Xref: utzoo soc.college:5477 comp.edu:3350 misc.jobs.misc:7324
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!nitrex!rbl
From: rbl@nitrex.UUCP ( Dr. Robin Lake )
Newsgroups: soc.college,comp.edu,misc.jobs.misc
Subject: Re: Academia vs. Industry (for CS PhDs)
Message-ID: <459@nitrex.UUCP>
Date: 16 Jul 90 14:27:23 GMT
References: <9518@hacgate.UUCP>
Reply-To: rbl@nitrex.UUCP (Robin Lake)
Organization: BP Research International - Research Center Warrensville,  Cleveland, OH
Lines: 121

In article <9518@hacgate.UUCP> yamauchi@aic.hrl.hac.com writes:
| >
| >	I'd like to start a thread on what is undoubtedly one of the
| >most often asked questions in grad school (at least in CS) -- "Are you
| >planning to go into academia or industry?"  To narrow this question
| >down to a manageable size, by "academia" I mean a tenure-track
| >position at a good research university and by "industry" I mean a
| >position as a researcher at a top industrial lab.
| >
| >	My perceptions are that the primary advantages of academia
| >over industry are that you have complete freedom to decide what you
| >want to research and that you are your own boss.  The primary
| >disadvantages seem to be that you spend an inordinate amount of time
| >chasing grant money and that you have to teach (which may not be a
| >disadvantage to everyone).
| >
| >	Industrial positions seem to vary widely depending on the
| >company and the lab.  At the best labs, you may have almost as much
| >freedom as those in academia (although you still have a boss).  On the
| >other hand, at some labs this freedom may go hand-in-hand with the
| >need for chasing grants.
| >
| >	Both universities and industrial labs tend to be well-equipped
| >and to pay competitve salaries, so these areas don't seem to present
| >major differences.
| >
| >	Another issue is politics.  While I've never been in a very
| >bad political situation, I've heard horror stories from grad students
| >and professors about the level of internal politics at some
| >universities.  Of course, I'm sure internal politics also exists to a
| >certain degree in industrial labs -- but I'd be curious as to whether
| >people think it tends to be worse in academia.  Conversely, it seems
| >as though industrial labs may be more affected by external politics
| >(defense R&D cuts, corporate restructuring, etc.).
| >
| >	I'm currently a PhD student in CS at the University of
| >Rochester (working at Hughes over the summer), and my perceptions are
| >based on 2 years of grad school, 4 years of undergrad (Math/CS at
| >CMU), and 2 summers working in industry, so clearly, I've had more
| >experience doing research in the "academia" side.  I'd be interested
| >to hear whether others (grad students/professors/researchers/etc.)
| >have similar perceptions.
| >
| >______________________________________________________________________________
| >
| >Brian Yamauchi                          Hughes Research Laboratories
| >yamauchi@aic.hrl.hac.com                Artificial Intelligence Center
| >______________________________________________________________________________


I've seen both sides of the fence.  12 years in academia and 8 years in
industry.  My Humble Opinions follow:

Politics:  They are bad on both sides of the fence when resources are scarce.
You are probably more blessed by better senior management in industry than
in academia, where one can watch university presidents and passive boards
of trustees quickly run an institution into the ground.  Stockholders would
not stand for such non-feasance!  Politics of funding, space, staff and
time for research are about equivalent.

Freedom:  You must market your research ideas on both sides of the fence.  The
time scales may be different; the "clients" may be different.  In both cases,
the most certain funding is where you provide a needed service to clients and
bootleg the research onto the service function.  Used to be in industry we
had "15%" of our time for "personal research", which became "15% for personal
research and professional development", which became "0%" for personal 
research (that is unspecified, unapproved research) and "fight for" professional
development support.  This is not a complaint!  I understand the need for
"justification" and "financial control".  It is reported that a new "culture"
is coming down from above that will delegate more responsibility and authority.

Fact of life:  If you don't produce something that your institution perceives
as valuable, you won't last as long as you may like to last.  There are
precious few institutions where teaching actually counts, unless it raises
a LOT of money.  Continuing sponsored research and publication in peer-
reviewed journals counts.  Often, your "management" won't be able to tell
the quality of your research work nor the quality of your papers  --- therefore
scientific publications are full of work of questionable quality and slight
reworkings of the same ten dog experiments.....  perhaps more papers than
experiments!  Don't set your standards too high!

In industry, given today's competitive world, you will still need to justify
your existance.  Dollars saved, products invented/patented/licensed/marketed,
services rendered.  And watch out for divestiture of the business/market-segment
you are involved with.

Time:  There is administriva on both sides of the fence.  Reporting can
easily consume 30% of a week's work in industry.  The same effort may be
necessary to propose and report on project efforts when you are in an R&D
lab that requires "business unit" support each year.  Whether it is grant
writing in adcademia or project proposals to meet business needs in industry,
the time sink is still there.  There may be differences in the dynamics.  If
a business needs something quickly, it will have funding quickly.  If you
deal with grant proposals, you may find much longer waits.

Capital Equipment.:  MUCH easier to come by in industry.  If you need  expensive
hardware to do your work, it is much easier to acquire in industry.  Lab
space may be just as tight as in academia, but capital dollars still seem to
flow.

Pay:  Make no mistake.  Industry salaries are typically FAR better than
in academia.  Vacation policies may be better in academia, depending upon
how tough a negotiator you are when you have been accepted for a job in 
industry.  Health care benefits in industry are eroding quickly.

Tests:  How many signatures does it take to order a roll of toilet paper?
(I know you won't be ordering your own toilet paper, it is just that you
would still need the signatures....)
How many peers have stayed/left in the past decade?  When things get "tight",
the more talented who are not "married" to a geographic area tend to vote with
their feet.
How many major management reorganizations have occured in the past 5 years?
(Stability may be as valuable as funding in doing productive research.)
Do your personal computing needs conflict with the prevailing computing
culture?  (Ever try to promote UNIX in a VMS culture?)

NOTE:  I AM VERY HAPPY IN INDUSTRY!  THE COMMENTS ABOVE DO NOT REFLECT UPON
MY EMPLOYER --- it is just what I typically advise my former graduate students.
Each year I visit at least one university campus and try to keep my 
perspective --- the grass is equally as green on both sides, just shaded
a bit differently.