PhD graduates’ appraisals of work demands: challenging, hindering, and not very threatening

ABSTRACT

PhD graduates are often recruited for positions that entail various work demands. Based on theoretical models of work demands, PhD graduates can appraise these demands in three main ways: as challenges, hindrances, or threats. The more aware they are of the skills they developed in their doctoral program, the more likely they are to appraise demands as challenges or hindrances, and the less likely they are to appraise them as threats. However, past studies have shown that PhD graduates report low awareness of their skills, which may lead to high threat appraisal. We conducted semi-directive interviews with 16 PhD graduates from France to examine their appraisal of work demands. We investigated four work demands: important responsibilities, heavy workload, competitive work environment, and challenging work environment. Most participants appraised these demands either as challenges or hindrances. Although some participants reported a low awareness of specific skills (e.g. project management), they still expressed confidence in their ability to handle the demands, leading to low threat appraisal. This was largely due to awareness of transferable skills (e.g. the abilities to learn and adapt), supporting their adaptability to demanding contexts. However, participants rarely attributed these skills to their doctoral experience, which questions how they perceive the benefits of their doctoral program. Moreover, specific difficulties may arise for certain groups (e.g. women, international students) and work demands (i.e. non-constructive criticism).

KEYWORDS:

• Doctoral education
• work demands
• cognitive appraisal
• challenge
• threat

Acknowledgments

We wish to thank the participants for their contributions, and Peter Boddy for his comments on an initial version of the manuscript.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Ethical statement

Ethical review and approval were not required for this study in accordance with French legislation and institutional requirements on research involving human participants. Written or oral informed consent was collected from all participants.