MARIE CURIE RESEARCHERS AND
THEIR LONG-TERM CAREER
DEVELOPMENT: a comparative study
MARIE SKŁODOWSKA-CURIE ACTIONS’ 2014
Conference
Trento, 18 November 2014
Sara Gysen – GfK
1
Study context
Main objective
To collect and organise information
related to career development of Marie
Curie researchers, and to present a
comprehensive picture and a deep
analysis of the long-term career paths
after their Fellowship.
Survey of MC fellows
and control group
Direct interview
programme
Population of former fellows: researchers that
have completed their MCF five or more years ago
(i.e. under FP4, FP5 and FP6)
Bibliometric analysis
Operational objectives of the study
!  Mapping career paths (MC researchers)
!  Comparing the careers (MC and non-MC researchers)
!  Assess the extent of the correlation (MC outcomes and career outcomes)
!  Analyse the gender gap
2
Achieved Samples: profile of the respondents
Approximately 1,400
former Marie Curie
fellows who took part
in Marie Curie Actions
funded under the 4th,
5th and 6th Framework
Programmes for
Research and
Technological
Development
(1994-2006)
A control group
consisting of
approximately
1,500 EU
researchers has
been surveyed on
the same
dimensions
Demographics MC researchers
32%
female
80%
< 45
98%
doctorate
holders
years old
1. Natural sciences (75%)
2. Engineering and Technology
(12%)
3. Social sciences (6%)
24%
PhDs at top
100 university
59%
research
experience of
between 11-20 y
14%
Italian
13%
French
12%
Spanish
74%
12%
German
13%
Demographics control group
28%
female
49%
< 45
92%
doctorate
holders
years old
1. Natural sciences (65%)
2. Engineering and Technology
(15%)
3. Medical sciences (10%)
22%
PhDs at top
100 university
14%
30%
research
experience of
between 11-20 y
Italian
7%
French
EU15
8%
Spanish
72%
EU15
EU13
12%
3%
8%
48%
German
10%
4%
3%
11%
EU13
5%
Greek
4%
BRICS
4%
British
1%
US
40%
Other
8%
Other
Greek
British
Other
BRICS
US
Other
3
IMPACT ASSESSMENT
KEY FINDINGS
4
General analytical framework
Independent variables
Career
drivers
Demographic char.
Country
Educ. background
Sector
Dependent variables
Researcher
profile
Career
development
Discipline
Professional
output
Motivation
Type of MCF
Duration
Host profile
Knowledge transfer
MC
Experience
Employment
situation
Career enablers
Mobility effects
Short-term empl.
Continuity
Career speed
Family life issues
Publications
Patents / trade
Oth. sc. outputs
Access to funds
Title / responsib.
Status/ conditions
Employer ‘prestige’
Income
Satisfaction
5
Impact on Career Drivers (1)
Contribution of MC to Career ‘Drivers’
!  MCF had a comparatively more pervasive effect on career drivers
than other fellowships
Career Drivers
MC
Other
The quality of training / research supervision received
6.69
7.01
Having access to high quality research facilities and laboratories
7.78
7.19
A solid preparation on the primary subjects of research
6.34
6.41
The complementary skills and competences developed (team
working, leadership, project management etc.)
6.78
6.55
International mobility experience
8.43
7.90
Interdisciplinary / multidisciplinary skills
7.27
6.83
Productivity in terms of research output (e.g. publications, patents,
keynote papers…)
7.16
6.97
A strong and widespread research network
7.72
6.86
6
Impact on Career Drivers (2)
Cross-sector mobility
•  MC fellows experience slightly greater cross-sectoral mobility in their career
•  Half of the MC fellows are no longer in the sector they were employed before
MCF. [university; public sector employer; research lab / institute (private or semi-public); not-for profit
entity; SME; large enterprise]
University
26%
45%
1%
Private enterprise
11%
4%
Other sectors
3%
7
Impact on Career Drivers (2)
Multi- & Inter-disciplinarity
•  MC fellows are less likely to change discipline after the MCF
•  MCF more effective in developing interdisciplinary skills
Internationalisation of careers
•  MC fellows have worked in more countries
•  Settled more frequently abroad
•  Collaborate more frequently on joint international publications
Professional network established
•  Smaller but stronger networks (continued collaboration)
8
Impact on Career Trajectories (1)
Short-term employability
•  Improved fellows’ short term
• 
employability
More likely (+8%) to obtain a
permanent position after the
fellowship
MC fellows
100%
80%
34%
60%
6%
10%
4%
86%
40%
61%
20%
0%
Before
other
unemployed
employed
Six-months after
Other: students, trainees, unable to work
etc.
Retention by Hosts
•  More likely to be retained by hosts, especially after long fellowships
Career Speed
•  Mild short-term effects especially for knowledge-intensive fellowship
•  No effects or negative effects in the medium/long term (academic
titles)
9
Impact on Professional Output (1)
Impact on Publications
• 
• 
• 
• 
Slightly higher number of articles published
Higher H-index citation
Significantly higher Journal Impact Factor
Rather limited positive effect on books and monographs
Impact on Other Scientific Outputs
•  Less patents filed/commercialised
•  Average no. of start-up enterprises established marginally lower
•  Greater participation of ‘young’ MC fellows to international conferences
•  Higher number of scientific prizes and awards received by ‘young’ MC
fellows
10
Impact on Professional Output (2)
Access to Research Funds
70.0%
65.5%
62.4%
60.0%
MC
50.0%
CG
40.0%
30.0%
19.4%
18.2%
20.0%
10.0%
21.0%
20.3%
7.2%
5.5%
19.2%
13.8%
20.4%
17.0%
17.6%
12.0%
9.6%
8.5%
0.0%
ERC
EU fund
Intl. grant
Nat. grant Ext. private Int. private
fin.
fin.
Other
None
11
Impact on Current Professional Situation
Employment status and conditions
!  Marginally more often employed with more stable contracts
!  More frequently employed by top 100 institutes (ca. 25%)
!  No significant impact on income, but marginal positive effects with
respect to income growth
Job profile and qualifications
!  More likely to be still active in research
!  Much higher probability of leading a research team
!  More likely of holding the title of associate professor or full professor
Effect on satisfaction
!  On average, 16% higher overall satisfaction:
!  Progress opportunities (32%), benefits (27%)
!  Resources for research, job location (24%)
!  Job security, working conditions, status/prestige (21%)
12
GENDER ISSUES AND MCF EFFECTS
KEY FINDINGS
13
Disparities in Career Development
Career constraints
•  Women report far more
frequent career ‘breaks’ than
men (56% vs. 24%)
•  Women also experience more
frequently conflicts b/w
professional target and
private life, and often this lead
to lower career targets
100%
21%
19%
28%
35%
51%
47%
M
F
80%
60%
No, played
down private
life
No, played
down career
40%
20%
Yes
0%
14
Self-assessed discrimination
Experiences of discrimination
•  About one-third of female researchers suffered some kind of
discrimination (lower among ‘young’ researchers)
•  Only marginally lower in the MC sub-group
Types of discrimination
Job qualification and conditions: by far the most frequent, especially cases of
male colleagues with same level of experience and skills having higher-ranking
positions
Employability and career progress: reported less often, severity was rated
higher: especially for cases where the potential employers appear reluctant to
hire candidates with children
Gender-based misconducts: these cases were reported as being comparatively
less severe than various other types of discrimination
15
Disparities in the MC experience
Differences in immediate
career effects
100%
•  MC proved more effective in
enhancing the immediate
employability of women than
men but a greater share of men
obtained a permanent contract
after the end of MCF
80%
60%
40%
27%
31%
M
F
54%
50%
M
F
70%
68%
M
F
20%
0%
Become
employed
Got a perm.
contract
More senior
position
•  The chances to move to a more
senior position after MCF are
high for all fellows, but seemingly
slightly higher for men
16
Career Outcomes and MC effects (1)
Impact on scientific output
•  Number of articles published: smaller for female researchers but
mitigated by participation to MC
•  H-index citation: Also lower for female researchers but significantly
offset by participation to MC
•  Journal Impact Factor: no significant discrepancy; MC female
researchers has a higher JIF than non-MC
•  Patent submitted: significantly lower for women, not influenced by MC
•  Invitations as keynote speaker: lower than men and not influenced by
MC
•  Access to research funds: significant outcomes registered for access
to EU/intl. grants (lower for women in general) - significantly offset in
the case of MC female fellows.
17
Career Outcomes and MC effects (2)
Differences in employment status and conditions
•  Women appears slightly more frequently unemployed than men,
and less often employed under a permanent contract
•  The professional title and position of women appear generally
lower than men (especially professorship title), but the MC female
subgroup is typically in a better position than non-MC researchers
•  Job satisfaction is somewhat lower among women, but only
marginally
M
70,000
F
Average
60,000
EUR (2012)
•  The income level of
women is lower
than men for all
degrees of
professional
experience
80,000
50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
-
< 8 ys.
b/w 8 &
15ys.
b/w 15 & 25
ys.
> 25 ys.
TOT
18
CONCLUSIONS
19
Overall conclusions
•  MCF do have definite beneficial effects on improving fellows’
career prospects and achievements.
•  a highly positive reputation in the research environment
•  attracted talented EU researchers educated in prestigious
universities
•  degree of affiliation of former fellows remains high, even many
years after the end of fellowship.
•  In quantitative terms, the differences observed between MC
fellows and the CG career outcomes are rather small.
Possible reasons:
(i)  career benefits take longer to fully materialise;
(ii)  non-MC fellows often undertook equivalent mobility schemes,
which produced similar effects.
•  MCF can mitigate some aspects of the gender gap – especially with
regard to the career outcomes for female MC fellows compared to their
female counterparts completing non-MCF.
20
Recommendations (1)
(as discussed at final validation seminar held with EU-level stakeholders, MC
supervisors and fellows)
#1 – To further MCAs contribution to structuring the European Research Area
(ERA) in terms of training and employability
•  Host institutions are asked to provide education and training that
focusses on increasing fellows’ employability.
" also involve training in transferable skills (project management,
presentation skills, etc.)
•  MCA could emphasise that a variety of career paths are possible
following the completion of MCF. Case studies of the different career
paths taken by previous MC fellows should continue to be advertised
with materials emphasising that a MCF that does not result in an
academic career is by no means a ‘failure’.
21
Recommendations (2)
#2 To further the relationship between MCA and private industry
More difficult for SMEs to engage with MCAs because of less experience and
resources at hand (human resources and legal knowledge to facilitate the
administration of such programmes).
•  MCA could foster partnerships between SMEs and universities, in part for
universities to assist SMEs with the administrative aspects of the fellowship.
•  Promotion of such collaborations by communications focusing on success
stories of MCF within SMEs.
22
Recommendations (3)
#3 – To increase the focus on closing the gender gap
• 
Statement on MCFs and maternity leave: maternity leave could be treated as a
matter of social security, and should not impact on the fellowship in terms of time
and money, i.e. should not imply a shortening of the fellowship or receiving less
funding.
• 
Mentorship or other type of support could be increased to help female
researchers in their career progress (e.g. stimulating output) but also in finding
work-life balance and resuming the career after breaks.
• 
Improve the gender balance in MCF selection committees and panels.
‘Selectors’ and ‘evaluators’ should be further trained to be conscious of potential
gender biases which can impact on the decision-making process.
23
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION
Sara Gysen – [email protected]
24