Negotiations

Lately, I've been getting settled at SnowU. I'm up on the faculty page in one department (and hopefully soon on the other). My permanent office was just vacated by its previous occupant. Now all they need is a new coat of paint and my furniture and I'm good to go on that front. The other stuff is going decently well too. There's a fellow new faculty member in one department and we're trying to work out logistics between the two labs, costs for remodeling, and establishing a 3-5 year plan for our spaces. I'm not too worried about that as I think it will get worked out shortly.

That does, however, lead to the main topic of this post: negotiations. When I originally discussed the App Package (part 1 & part 2) and the rest of the interview process, I realized I never mentioned much about the negotiations. From what I've heard and from my (limited) experience, everything is negotiable. If it's something that is a deal breaker for you, definitely bring it up now because you would be able to do it later. However, most negotiations break down along a few lines, namely: Startup, Students, Lab, Office, Salary, Extras. First, I'll start with some general thoughts though.

General Info

Have specific targets in mind for everything. I need "X" amount of lab space, roughly "Y" students salaries for at least two years, and I'm a rough startup pile'o'cash of "Z". If you're needing specific equipment, come prepared with a list during your interview. Also, look up student salaries and tuition expenses to get a rough idea of the cost per student. I didn't really have to show the specifics during my interview but they definitely glanced at my rough startup outline and were impressed that I had what appeared to be a detailed list. It shows you've thought about what you'd need, estimated costs, and are prepared for the job.

Startup

I know the whole thing is called your "Startup Package", but this is really the money part. How much do you need to get the ball rolling on your operations? What's the minimum amount you need to grease the wheels. If you throw out a huge number, be prepared to back it up with hard figures (even quotes if necessary). The university you're interviewing at will have some ideas about your research field and they'll know roughly what to expect from you. If you low-ball it, they'll probably not take you seriously. If you high-ball it, just justify it and negotiate from there. Remember, most (decidedly most, but not all) don't want you to fail in your tenure track period. They want you to succeed because you're expensive for the university. But if you don't ask for it now, it's not going to matter at tenure review when you say "well I didn't have enough to start the ball rolling." Have a rough number in mind and then round up by 30%. Hey, it's negotiations.

In my case, startup money, students, and summer salary got lumped into one total pot that I can draw from so I don't have to stick to 3 students and X in money. I can change it to 2 students and X+dX in money if I want. If you can negotiate that, do so because it will make things more flexible for you.

Students

I specifically separated students and startup money because tuition is expensive and 4 years X $$$$ tuition X some students = a lot of startup money. In practice, that will probably come in the form of tuition waivers and things like that. It doesn't matter how the university does it, just make sure you budget for students. Also find out the policy for tuition waivers (if any) or if you get TA support as per normal faculty.

Inquire about the average cost per student per year ( (tuition+salary+taxes)*overhead). This may be a key factor in deciding where to go if you've got multiple options. If you're planning on having a big group (say 10 people), the difference between $100k/student/year and $85k/student/year means $150k difference in your needed funding per year. If you're running a 10 student lab then you're in the $1M+ in research money turnover per year. To some profs, the difference between $850k and $1M in research money per year may not seem like much but as a new faculty member, that scares the shit out of me. That's a lot of money to have to bring in every year to keep things going.

Lab Space

Your lab space is directly coupled with the startup package and the size of your group. How many students are you planning on supporting right away? What equipment do you need and how much floor space does it take up? What are the requirements for your lab conditions (temp control, lighting, humidity, fume hoods, whatever)? Once again, a detailed list is better here. It shows you've thought about it and they you're not in over your head. I probably wasn't too specific on the size but I had very specific requirements on the lab conditions.

Salary

I've heard two different schools of thought when it comes to salary. One is: don't negotiate on it and save all your chips for more space/bigger startup/more students. Two is: only mainly negotiate on salary because the rest won't matter too much in the end.

I can definitely see the logic in (1). You're probably going to make decent money anyway and you'll probably do some consulting on the side. So your academic salary + summer salary + consulting should be enough to live on. Plus, instead of taking some extra money, you can get possibly an extra student or more equipment or whatever. That will help you get tenure (and more output, recognition, etc) and a higher earning potential.

However, (2) also makes sense. Here's the point reason. They're going to give a startup package so you will get some stuff. If you've asked appropriately in the beginning, even if they low-ball you, you're going to still get a nice package. So, this will be your only time to really ask for more money. And, to tell you the truth, I'm not so sure an extra "X" amount in startup or 1 extra year of a student salary is going to make or break tenure. If you're that close to the "go/no go line", then a lot more has gone off track than your initial negotiations.

In the end, make sure to ask for summer salary for at least your first two years. You're not going to have much research money coming in before then. After that, it's up to you.

Office

I'm not sure how much it matters (although I'm not in FSP's office) so I just asked for the same sort of office space that all the other tenured/tenure tracks have. I did ask for a nice coat of paint and a carpet though. Basically, I would try to make sure you're on professor row where you are visible like the other profs. Young students don't want to forage around in the dank basement for your office. That's going to make it harder to attract good students.

Extras

I wasn't sure what extras you might negotiate on until this past week, which is ultimately what spurred this post. PARKING!!! Maybe this is just me but I don't think you should have to pay for parking where you work. And I don't think you should have to deal with BS about which car you take on a given day. This is the one thing I did wish I negotiate for and forgot to do so. I think all faculty (and probably all employees) at a university should get a hang tag free'o'charge from the university when they start. No fuss, no bullshit, and no dealing with parking which seems like an entity unto themselves with universities. And, if all the new faculty start asking for it and get it, they might change the policy at the university.

So that's all I have on the subject for now. Anything else I missed, please comment below. Feel free to add other tips and thoughts as well.

Getting the "In"

The most difficult thing about getting a TT position is getting your foot in the door. I do think, however, it is a misconception that you have to be “groomed” for a TT position or that you need a direct “In” from your advisor or some other mentor. I’m not suggesting that it doesn’t help to have it, but it’s not 100% necessary.

The best thing about contacts at a university that you want to apply for is that you might have a source for a little extra, off-the-record information. For instance, at my ideal university, I suspect they had some specific people in mind when they advertised their open position. Even so, I applied anyway. I did not make the cut, but at least it was good to go through the motions. Also, I was able to speak with the Search Committee Chair regarding my application package and I got some good advice on things to accent in my app package.

At the other places I applied to, I did not have an “in”. They were the random online submissions, where I had originally guessed that the Send button was just a mask for Delete because they already had someone in mind. In those cases, it is generally submit and then hope for the best.

While I know it sounds crazy but if your app package says you’re ready for a TT position, the search committee will see that. If you are ready, but your app package doesn’t say that, then they’re going to think you’re not ready. That’s why is hugely important to have spent a lot of time and effort on preparing your app package.

In my experience, most of the online submission pages do not list the search committee chair. In those cases, I do think it is good to check with the department secretary to make sure your information is received in full. If they do list the committee chair, then you should inquire with them after a reasonable amount of time (maybe 1 month) to “check the status of your application” and if there’s “any more information that they need before reviewing it”. There’s no need to elaborate further on it. Doing this once is acceptable. If they don’t respond, then either you didn’t make the cut or they haven’t reviewed the applications yet. Also, it’s very easy to brush aside an email. It’s probably better to just pick up the phone and call them. It also shows that you’re proactive. However, do not become a stalker over this. That’s a surefire way to get you un-considered for the position.

In the end, just be positive about it but also realistic. While we’d like to think we’re the special candidate, on paper there are probably 10-15 other candidates at your level that look just as good. The committee is only going to pick 3-4 for interviews. Your CV, SoT/SoR, and cover letter will get you to the 10-15 person cutoff, but it takes some luck to be picked in the top 3 after that. And once you’re in the interview, there’s your chance to shine.

The App Package (Part 2)

After the CV, the next two critical documents for your application package are the Statements of Teaching and Research. During my preparation, I received the whole gambit of advice from having short 1-page statements for each to having multi-year, elaborative exposés on your future plans. In practice, this usually gets sorted out based on the position for which you are applying.

For instance, if you’re looking for an assistant professorship, they aren’t going to expect you to have gobs of info on teaching. Thus, a lot of the places have a limit of 1 page each or 3 pages total. In those cases, you only have enough space for the core points in the SoT/SoR. For teaching, it helps to show you have a teaching philosophy. By now, you’re probably either an experimentalist or a theorist. But in engineering, you’ll need to be able to teach both. Also, you should have an idea about the core program classes that you can teach. These core classes should be pretty common in some shape or form in most engineering programs. Lastly, you should mention a few ideas about classes that you’d like to develop.

On the research side, when space is limited, I think there are only two things you need to get across. The first is that you have larger plan for where you want to be 5-10 years for now because you think the technology is headed in that direction. The second is that you have a series of projects already outlined which help you plan out that 5-10 year period. One thing that I learned (and was asked during an interview question) was “How is my future research different from my current group?” In my case, that was fairly easy to answer but for others, that may be difficult. If you’re not doing something new or there is a research group focused on that already, how are you going to get funding?

And speaking of funding, that bring me to topics that should be included in your SoT/SoR that should be considered if you have sufficient space. On the research side, in addition to outlining where you believe the technology is going and having projects which lead in that direction, you also have to show that you know how to get there. In academia, that’s via funding and group management. Naming key grants that you will go after during your tenure track period and defining how you will set up your group will go a long way to showing your future colleagues that you’re ready for this challenge. This includes the number of students and a rough idea of the cost per year of running such a group. Lastly, adding a section on your previous research can give an indication that you’ve already been trained for this type of research and you’re the right person to lead it in the future.

For the SoT, space permitting, having some good grandiose ideas about novel classes that would greatly add to the curriculum shows that you haven’t just focused on research. These should be treated differently than your suggested courses that you would add because these ideas should be a department or college initiative. This could be something like a minor or specialization within a degree or a course which would take some significant support from the department. Also, look for higher education teaching grants. This would show the department that you’re serious and that you think there are additional support mechanisms which would help you get this started.

The last piece of the puzzle is the Cover Letter. In general, the Cover Letter should be customized for each position. It should specifically draw connections from points in their advertisement to why you fit the position. This is where you can get specific about why you fit this exact position. The SoT/SoR should largely be independent per position for which you are applying. Some other considerations are that this should be addressed to the committee chair if it is publicly known but you should expect the rest of the committee to read your letter. Also, some people say a two page cover letter is fine but I think at this stage in your career, one page should be enough.

The last thing I’ll say on this is to be hopeful but don’t get your hopes up too high. I ended up applying for 10+ positions and received no reaction from almost all of them. All of those positions that I wasn’t successful for didn’t even have the common courtesy to have a form letter rejection saying they were “going in a different direction”. I think that’s a little improper, but that’s the world we live in. If a semester has past and you have followed up several times and you still haven’t heard anything, it’s not looking too good. This can be the most frustrating aspect (not officially knowing) but it takes persistence to get a position. Also, it [sometimes] helps to know someone on the faculty. More on that tomorrow.

The App Package (Part 1)

Let’s face it, academia is a tough world. But if you’re that good and you present yourself as being that good, someone will take a chance on you even if you didn’t come from the best lab/university/professor. Presenting yourself as being that good is as important as your technical ability because you’ll eventually need those skills for commanding a conference hall, a classroom on a daily basis, and you have to inspire your students. Underneath all of this research and teaching is a business. A Tier 1 research university, on some levels, in nothing more than a business. It’s your job to bring in money so you can play in the lab and the university can function (and give you a lab in which to play). If you’re good but not good at showing people how your research relates or how efficient your research group is, you’re not going to succeed.

The most important way to get this across is your application package and, if you are lucky, your interview and presentation. For now, I’ll stick with the application package and discuss interview stuff over the next few days. The app package usually consists of four items: CV, cover letter, statement of teaching (SoT), and a statement of research (SoR). If you’re good at graphics, then make a fancy (but tasteful) cover with an explanation of what it shows. They don’t want to see abstract art, but if you have a few pictures or drawings that summarize your research, then do it.

Let’s start with the CV. Critically assess your CV. If you’re looking at academic jobs, you have to know you’re good enough. If you have a few publications in OK journals for your field, then it’s looking dicey. The easiest way to check is find the newest assistant prof in your department and ask them how many papers they had when they were higher. If you’re equal or greater, then you’re off to a good start. Also, NEVER have a “papers in prep” section. That’s basically saying “Yeah, I was going to do that but I never got around to it”. It screams of saying you’re not a closer. At the very least, don’t give them a reason think poorly of you.

Another good tip for papers is to separate journal publications and conference proceedings. Most reviewers will try to divvy them up anyway, so they’ll thank you for helping them out. Putting them together is a lose-lose proposition. Assuming you have only one or two journal papers and you hide them with 8 conference proceedings, it is going to look like you’re hiding the fact that you didn’t publish enough. Even if you had 8 journal papers and you intersperse them with a bunch of conference proceedings, they’re going to say “Wow, this person has done a lot of work, but why not accent that you know how the publishing game is played” (More on the politics of publishing later).

As for the rest of the resume, make sure to keep an accurate employment history and remember important dates for everything. Since I did not have postdoc experience while applying, I left everything research or academia related in my resume since about the middle of my undergrad. Make sure to have all of your sections concise and not spread out over a page break but do list everything. Aside from research/employment, education, journals, and conferences, list any patents, presentations at conferences, companies, and/or universities, mentoring, key skills for your research, academic service, conference volunteering, professional associations, awards, grants, everything including the kitchen sink. You're supposed to stand out, not blend in.

Another tip I got was to make a website of projects. Your future colleagues probably don’t want to go through all of your papers but if you had a website with some good photos and schematics, that will work wonders. Have a short description, keeping the high-line of the research focusing on “What’s the main purpose” and “Why is this project successful”. No more than a paragraph or two. That can really give reviews a good perspective.

On Monday, I’ll tackle the SoT, SoR, and cover letter. Any other tips/tricks that I didn’t mention are greatly appreciated.