Academic-industry PhD students ‘face conflicting priorities’

Doctoral candidates in collaborative PhD programmes often find themselves balancing competing expectations from universities and employers, according to a report that calls for stronger support for students and clearer partnership arrangements. 

The report by the European University Association’s Council for Doctoral Education (EUA-CDE) examines how doctoral candidates engage with partners outside academia such as businesses, NGOs and public institutions.

It highlights a range of challenges that students face in collaborative programmes, including conflicting timelines, funding mechanisms and workplace demands. 

“Doctoral projects usually take several years and require stable commitments. Societal partners, however, may face shifting priorities and new developments that make long-term engagement difficult, not only in the private sector, but also for public or non-profit actors,” the report says. 

It finds that institutional procedures on both sides are often “too inflexible” to accommodate the needs of partnerships between doctoral candidates and their employers.

A gap in understanding between universities and external partners could leave doctoral candidates in “vulnerable positions, caught between academic requirements and workplace demands”, it warns. 

Jari Hämäläinen, chair of the thematic peer group behind the report, said doctoral education was undergoing a “significant transformation” as universities were increasingly expected to contribute more visibly to society. 

A previously published EUA-CDE survey found that more than 70 per cent of doctoral graduates now pursue careers outside academia, up from roughly 50 per cent two decades ago.

The latest report draws on input from doctoral candidates in collaborative programmes, representatives of the European Commission and societal partners across Europe, as well as findings from the earlier university survey.

Among the most significant concerns raised was that collaborative partnerships depend on the personal networks of individual supervisors. 

“In many cases, a single professor manages the entire relationship with an industrial or societal partner. When that individual leaves, the connection is often lost and the partnership dissolves,” the report warns, adding that universities should create dedicated roles, such as liaison offices or partnership directors. 

Cultural barriers also emerged as a recurring obstacle. Academic and non-academic organisations often have different values and workplace cultures. 

“In some cases, universities conclude that collaboration is not feasible because a partner does not fully appreciate the academic culture, including the importance of research integrity and academic freedom,” the report says. 

“Conversely, academics may underestimate the contributions of external actors, overlooking that these actors possess enormous knowledge and generate economic value that supports broader societal and research ecosystems.”

The authors highlight successful case studies from several countries. Portugal’s national science foundation grants non-academic doctoral scholarships annually that allow students to work in non-academic environments for at least 12 months. 

Finland has committed €255 million (£220 million) to create 1,000 new doctoral researcher positions in collaboration with universities, research institutes and businesses.

The report says universities should be strategic about their doctoral collaborations and choose partnerships based on how they align with their research profile, strengths and priorities. It also suggests reforming research assessment by recognising a “wide range of outputs”.  

Other recommendations include documenting expectations from the start, having contingency plans for if a key contact leaves and providing targeted training as well as continuous follow-up from academic supervisors.

seher.asaf@timeshighereducation.com