Security studies question: Polsci or Public Policy PhD?

[graduatingsoon]

I'm wondering if someone might be able to provide advice about what programs to look at if I'm hoping to pursue a career related to defense planning and spending. I'm especially interested in focusing on U.S. military-industry interactions.

Would a phd in political science at somewhere like MIT make sense, or should I be looking at public policy phd programs? Would an mba/ma combo be out of the question if I'm more interested in non-profit or government work than staying strictly within academia? Any thoughts (especially suggestions about specific programs and individuals to look at) would be MUCH appreciated!

[Aubstopper]

some universities have actual security studies programs like GWU, SAIS (strategic studies), and Georgetown....

Georgetown even has a dual MA/PhD in Security Studies/Government...SAIS also has a PhD program in Strategic Studies, although they only take a few people a year.

[polisciphd]

I can speak from experience here, having worked in the policy world, both for thinktanks and for the government. If you want to work in D.C., then an MA in security studies from any of the APSIA schools would be fine. Just be aware that there are a lot of people in the district who have the same degree, so the pool of applicants is going to be high. That being said, there are ways to hedge your bets. If you can manage to get an internship while you are in school were you can get a security clearance BEFORE YOU GRADUATE, then you should have no problem finding a job. There are defense budget jobs all over DC (check out the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Analysis). The founder, and my former professor at GW, Gordon Adams, is a specialist on the Defense Budget, is now at American Univ., so you should look there.

As far as getting a Ph.D. goes, while many people who work in DC thinktanks have poli sci phds, most of them got them 20+ years ago, when the poli sci field was much different. I think that it was probably easier to make that switch. This is particularly true if you are in a program that is quant oriented, most gov. people in DC could care less about your quantitative model, they just want you to tell them the answer (whether you have scientific proof is a secondary, well more like 10th, concern). Even at MIT, who has an actual security focus, you still have to learn Security Theory, not just its specific application.

For a Public Policy Ph.D., you need to be careful and figure out if it is just the US military that you want to focus on, if this is the case, then you should be fine doing a policy Ph.D., especially if you have no interest in teaching. If you want to do more internationally focused work, then SAIS (really good for economically focused wor) or the Fletcher School (their law and diplomacy ph.d.) would be the way to go in my opinion.

[natofone]

If you are planning to pursue a career outside of academia then you should avoid the political science PhD. You won't even get into a program if you put that on your statement of purpose.

A public policy PhD is a better option because it'll only take you 4 years (as opposed to 5-7 for political science) and you can write your dissertation on a very real-world, policy-oriented topic. The nice thing about many public policy programs is that you can often start off with an MA in PP and then transition into a public policy PhD program. I think the MA option might be the best place to start at this point.

When I did my MA (in IR), our advisers made it very clear to us that the leap between BA to MA was huge, but that the leap from MA to PHD wasn't going to make a huge difference in terms of career trajectory.

[dysmetria]

Based on your specific interests, you should definitely look into the PhD program at the RAND Corporation. It's very quant-heavy, but students get through quickly and can command considerable salaries upon graduation. "defense planning and spending" is precisely what they do.

[gradster]

If you don't want to be an academic there is no point doing a PhD. Get a masters or a policy degree.

[dysmetria]

If you don't want to be an academic there is no point doing a PhD. Get a masters or a policy degree.

You know, the people who usually say this are those who have never been in policymaking jobs where the benefits of an academic PhD over a policy degree are quite obvious.

[natofone]

You know, the people who usually say this are those who have never been in policymaking jobs where the benefits of an academic PhD over a policy degree are quite obvious.

Do those benefits outweigh the opportunity costs of being outside of policy work for 5-7 years to finish a PhD? It seems to me like a MPP or MA in security/IR plus five years of work would at least balance out any possible benefits of an academic (i.e. political science) PhD. A three to four year public policy PhD at a top 5 program, maybe...but political science? Plus, you can make a few hundred grand during the time that PhD folks kill themselves writing their dissertation, destroy their social life, and eat spaghetti on 20k/year stipends.

[catchermiscount]

Wait, we get spaghetti?

[natofone]

Yes, my house at 8pm tonight.

[plisar]

I love spaghetti. Not only is it delicious, but it is truly a meal of the high class!

[adaptations]

I like food - I'm in!

[dysmetria]

Do those benefits outweigh the opportunity costs of being outside of policy work for 5-7 years to finish a PhD? It seems to me like a MPP or MA in security/IR plus five years of work would at least balance out any possible benefits of an academic (i.e. political science) PhD. A three to four year public policy PhD at a top 5 program, maybe...but political science? Plus, you can make a few hundred grand during the time that PhD folks kill themselves writing their dissertation, destroy their social life, and eat spaghetti on 20k/year stipends.

Opportunity costs are specific to the individual but unless you have been on both sides, I don't really think you can say. For someone willing to try this route, the opportunity costs are obviously lower the closer one is to undergrad.

[natofone]

Maybe. I recently finished an MA from a security-oriented IR program where we met with security practitioners from think tanks, govt agencies, security agencies, etc. and they very consistently said that a PhD will not offer as much in return as it costs. They said that the MA or MPP is definitely worth the effort, but that the leap from policy-oriented MA to PhD wouldn't result in that much of a change in career trajectory.

All of this being said, the person in question can usually leave the program after receiving their MA in political science and pursue a career in the security sector, so it isn't like they're locked into this forever. Still, I'd prefer the quant-heavy training of a two year MPP/MA over a highly theoretical political science PhD. It seems like there are very different skill sets involved with each option and the MA/MPP option is more geared towards succeeding in an applied security environment.