I wish I had known this earlier in my job search. It's so easy to confuse the two, especially when transitioning from academia to industry.

This video really helped clarify the difference between a resume and a CV. I always thought they were interchangeable, but now I see how important it is to know the distinction.

Do you think using tools like ResuBot to create a resume is better than just using Google Docs? I feel like having a professional format could make a difference.

Great explanation. It's surprising how many people still mix these up. I guess it really does matter in the job market.

Thanks for breaking this down. I always thought a CV was just a longer resume, but I see now how specific each one is to different career paths.

Important question for all students all over the world🌏 who are about to enter university as undergraduates. How do human👥 civilizations evolve from Middle Dark Ages to Industrial🏭 Age and then onto Modern 20th and 21st century? Answering this question completely will help you to realize😃 the critical and crucial connection between a PhD📜 (in STEM 🧬📡field) and industry🏭. "From where does the industry🏭 comes from?" Try answering it completely and verbally and on the spot under 10 seconds⏳.

Thanks for your research!

I disagree. From my experience technical people have pissing contests and waste time and money not delivering.

You will -- until the first paycheck comes in and you realize that your boss can't call you at 2am or on the weekend and get you to come back to the lab.

Tried the app that you mentioned and it feels like just another Facebook copy the first thing I see is a random guy from Canada who doesn't even have a profile face currently all I'm seeing is remote work from home scams jobs on that app

Thanks so much l would like a lob

I wonder If you guys from TurningScience are still around 5 years later on July 2024? I would really like to get some advice and help.

I am going to graduate with Ph.D. degree in chemistry soon. Yesterday, I bought this book. Now, I am reading 😊

Wrong, this tells me you have not been in industry long enough. In industry you have no work life balance. Academia is so much more balanced.

Honestly what drives me more to the industry side is the fact that I won't have to grind those 10-15 years before finally getting tenure, getting my first good paying job until my 30's sounds like a lot to me

I have a master's degree in a traditional science field, namely analytical chemistry. My PhD that I'n currently finishing up is in chemistry education research, which I pursued because I thought I wanted a job in a academia. But after seeing all of the politics in academia and the chance for faster promotion in industry, I am now exclusively applying for industry positions. I've advertised my education research experience as experience in creating lab procedures for undergraduates and being a fast learner of new techniques myself, which is true. I've got some job interviews coming up, so I think I'll continue to position myself as someone with a growth mindset and a quick learner even if I lack some of the more technical skills of a traditional bench PhD chemist.

In my field, people in academia have more work-life balance. In industry you are required to be in the office for the 8 hours a day even if you are not working on anything. The only edge industry has on academia is money. I think if your pursuit is money, go to industry.

I can't thank you enough for this video. I'm binge-watching videos about people complaining about phd and post doc since I want to do a research job myself. I'm ok with the difficulties and the strugles but none of those people have worked in the industry like I want and I definitely needed your point of view. So, again, thank you sir, you maybe have saved me a lot of time loss.

I know people who wanted a career in the biotech industry that did a postdoc simply because a postdoc allowed them to gain techniques and skills that would allow them to get their preferred job. Most graduate students lack the critical knowledge to pick their the techniques and question they are most interesting to them and highly desirable for potential employees. After a couple of years of doing a postdoc they had no problem finding a job. I know of no faculty member that thinks an industry is a bad outcome. I know for a fact that in evaluating graduate programs both NIH and NSF consider an industry job is a good outcome.

Thanks for the video!

LOL maybe mangers should get off there high horse and listen to PhDs, they might learn something.

Great information! Thanks Sir

Man are u kidding or what? Why should give a shit about what other people would think of me if i do a postdoc!!! I dont care about them. I just wanna do what i like as simple as that. Plus a postdoc in Australia for example is a much better opportunity than your industry. They give you money and time and experience. You like to be a slave for a company that's your choice

Also don't forget that most academics are narcissists and wouldn't even know the best advice to give as they cannot really think out of the closed environment of academic food chain

Thank you for this video! I love pure and abstract science and hate trying to find applications compared to it so I think academia is for me. I am just afraid of having enough money to survive and help my parents.

Also a lot of jobs are also useless.

The negative view of finding fault with an idea is the problem. Academics are uncomfortable by training with ambiguity. This leads to the charges brought forward at the beginning of this video. 80 percent solutions are generally what's required in industry. I've been in meetings with PhDs where they tell everyone what's wrong with there ideas without suggesting anything at all that may solve the problem. It left everyone wondering, "so what are we supposed to do?" In the end, everyone eventually ignored everything this person had to say, implementing those ideas and the program moved forward without them contributing much of anything other then criticisms.

Education creates pseudo intellectuals. Having degrees, does not make you “smart.” It makes you “familiar” with certain specifics. A common issue with people who get a masters degree of above is that they do often surmise intellectually superiority. Believe me, there are plenty of “idiot doctors.” Education and intelligent is not synonymous.

Will you regret looking like Lyle Lovett?

In other words: 90% of industry managers are worthless and likely "stoopid" as well. You'll have to take my PhD in physics out of my cold, dead hand.

college people are to fixed and can not admit that something is wrong or needs to be changed. "i went to college" or "we just did not do it correctly" i get allot from the college people. the trades and licences guys are more of a "lets fix it", lets try this, and way more open to changing something. they don't take it personally...

Very accurate. Paralysis by analysis. I get annoyed when I keep hearing people complain about things, but never offer reasonable solutions.

A huge % of phds are worthless because their phd is in a worthless pseudofield. Then another % of phds are worthless from real fields because they’re box tickers. They’re going through the motions in terms of credentials looking for a path to success. I feel like your video is aimed at the remaining % of people with phds who have talent and drive, but need some direction at how to function in business.

PhD (Unlike German 'Doktor' which since 1997 = M.E, from Alabama college) gentry are over-qualified for the menial, ring-kissing, shit-jobs, dealing with morons, undocumented situations and an specified whims.

What you are describing is exactly the environment that lacks a priori knowledge. The collective illusion of 'inventing together+workign as a team' is exactly the short-sighted consensus aimed at limited knowledge horizons or each participant. By 'brainstorming' in fact, you are making sure you will NOT have top 10% or even top 20% solution. This passes, as modern economy is revolving about replaceable technology guy and forged contracts plus hostile takeovers and such. In technology-driven exonomy which usually exists after or during world war, where resources matter, things are completely opposite. Things look as they are because your entire life you were making a career in declining western society.

Bold of you to assume I care what companies think of me. I only care about how I see myself. No one else is going to see the effort stress I go thru but me.

PHD is not something you are. PHD is something you have done. Which may, but most likely will not align with the needs of the business you are applying to.

I'm 3 years into industry (after a PhD) and can confirm it is 100% teamwork, and everything in this video is true.

Coz they are Permanent Head Damaged, PhD

It might help after, but how will it help to get job?

How about why PhDs don't wanna be hired by industry? I am one. In fact I don't want to be employed by Academia either. I am not built to be a follower, I have to do my own thing, which I am doing. No patience to "position yourself" like a horse etc into a harness and slowly bend over. Play by their rules because they own you now, you are hostage of your mortgage and credit. They can now make you act like they want to. F that

It's note the PhD that's useless, often it's just that individual who cannot apply that knowledge in the real world!

Terrible advice. I worked 40 years as an industry consultant doing the opposite. Do what you are good at. 1) Be the expert in your field (not in others) 2) Remove faults and problems in projects before they are implemented 3) Make the decision when the risks are documented and accepted Yes, this works exceptionally well in teams, big or small.

Holy smokes. I forgot to get a B.S. Then a M.S. Then a PhD. Then a couple of Post Docs. Missed out on writing dozens of research papers. But I did get turned down by the Lab Director at an IBM Research Lab for a job transfer, after a face to face meeting. He was an empty suit. I was not. His latest project failed. Mine did not. My PhD experience. They are not technically current. They alter data to fit their recommendations.

I rather Pharma companies and health industries wouldn't just rush a product with "oh we'll fix it when it comes up" attitude.

really true

Shouldn't there be a golden middle? It's the job of management to NOTICE and nurture something that's valuable. What if the management consists of greedy crass dumba.ses? Then what?? What if managers want to just churn out a product that is potentially dangerous for the environment or people's health directly? I think it's extremely important for the players involved not to confuse the high pursuit of ethical solutions or even simply better ethical solutions with just academic pedanticism.

wow, this video has a vietnamese subtitle in it. Amazing for a channel only has 4.6k view. Also I appreciate the info in the vid so much. Subbed.

yes

A friend of mine has a family member working in the hiring dept at intel and and he told me they often don't hire bachelor graduates and above. The reasons being is that in the past they have found they often demand more pay for the same work as honours graduates, they see themselves as overqualified for work and often have an entitled attitudes refusing to do work they see as beneath them, even when just starting out and with zero previous work experience.