in our work, it's the exception. So, we often doubt ourselves, our methods, our results, etc. We even start having doubts about top research, Nobel prize winners.

 

So, it's not that I don't doubt myself. But I persist despite all those doubts. As people often say, doing a PhD is not about being good or bad, it's about being able to read the end of it. And motivation is a big part of that.

 

Just like you, I don't want to go back to the corporate world. But that's a motivation to leave the corporate world, not necessarily a motivation to do a PhD. I had already left the corporate world. I was already teaching, and left my teaching job to do a PhD. I'm doing a PhD because I want to work with research. I don't know how things would be if my motivation was not related to research, since that was really the focus during my 3rd year when I made all that progress.

 

In summary, I don't think self-doubt is a big issue unless you let those doubts overcome you. Use them as motivation to do better. But whether motivation is an issue or nor, that's something only you can answer. You're not in this alone, although it may often feel like that. Maybe the biggest lesson from a PhD is learning to trust yourself and trust others, even when we see reasons to not trust.

[playaa07]

This is truly helpful and inspiring. Thank you so much for sharing your journey. Wish you the best in your defence and job interviews.

 

I'm not in Finance, but maybe my experience and perspective can be useful.

 

I applied to 20 programs in the US, I was rejected by 19. PhD applications can be amazingly competitive. Being accepted by 1 is already an amazing feat to be celebrated. Usually, even perfect applicants are not showered with offers.

 

I struggled hard with the coursework. Really. Almost everyone did, including the professors. I always remember when one of the Econometrics professors tried to solve one of the problems from the book, since we still had time left in a class, and he wasn't able to.

 

With my first research project, my advisor said that was just master's level stuff. Not enough for publication, for a dissertation, or anything really.

 

A PhD is no joke, we among the best of the best in the world, and we are expected to become their equal. It's easy to feel small, not good enough.

 

3 research projects later, I'm now in my 4th year. And my advisor recently told me I'm now at a much more advanced stage than 4th-year students usually are. He seems very pleased with my progress, confident I will do well next week when I defend my dissertation proposal. I'm getting ready to search for a job as a professor.

 

I think one without self-doubt during a PhD is one with illusions. As a professor here said, research is an unusual type of job: failing is the standard. We fail to obtain results, we fail to publish, etc. Success is rare in our work, it's the exception. So, we often doubt ourselves, our methods, our results, etc. We even start having doubts about top research, Nobel prize winners.

 

So, it's not that I don't doubt myself. But I persist despite all those doubts. As people often say, doing a PhD is not about being good or bad, it's about being able to read the end of it. And motivation is a big part of that.

 

Just like you, I don't want to go back to the corporate world. But that's a motivation to leave the corporate world, not necessarily a motivation to do a PhD. I had already left the corporate world. I was already teaching, and left my teaching job to do a PhD. I'm doing a PhD because I want to work with research. I don't know how things would be if my motivation was not related to research, since that was really the focus during my 3rd year when I made all that progress.

 

In summary, I don't think self-doubt is a big issue unless you let those doubts overcome you. Use them as motivation to do better. But whether motivation is an issue or nor, that's something only you can answer. You're not in this alone, although it may often feel like that. Maybe the biggest lesson from a PhD is learning to trust yourself and trust others, even when we see reasons to not trust.

[playaa07]

Thank you for the empathetic response, @BCB. Your response played a key role in me rationalising and remembering the factors I should use to make my decision. I've even written them in case I forget them again. I'm much more at peace since your response. Wish you the best of luck.

 

I am sorry that you had such a poor experience in the application process. However, I hope that you are not too discouraged as it sounds like you have a strong profile since you received interest from some top schools. Remember, these PhD programs are highly competitive and it only take two or three people who have a better day on the interview for it to make a difference between an acceptance or a rejection.

It definitely sounds like you have the drive to be a good academic.

Bocconi is a great placement and a PhD from there will set you up well for the job market. I would say that they are easily on par with top 30-50 programs and could also possibly help you crack top placements if you have a stellar publication record. So I would think hard about going there if you feel that you can make it work.

It sounds to me like your motivations for getting a PhD are not research driven which likely set off red flags for a lot of the top schools you applied to. They care a lot more about research and may have passed over your application in favor of someone who was more research focused. Your interest in teaching is not bad and I think a good number of people who get PhDs are initially motivated by teaching interests. However, if you choose to go through another application cycle, I would suggest emphasizing research interests rather than teaching interests. If you feel like research is not something that you would enjoy (and I mean really enjoy to the point that you are happy doing it 40-60 hours a week throughout the PhD program), then I would also recommend shooting for lower ranking R1s that will create less of a research-centric "pressure cooker" environment. Any R1 PhD program will still be research intensive but some are more ok with students placing in balanced or teaching positions.

[recentgrad]

Hi OP. I'm a 5th year PhD in Management at a competitive program. I generally agree with BCB. You need to enter (or quickly develop) a passion for research to have the PhD make any sense in your career. If you get bad feelings about this path after your first few years, take the masters and leave. The only reason to get a PhD is that you can't see yourself doing anything other than research for the rest of your life. Going in because you like teaching and don't like corporate work is a recipe for a bad outcome.

 

I cannot emphasize enough the fact that research academia is structured unlike any other career, mostly in ways that are not attractive. It is a long, random, and risky game. It is the complete opposite of teaching and corporate, which emphasize relatively quick projects, have direct connections between input --> output, and are generally stable from the day you enter the career to the day you retire (with some exceptions like consulting). Yes, it gives you that autonomy from your boss that you seem to crave. I don't have scheduled hours, and I don't have to be in the office (but that's a lot of people nowadays, so it's kind of a moot point). During that time, I am expected to produce output equivalent to 50-60 hours of work a week, and to be successful, you will constantly think about every possible way that your research could be criticized by your peers. It's an entirely different lifestyle.

 

Consider these issues: in research academia, you could work for several years on a project until you realize that you won't be able to publish the findings in a paper, either because you have been "scooped" by someone who published the same idea before you or because you aren't able to collect enough data to run meaningful analyses in the eyes of reviewers. Apart from potential use in other projects, those years would largely be a waste. You may end up in a department with an advisor who is absent or generally unhelpful (this happens to a LOT of people and makes your PhD a LOT harder compared to those with awesome advisors). You may end up not meeting the publication/R&R bar needed to get a tenure track job, which is increasing year after year. Since I entered, the prospects for graduating PhDs in academia have gotten slowly and uniformly worse, and I don't see that changing in the next 10 years. The trend at top schools is to take an unfunded (zero stipend) 6th year before going on the market. By the time you graduate, that may be the norm everywhere for those interested in academic jobs. The tenure bar at most places is high, and most pre-tenure academics expect to move at least once after their first job. So home buying and putting down roots is delayed.

 

Speaking as someone in this system who has experienced major setbacks, you will run into at least one of these major setbacks during your PhD or pre-tenure years, and it will wreck your emotional state. In general, your work is only your work, so there's no meaningful work team to blame or lean on when times get tough. You wonder why you are giving up tens (if not hundreds) of thousands of dollars in lost income. Day to day, things move so slowly that it can feel like you are spinning your wheels alone in your office. A paper I worked on in undergrad is finally being published in an A-level management journal. I started working on it 6 years ago, and it was only rejected from 1 journal prior to finding its home. 6 years. That's 20% of a 30 year career spent thinking about a project during most of your waking hours. It's ridiculous.

 

In the end, you have to LOVE research to put up with the downsides. For most people, the level of autonomy is nice, but very much not worth the tradeoff.