By Christopher Keyes

In part I, I shared my thoughts on how to determine what you actually want out of your first job search. Here I’ll focus on specific things I did, or pieces of advice I received, that I found especially useful leading up to my first academic job search, as well as some thoughts on how I might do things differently next time.

Seeking advice

My PhD supervisor often suggested that I "ask lots of people questions and take the average of their responses." I was fortunate that he gave me plenty of quality advice himself, but getting a variety of opinions was really helpful especially around job hunting season. Here are a few tidbits that I heard several times over, from multiple faculty:

• Many said the first thing they do when reading a job application is to look up a candidate's website. One (rather senior) individual wouldn't even look at a candidate who didn't have a website.

• Your research statement is going to be read by a hiring committee which typically includes people not in your specialized subfield, so you should make it more accessible than you might think.

• Your ability to give a good talk is sometimes used as a proxy for your teaching ability.

• Several faculty on hiring committees told me they don't carefully read cover letters.

• Several faculty on hiring committees insisted the cover letter is one of the most important parts of the application!

Sometimes the advice I got was conflicting. It seemed that the answers depend a lot on the person, role, and institution, but hearing the same suggestions from lots of different people helped me feel confident that those things are likely to be valued by hiring committees across the board. When opinions diverge, you start to get at what different people and institutions really value in the hiring process.

On this point, getting a variety of opinions is especially important when looking to transition between industries or different types of positions and institutions. If you have only attended large public research universities, but you want to teach at a small liberal arts college, you would be well served to seek out contacts at those places to get an idea of what they're looking for in an applicant, in case it is different from what you hear from people at your home institution.

Yet another great resource is the people a couple years ahead of you in graduate school, since the process is more fresh to them. Soon, they might even be on the other side of the process, serving on a hiring committee of their own, willing to spill all the secrets about how these decisions actually get made. Reach out and ask what worked for them, and what they would do differently, knowing what they now know!

Some practicalities

Practice summarizing your work

When it came to actually writing my application materials - specifically the research statement - the most useful instruction I received was to write a one page summary for every research project I had worked on. The idea is that by writing when the project is fresh in your mind, you can later slot this right into your research statement, thereby avoiding the need to wrack your brain trying to remember the details of that old project from three summers ago when you were just starting your PhD.

I heeded this advice, and it worked so well for me that I still do it to this day! Every time I finish a project (about the stage I’m ready to give talks or post to the Arxiv) I write and save a one page summary that motivates the problem, states the main results, and gives a bare minimum account of the proof idea and key applications. While it was still a challenge to weave these together into a unified narrative, it was far easier than it would have been to start from scratch. As a secondary benefit, this exercise helped me to practice the skill of summarizing complex, technical ideas and quickly putting them into context, which you'll find useful in whatever career you choose.

Next time, I’ll try to do the same thing for my teaching activities: after each semester, I think it will help to reflect on what I learned and write down some things I did well and where I could improve, with illustrative examples while they’re fresh in my mind. Even better, I’ll ask a faculty mentor to attend my class and share their feedback. Then when it's time to sit down to write a teaching statement, I’ll have had some of it already written, along with specific actions I took that demonstrate steps I took to become a better instructor.

Uploading reference letters

One frustrating part of the actual application process is arranging for your reference letters to be sent on your behalf. This is easy for postings submitted through MathJobs, but for positions hosted elsewhere (looking at you, UC system) you may need to arrange for your letter writers to upload each separately. Even if you are tremendously organized, if you plan to send a lot of applications outside of MathJobs this can be a challenge, and it assumes you can rely on 3-5 stretched-thin academics to be equally organized, while they are likely writing similar letters for their other students.

I submitted enough applications outside of MathJobs that it was worth it to me to spend $50 on Interfolio's Dossier service (not a sponsor). It allowed me to have my references upload their letters to a website once. They then gave me an email address which I could supply on a job application that automatically sends the letter, without the letter writer having to do it each time. The service looks to cost $60 now, but it really cut down on the number of deadlines that my recommenders and I had to stay on top of, so I would use it again.

Embracing uncertainty

The academic hiring process can be opaque and arbitrary, with little in the way of communication or feedback for applicants. Many postdoc positions don’t even hold interviews, so applicants can be left waiting by the proverbial phone for months, or hear nothing at all. It's not uncommon for positions to be advertised as open to all specializations, but in reality one research group or another has priority in the hiring decision. I personally had what I thought was a solid interview at JMM, only to be told at the very end that while I seemed like a great fit, they really needed to hire an analyst. Experiences like this can be incredibly frustrating, making it feel as though the odds are stacked against you despite your qualifications and preparation.

My advice to my past self—and to anyone going through this process—is to embrace this inherent randomness and resist the urge to hyperfocus on the search itself. Instead, take pride in your work that has brought you to this point. You've already done the heavy lifting: conducting original research, teaching courses, tackling programming projects, and honing your diverse set of skills as a PhD student. These accomplishments are what truly matter, the foundation of your professional value, and what will ultimately pave the way to your next opportunity.

Chris Keyes is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow at King’s College London, studying number theory. He received his PhD in 2023 from Emory University.