Ph.D. Candidates Are Not Overqualified, They Are Underrated
It's a phrase far too familiar to Ph.D. holders navigating the job market. Despite their deep expertise, many find that corporate America often misunderstands, underestimates, or overlooks the value they can bring to businesses, especially when the preference leans toward more traditional credentials, such as the M.B.A. In an era of accelerated technological disruption and knowledge-based industries, companies can no longer afford to ignore the untapped potential of Ph.D. talent.
Ph.D. is short for Doctor of Philosophy. Its roots trace back to 18th-century Germany, where the Prussian model of education was designed to train individuals to produce new knowledge, not just practice or regurgitate current knowledge. The U.S. adopted this model in the 19th and 20th centuries, and today the Ph.D. is a common offering at many universities, focused on pushing the boundaries of what we know.
What separates a Ph.D. from other graduate degrees isn't just subject matter expertise, it's the process of their studies, which entails a long and rigorous journey. On average, earning a Ph.D. takes about five years, and can extend up to eleven. Candidates conduct original research, publish findings, and defend their dissertations in front of experts in their fields. The result is a scholar trained to solve problems no one has solved before. These are exactly the kinds of thinkers businesses need when thinking about new innovations and approaches to challenges.
Historically, Ph.D.s were seen as a pipeline to the professoriate. But that narrative is changing. Nearly half (48%) of all Ph.D. recipients now pursue careers in industry, while just 33% remain in academia. In STEM fields, that number is even higher. Over half of Ph.D.s in science and engineering fields enter industry, and for engineers, it's closer to 79%. These shifts aren't just preferences—they reflect evolving professional ambitions.
And there's a new variable reshaping the Ph.D. talent pool: government layoffs.
Recent cuts in federal agencies have displaced over 51,000 federal workers. The result is a wave of highly trained Ph.D. researchers with policy insight, scientific rigor, and real-world experience entering the private job market. However, future supply of researchers may be a risk. Research universities (where most Ph.Ds are trained) rely on government grants and have had to scale back due to federal cuts, meaning less funds for Ph.D. students.
For employers, this is a talent acquisition opportunity hiding in plain sight. These professionals bring expertise in data analysis, project management, and scientific reasoning while working within tight budgets (i.e. government). These are skills that are increasingly vital as companies across industries seek to become more innovative and tech-forward. Whether in product design, Research & Development (R&D), sustainability, or strategy, Ph.D. holders can help companies not just compete, but innovate.
Yet too often, Ph.D. applicants are dismissed as 'too academic' or 'overqualified.' This stems from outdated assumptions and an incomplete understanding of what Ph.D. training entails. Yes, Ph.D.s are highly educated—but many also bring real-world experience: managing budgets, writing grants, collaborating across institutions, and mentoring diverse teams. These are not your thought-of ivory tower theorists; they are applied thinkers ready to drive change.
There's another aspect worth noting. Ph.D. pathways are difficult to access, especially for students without generational wealth or academic lineage. While federal numbers on graduate completion are limited, some research purports that only 56% of Ph.D. students actually complete their programs.Only 3% of first-generation undergraduate students ever enroll in a Ph.D. program. That's a missed opportunity for both social mobility and corporate innovation.
To tap into this hidden talent, employers must take action. That means building or supporting recruitment pipelines—like the McNair Scholars Program, Científico Latino, The Ph.D. Project, and Leadership Brainery. These initiatives are working to ensure that students from even the most challenging backgrounds can become the next generation of knowledge creators and innovators.
If innovation is the lifeblood of 21st-century business, then Ph.D. talent is part of the circulatory system. These individuals know how to ask the right questions and pursue rigorous answers, skills that go far beyond academic settings. Companies that recognize and embrace this kind of thinking will be better positioned to lead in an increasingly complex and competitive world.
So the next time a résumé crosses your desk bearing the letters 'Ph.D.,' don't ask whether the candidate is overqualified. Ask whether your company is ready to think bigger.
Help us widen the pipeline. Support Leadership Brainery in creating equitable pathways to graduate education. Donate today! Interested in engaging with us or have an idea for a future topic? Submit this brief form.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Associated Press
4 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Trump narrows Fed chair candidates to four, excluding Treasury Secretary Bessent
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump said Tuesday that he's whittled down his list of potential Federal Reserve chair candidates to four as he considers a successor to Jerome Powell — a choice that could reset the path of the U.S. economy. Asked on CNBC's 'Squawk Box' for a future replacement to Powell, Trump named Kevin Hassett, director of the National Economic Council, and Kevin Warsh, a former member of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors. 'I think Kevin and Kevin, both Kevins, are very good,' Trump said during an interview on CNBC's 'Squawk Box.' He said two other people were also under consideration, but Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent is not among them. 'I love Scott, but he wants to stay where he is,' Trump said. He did not name his other two top candidates but used the opportunity to disparage Powell, whom he has dubbed 'too late' in cutting interest rates. The news that Trump plans to make a decision on the Fed chair 'soon' comes as the Republican president has been highly critical of current Powell, whose term ends in May 2026. Trump recently floated having the Fed's board of governors take full control of the U.S. central bank from Powell, whom he has relentlessly pressured to cut short-term interest rates in ways that raise questions about whether the Fed can remain free from White House politicking. Trump has openly mused about whether to remove Powell before his tenure as chair ends, but he's held off on dismissing the Fed chair after a recent Supreme Court ruling suggested he could only do so for cause rather than out of policy disagreements. The president has put pressure on Powell by claiming he mismanaged the Fed's $2.5 billion renovation project, but he's also said that he's 'highly unlikely' to fire Powell. One of the Fed's governors, Adriana Kugler, made a surprise announcement last Friday that she would be stepping away from her role. That created an opening for Trump, who called her departure 'a pleasant surprise,' to name a new Fed governor. Trump told CNBC it's 'a possibility' that his pick to replace Kugler could also be his choice to replace Powell. Here's what to know about the two known candidates: Kevin Hassett Hassett, director of the White House National Economic Council, has been supportive of the president's agenda — from his advocacy for income tax cuts and tariffs to his support of the recent firing of BLS Commissioner Erika McEntarfer. Hassett served in the first Trump administration as chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers. He has a doctoral degree in economics from the University of Pennsylvania and worked at the right-leaning American Enterprise Institute before joining the Trump White House in 2017. As part of Hassett's farewell announcement in 2019, Trump called him a 'true friend' who did a 'great job.' Hassett became a fellow at the Hoover Institution, which is located at Stanford University. He later returned to the administration to help deal with the pandemic. On CNBC on Monday, Hassett said 'all over the U.S. government, there have been people who have been resisting Trump everywhere they can.' Kevin Warsh A former Fed governor who stepped down in 2011, Warsh is currently a fellow at the Hoover Institution. He has been supportive of cutting interest rates, a key goal of Trump's. 'The president's right to be frustrated with Jay Powell and the Federal Reserve,' Warsh said on Fox News' 'Sunday Morning Futures' last month. Warsh has been increasingly critical of Powell's Federal Reserve and in July, on CNBC, called for sweeping changes on how the Fed conducts business as well as a new Treasury-Fed accord 'like we did in 1951, after another period where we built up our nation's debt and we were stuck with a central bank that was working at cross purposes with the Treasury.' He said the Fed's 'hesitancy to cut rates, I think, is actually quite a mark against them.' 'The specter of the miss they made on inflation' after the pandemic, he said, 'it has stuck with them. So one of the reasons why the president, I think, is right to be pushing the Fed publicly is we need regime change in the conduct of policy.' 'He's very highly thought of,' Trump said in June when asked directly about Warsh. ___ Associated Press writers Josh Boak and Christopher Rugaber in Washington contributed to this report.
CBS News
4 minutes ago
- CBS News
Denver Board Of Ethics investigating flight prices at Denver International Airport
Denver's independent Board of Ethics is investigating the purchase of business and first-class tickets this past April for nine Denver International Airport executives to fly to a conference in Madrid, according to three sources aware of the ongoing investigation. The probe was sparked by a CBS News Colorado investigation in May that revealed the airport spent as much as $19,000 for one of its executives to fly to the three-day conference. Another ticket cost about $16,000. All of the executives flew either business class or first class to the conference and back to Denver. "Our policy allows us to do that," said Denver International Airport CEO Phil Washington. Travel websites showed round-trip tickets from Denver to Madrid cost as little as $1,300, and upgraded seats in premium economy sold for about $3,000. "Those costs may seem high," said Washington, but, he said, "they are an investment in our people. We sent who we sent, and they are going to pay dividends as we build out this infrastructure." But the spending elicited widespread criticism, which made its way to the Board of Ethics, according to CBS Colorado sources, who said the board was querying whether the spending amounted to using public money for private gain. Lori Weiser, the executive director for the Board of Ethics, said she could not comment on any board investigations. "The Denver Code of Ethics prohibits public disclosure of any complaint that has been received," wrote Weiser, "until it passes through a screening process, and an investigation process, if the Board requests investigation." In 2024, the board received 78 cases and issued 13 advisory opinions. Washington did not provide any comment about the ethics investigation. His own employees raised ethical concerns about the trip, saying it created a "rift" between executives and lower-level employees. The CBS Colorado report prompted Washington and his staff to reevaluate airport employees' travel policy. On Aug. 1, the airport completed an updated travel policy that addressed some of the issues spotlighted in the original CBS Colorado investigation. A spokesperson for Washington said he "doesn't have anything to add" regarding the new travel policy. The total cost of the Madrid trip was about $165,000 and was paid for out of Denver International Airport revenues, which are derived from what passengers pay for concessions, parking fees, rental car revenues, and other user fees.
CBS News
4 minutes ago
- CBS News
Trump administration officially ends "5 things" emails for federal employees
Washington — The federal agency that asked government workers to document five things they accomplished over the past week has officially ended the practice, which was initiated by Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency. Scott Kupor, the director of the Office of Personnel Management, said in a statement that the office communicated with human resources leads at federal agencies that it would no longer "manage the five things process nor utilize it internally." "At OPM, we believe that managers are accountable to staying informed about what their team members are working on and have many other existing tools to do so," Kupor said. In February, federal workers received an email instructing them to document five things they accomplished in the past week, while Musk, who at the time helmed the Department of Government Efficiency, said those who didn't reply would risk losing their jobs. "Failure to respond will be taken as a resignation," Musk wrote in a post on X at the time. He added in a follow-up post that "the bar is very low here," saying it should take less than five minutes to write. The emails were part of an initiative to cut down the size of the federal civilian workforce. But multiple agencies told workers to ignore the request from the start, and OPM told agency heads to use their discretion when determining how they would handle the directive. In May, the Defense Department formally ended the requirement for civilians, and many other agencies have ended the practice or were handling it internally. Musk left his role as a "special government employee" in May.
