I took a second postdoc because I didn’t know what else to do with my degree.
That’s the honest version of how it happened. My research career was not going well, and I did not have a clear path to a faculty position. But staying felt safer than facing the question of what came next. I wasted two years that way.
If that sounds familiar, this newsletter is for you.
Most PhDs leaving academia default to industry research. Not because it’s the best fit, but because it’s the only exit they can see from inside the lab. The job titles are recognizable, the work feels adjacent to what they already know, and it requires the least reimagining of their identity.
The problem is that familiarity makes it the most crowded path out. And for a lot of PhDs, it’s also not the most aligned with what they actually enjoyed about academic life.
Turns out, there are many other options. Better paid in some cases and less competitive in others. And they can be more connected to the parts of the work you actually looked forward to. You just can’t see them from inside a lab.
Here’s the map.
The Default: Industry Research
What it involves: bench or translational research in biotech, pharma, or medical devices. Similar to academic research but with clearer timelines, defined deliverables, and no publish-or-perish pressure.
Why your PhD is an asset: you can do the work. The technical skills transfer directly and hiring managers know it.
The caveat: this is the most competitive path precisely because it’s everyone’s first thought. A PhD applying for an industry research role is competing with every other PhD who couldn’t answer the question “what else could I do?” It’s a legitimate path, but just go in with realistic expectations about the competition, and know that “scientist” roles at large pharma companies can feel more constrained than academia in ways people don’t anticipate.
Underrated: Regulatory Affairs
What it involves: ensuring that drugs, biologics, and medical devices meet the requirements of regulatory agencies like the FDA and EMA. Writing and reviewing submission documents, navigating agency guidelines, and managing approval timelines.
Why your PhD is an asset: regulatory affairs is fundamentally a scientific communication job. You need to understand the science deeply enough to translate it into documents that satisfy regulators. A life sciences PhD gives you that foundation. Most people in this field came from research backgrounds.
The caveat: the work is detail-oriented and process-driven in a way that suits some personalities but not others. If you loved the creative, hypothesis-driven side of research, the procedural nature of regulatory work can feel constraining. If you liked the rigour and the precision, you’ll be right at home. Demand is strong and the field is undersupplied with qualified people, which is a good problem to have on your side.
My Path: Medical and Scientific Communications
What it involves: creating content to communicate complex science to specific audiences, such as healthcare professionals, patients, and industry stakeholders. Can include medical education, publications support, advisory board materials, and more. Available as both agency employment and freelance work.
Why your PhD is an asset: the ability to read a research manuscript, understand what matters, and translate it into clear, accurate content for a non-specialist audience is exactly what this field pays for. You’ve been doing a version of this in every talk you’ve given, every grant you’ve written, and every paper you’ve published.
The caveat: This is a field that rewards communication skills specifically. If writing was always the part of academic life you dreaded, this may not be the right fit. If it was the part you looked forward to, stay tuned. I’ll spend more time talking about this path in future newsletters.
Extroverts/Travelers: Medical Affairs and Medical Science Liaison roles
What it involves: serving as the scientific bridge between a pharmaceutical or biotech company and the external medical community, people like key opinion leaders, clinicians, and researchers. MSLs communicate clinical and scientific data, gather insights from the field, and support medical strategy. It’s a relationship-driven, externally facing role.
Why your PhD is an asset: the scientific credibility that comes with a doctorate matters here. MSLs are expected to hold their own in conversations with specialists, and a PhD signals that you can.
The caveat: MSL roles involves significant travel; often 50-70% of the time depending on the territory. That’s a dealbreaker for some people and a selling point for others. Know which one you are before you pursue it. The compensation is strong, but the lifestyle demands are real.
The Specific Personality: Consulting
What it involves: either joining a large consulting firm (McKinsey, BCG, Deloitte) on life sciences accounts, or working with a boutique agency that specialises in pharma or biotech strategy. Projects can vary widely: market access, competitive intelligence, commercial strategy, pipeline assessment, etc.
Why your PhD is an asset: the scientific depth you bring to business problems is the whole point. Consultants who can read a clinical dataset and translate the implications into strategic recommendations are valuable and not easy to find.
The caveat: this is the most difficult path on this list to enter from academia, and the lifestyle in large firms is demanding in ways that make a postdoc look manageable. Boutique agencies can be more accessible and more sustainable. If you are energized by variety, ambiguity, and client interaction, consulting can be great. If you preferred the depth of focusing on one problem for years, it may feel scattered.
Idealists: Science policy
What it involves: working at the intersection of scientific research and government. Examples include advising policymakers, working for funding agencies, staffing congressional offices, or joining advocacy organizations. The goal is translating science into decisions that affect research funding, public health, or technology regulation.
Why your PhD is an asset: scientific credibility in policy contexts is genuinely valued. The ability to communicate research findings to non-scientists, clearly and without oversimplification, is the core skill.
The caveat: this is the path academics romanticize more than they pursue. Entry-level positions are scarce, pay is often lower than other options on this list, and the route in is rarely straightforward. AAAS fellowships and similar programs are the most structured pathway, but they are competitive. If science policy genuinely interests you, pursue it, but know it is a mission-driven path, not a high-compensation one.
I didn’t know medical writing existed until I went looking. I wonder what’s on this list that you hadn’t considered before today.
You don’t have to know exactly where you’re going to start moving. Expanding the map is step one. The next step is figuring out which path actually fits who you are, not just which one is most visible from where you’re standing.