Research, PI, or “Real World” Application

[nickel28]

Is it better to pick a group based on:

1) the interest level of the research

2) how well you’ll think you’ll get along with the PI

or 

3) the “real world” application of the research ?

Ideally, you want all three, but which is the most important? Thank you in advanced! 

[fuzzylogician]

One imagines that it'd be relevant to know what your post-PhD goals are. Do you want a career in academia or in industry? Does the topic you study in grad school matter for a career in industry, if that's your choice?

From my perspective in academia, the topic you work on has some effect on your career path in the sense of what kinds of jobs you can apply for. It doesn't entirely box you in, if you are able to tell a good story about why you want to switch topics (in case you do), or if you cultivate side projects of the right kinds, but it does to some extent determine the natural path forward for you. Your advisor has a great impact in terms of helping you through while in school and in terms of connections and support after you graduate. Your advisor and group also have an impact on your wellbeing and mental health; it's hard to get up in the morning and go to a workplace you are unhappy in, and that's more likely to happen because of a personality mismatch than because of your research topic, assuming that it's at least in the ballpark of what you want. I personally would much prefer the better advisor fit than the better research question fit, if you ask me. 

[TakeruK]

I second fuzzy's comment that your PhD topic affects your career path and that it mostly affects the jobs you can apply for after graduation (at least in my field). The first postdoc position is often an extension of your PhD topic (e.g. a spin-off research question) because it's necessary in today's job market to publish early and often during postdoc. So you want to have something that you already know how to do (and maybe already halfway finished during grad school). Then, a lot of people in my field do a pivot during the second year of their postdoc. Their next postdoc (or faculty job) would include multiple research directions. And many new faculty start even more new lines of research once they are hired since now they can hire a bunch of postdocs and grad students to do the work (they "just" need to come up with the ideas!). Most faculty I know aren't doing the same research they did as a grad student, but research question choice will affect your near future.

In my opinion, I would value:

- advisor fit first

- then research interest fit

- then real world applications

Here's my reasoning: I'm passionate and interested in my area of research and the act of doing research, but I don't feel like I need to work on exactly X to be happy. So it's much easier to shift my interest than to change an advisor to work well with me (not really possible anyways!). The only aspect of research interest that matters to me is whether or not academia even wants people trained in this area. If there are only 10 people in the country that study that subfield, then I wouldn't pick it for my PhD since that will really limit your job choices. I picked a research area that is the new fad in my field.

As for real world applications, this isn't really important to me, personally, for choosing a PhD program. Being able to influence society and contribute to the world is very important to me though, but I don't see a need to do this through my research. Instead, I find other ways to be a productive member of society. I spend a lot of time doing outreach and education to local groups. And, if I really wanted to contribute good to the world, I would just leave academia and do something else. I'd get paid more, maybe have more free time, and be able to make more of a difference to the world.