 For those of you who do not know me, my name is Amanda Chisholm and I'm a senior lecturer at the School of Security Studies at King's College, London. And I'm also the organizer and chair of this series, New Voices in Global Security, which has been running for two years now. And it's a seminar series designed to showcase the brilliant and diverse research of our PhD and ECR colleagues across the school. And it's also a platform for broader discussions around equality, diversity, and inclusion in higher education, the challenges, but also the successes. So today we have something that's kind of in between. So it's, we have a panelist who are going to be reflecting on their own career trajectories, I guess, and this is hopefully to offer the audience members and each other a broader discussion around career planning, how we measure and think about success, you know, as a personal kind of endeavor, as well as, you know, how society, I guess, measures success. And I think what's what we want to do foremost in this discussion too, beyond, you know, giving everyone through their different questions, concrete or philosophical advice around career planning in and out or up or around academia, but also to dispel this myth that there is just one right way to plan, right? If you publish enough, if you teach enough, if you network enough, all of these things will facilitate you getting that, getting that dream job that you want, right? So this, we're going to have more frank discussions about how most of us, I think, navigate academia or a broader out of academia in, in less, you know, arcs, right? In less kind of predetermined pre-knowing arcs. So, yes. So, so that's, that's the hope for the panel. But again, you know, you the audience, you can ask any questions that you want. Our panelists are here to, to answer and hopefully give some frank and candid feedback or responses to those questions. So our panelists, we have Nega. And Nega, first of all, yeah, hi Nega is the director for multilateral initiatives for the Democracy and Human Rights director of the United States National Security Council, White House. Nega spent over 15 years in the U.S. Department of State where she represented the U.S. on counts or a complex bilateral multilateral negotiations advised on issues related to the G7 and the UN Security Council peacekeeping sanctions counterterrorism and anti-corruption and coordinated the international donor and assistance efforts for the Middle East and North Africa and South Asia. Originally from California, Nega holds an MA and MBA from the American University and is a part-time PhD candidate here at King's College London. We're so happy and grateful, I think, to have Nega in war studies. Most recently, she, yeah, is a full-time PhD student with the Department of War Studies. And then she left us and returned to America in 2021. During her time in London, she was a GTA for the Department of Security Studies and Department of Theology and Religious Studies, senior editor for Strive Journal and co-founder of the Middle East Research Group, which is a PhD working group in the Institute of Middle Eastern Studies. So, Nega, that's an impressive profile. And you're an impressive human being, too. Alison Hawks, you say Alison, Ali, do you like just being called Ali? I always call you Ali. Yeah, Ali works. Ali's fine, okay, great. Ali is the Executive Director for the Common Missions Project in the UK. She was previously the Director of Research at this section, 809 Panel, a US Congressional, Congressional Mandated Commission, tasked with streamlining and codifying defense acquisition. She has been an assistant professor at the School of Foreign Service in Georgetown University and is a visiting research fellow at the School of Security Studies here at King's College London. So grateful to have you, too. Ali is part of our department or part of our school. Previously, she was a lecturer at the Defense Studies Department at KCL and has lectured in American politics at Brunel University, as well as numerous undergraduate courses in the Department of War Studies. Her doctoral thesis was in military sociology and she has published her research and given numerous presentations on her work in the UK, US, and Sweden. She received her PhD from the Department of War Studies and her MA in Strategic Studies from the University of Leeds and she holds a BA in Political Science from the University of California, San Diego. Next we have Sumi and Sumi is a professor in Political Theory and Gender Studies at the Department of Gender Studies London School of Economics. Quite unusually, she is a feminist political theorist with an ethnographic sensibility. Her work complements theoretical, conceptual, and philosophical investigations with detailed ethnographies of lived experiences, processes of political subjugation, and subaltern political struggles for rights and justice, specifically in South Asia. Her latest book is titled vernacular rights, cultures, the politics of origins, human rights, and gender's struggles for justice and that's with Cambridge University Press. She is also the author of Rethinking Agency, Developmentalism, Gender and Rights, and the co-editor of Gender, Agency and Coercion and of the Sage Handbook of Feminist Theory. So, Sumi's scholarship goes beyond producing critiques of Eurocentricism and develops new concepts, theoretical frameworks, and methodologies which combined or contribute to setting new epistemic directions for social science focused on knowledge production from the global south. Finally, we have Malcolm joining us. Malcolm is a professor in Contemporary History in the Department of War Studies at KCL while undertaking his doctoral studies in modern history at New College Oxford University. He was selected to be the research assistant to the Earl of Birkenhead, one of the officially commissioned life of Sir Winston Churchill. It proved to be a priceless opportunity for Malcolm since these papers were restricted to only two historians in the world at that time. Malcolm has subsequently taught at universities across four continents, winning teaching awards at each of the institutions he has represented. He has written 15 books on a range of military, strategic and political themes and was elected a fellow for the Royal Historical Society in 1991 and became an associate editor for the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography in 1997. His naval warfare, 1919 to 1945, is widely recognized as a pathbreaking book since it brings the elements of simultaneously of the actions and decisions making to bear in each theater across the globe and with every combatant involved in the process. Known for his experience in Asia, Malcolm was invited in 2017 to become the series editor for Rutledge's new set of publications under the banner Cold War in Asia. Yes, we have a very impressive lineup. I'm impressed listening to or just reading the different biographies of each of you. So thank you so much again for coming. Thank you all the attendees who are here to listen. Just I guess a few housekeeping, you know, if you have any questions at any time just put them in the Q&A box and we're happy to answer them here. Oh, and we have Mervyn. I've just seen Mervyn Frost has joined us on the panel too. Hi, Mervyn. Yeah, so I guess what I want to do to begin before questions are being posed is just the panelists themselves to think about, I guess, just spelling this myth that we already had this arc, you know, when we all started our PhDs, we knew this is where we want it to be, right? And we have all of these different tick boxes that we needed to get there. And I know my own experience and just, you know, I'm listening to all of you speak, it didn't happen like that. So I just wonder if you, each of you can kind of reflect on, you know, maybe not all of them, but some of, I guess, the pressure points or the different structures or whatever that helped navigate where you are right now. That's a really tough question. So you can pick up on whichever ones you want. Let's start with you, Nega. No pressure, right? First one up. Well, you know, it's tough, right? There's no one size fits all. And when you do have a plan in place, life gives you all sorts of twists and turns and different opportunities come about. And I think that's one of the pieces of advice that I give to everyone for their career in or outside of academia. I think you definitely want to have a plan penciled out, but then take up a lot of these various different opportunities that arise, whether, you know, it's writing for something outside of your field from a different perspective, from a different context to opportunities that arise. Again, I'm coming more from a policy space. But academics bring a completely different perspective. And I think when you are thinking about career choices, sometimes it's a bit daunting coming into a policy space because of the way it's structured, sometimes the hierarchy. But I think, especially PhD students, there's an ability to bring in and hone in on those analytical skills and becoming an expert within five seconds of being told to be an expert on something. And it's a talent that not everyone carries. And I think that's one thing to cherish. So I think when you're going through various opportunities or life gives you twists and turns, it's definitely you should be open and not doubting yourself if there's a certain kind of hierarchy or bureaucracy. So I think from a very holistic perspective, that would be my sort of two cents and also trial and error in my own career. I think that's sort of how I later on in life realized that these opportunities sometimes are unique. And if they're presented to you, you should definitely take them because it takes you down a completely different path. It makes you a much more well rounded, be it academic or policy person, depending on what you want to achieve. Great, thanks. Let's move on to, I guess, Allie. We'll move on to you since going on that theme, particularly of taking pathways. Definitely. Yeah. And great to see you, Mervyn. It's been a while. I was lucky enough to obviously do my PhD way before COVID and see Mervyn on a frequent basis. So this is a real treat to see you on the other end of a camera. And I really echo what Nega said. I thought it was great advice is during your PhD is the opportunity to say yes to everything. Because you really, one, you have the capacity to do it if you're not working. And even if you are working a little bit, is really trying to expand your own skillset and to experience as much as you can. So to Nega's point of, you know, publish in a journal or try to do a co-publication or something that's way outside of your comfort zone and really push yourself. I also think that doing the PhD is an extraordinary time to take an assessment of your skills and the opportunities that you have to learn. So in in KCL, I know that they have an entire doctoral center where you can become skilled in quantitative research or qualitative research. And those skills will not fail you. And I really agree with Nega that they bring a completely different perspective, whether you go into academia or whether you go into a think tank or for me, I became an entrepreneur. But the rigor that I bring to the work that I do completely separates me from other people in my field because I have that training behind me. So I think that my experience would be say yes to everything and then be really ruthless with yourself about what you are good at and what you are not good at. And so I think one of the best things about academia is that it really gave me a thick skin because people, there's nothing more academics love than to tear each other apart in their work. But if you can think about it as if someone comes back to you know, your mini Viva or whatever chapters you have and it's all slashed through. The way I tried to look at it was like, that's free advice. I have someone like, you know, Christopher Dan Decker, for example, was my supervisor is really a renowned military sociologist is giving me free advice on how to be better. So I think is having that mindset that is being able to build the resilience to take on that feedback and then to turn the mirror on yourself. Because at this point in your career, whether you go into academia or whether you take a different path, you have to be very clear about what you are good at and what you are not. And then my advice is, don't worry about what you're not good at. You're probably too old to change it, just really leverage on what you are good at. And that's what you're trying to sell. And you'll find other people in your organization to pick up on your weaknesses. And you will there's vice versa. But I think if you can become really clear on that, and you have the time to think about it during your PhD, it's really a great time to experiment and to reflect and again, say yes to everything. So that would be I'll leave it there. Great. Thanks, Ali. I mean, it's great. And you can see by both of your profiles too that you've got such great practitioner experience and experience of outside of just the immediate academic sector too. And you've taken up those opportunities that have, I guess, probably opened up different pathways for you too. I just want to move now, I think, to Sumi, who is so entrenched in political theory and conceptual and feminist theory and whatnot, and see, yeah, let's get your perspective, Sumi. Okay, thanks very much, Amanda. And you've actually, I wish it were such a kind of a clean, neat, cut perspective. So as you pointed out, but actually, it's anything but that. And I want to start by sort of saying that the conditions in the academy are extremely precarious for most people entering the academy and also those who are already in it. I mean, it's a very difficult context of work, working alongside and especially for some of us who are already, you know, have permanent posts and so on, and to see our PhD students and our early career colleagues in such a difficult context, I wanted to sort of extend my solidarity right to the beginning because we cannot speak about career options and not think about what's actually happening on the ground. And so I just wanted to say that right at the outset. And the other thing I want to sort of point out is that I, you know, I seldom, I'm careful about giving advice out because I know that that can also come across that I understand that things are very, very different and difficult for lots of people. And, and especially if you're a non normative subject in the academy, by which I mean that you're, you know, you're racialized, you have, you are not an unencumbered free being in the sense that you have duties of care, you have caring responsibilities, that, that and, and, and that you are, you know, you are non normatively gendered and so on. So these already mark you out as the non normative person, right? And so on. And the academy actually is a very hostile place for people who are non normative in those very space in various kinds of ways. But also I think that on top of that, if you then do work which kind of refuses disciplinarity, doesn't stay within the policing, police borders and norms of what constitutes disciplinary based work and so on and so forth, that then becomes a double whammy. So you're already sort of, you know, out right there, you know, and I just wanted to fly a flag for all those people who do interdisciplinary work, because as I always tell, you know, my PhD students and my early career colleagues whom I learned so much from, you know, is that everyone loves an interdisciplinary scholar but very few people will hire one, right? And, and, and so it's really something to think about quite carefully as to what my all my years of looking at what goes on in the academy has made me very circumspect about, you know, or so many practices to do with policing and policing disciplinary boundaries and, and so on and so forth. So I suppose my, you know, my sort of intervention in all of this would be to say that my own pathway is actually extremely unconventional, and I thought I'd sort of say that, right? Because I didn't, you know, I mean, I didn't actually have, I mean, I thought of having all these plans in my head, but the way that things worked out were hardly, all those plans got thrown out of the wind, torn up into various pieces and so on. So I'm really hardly somebody who's going to sort of save to people have a plan because literally I didn't have, you know, none of mine worked out. And that's because I, you know, I gave up a permanent just as I was finishing my PhD, I got a permanent post in IR actually, and I gave it up to take up, to take up a two-year melon postdoctoral fellowship and people sort of, even at that point sort of said to me, well, that's super adventurous, so risky, how can you give up a permanent post for a two-year job and so on and so forth? But then of course there were all kinds of reasons why one does those things, right? Apart from being the only brown person in that particular city and, and having so caring responsibilities and so on, I just, I just couldn't hike it, I had to do other things. And so that is why I wanted to bring that out, saying that all our background contexts, right, the kinds of relational webs that we find ourselves in, all our responsibilities, after all, we have a life outside the academy, right, and we have to take all of those things into account, you know, and that's why it matters so much about the kinds of spaces we create for our colleagues, particularly early career colleagues, and my own experience as an early career person, you know, obviously, which everyone is, at the start of that career, made me absolutely committed to making sure that, you know, early career colleagues are, you know, are, you know, great front and center of departments, because my own experience was, of course, that no one cared, right? So those are the kinds of things that I think are quite important. And I wanted to just sort of put that message out to early career colleagues, PhD students, you know, that, that these kinds of things are very important as well when you look out for jobs, look out for the kinds of departments that you were working, the kinds of spaces that you were working, because these can make or break academic careers and so important. Thank you so much, Sumi. I think, I mean, we're reflecting on what Ali had said in a previous talk too, is about, you know, building, building networks of, and, but people who, I love Ali, your quote was not just about mentoring, right, getting mentors that were over mentored, but people who will advocate for you, who will stick to you. Yeah, women in academia are over mentored and undersponsored. Well, in industry, I think overall, so everyone will want to mentor you. But you have to be really clear about what you want to get out of the mentorship, but what you really want is a sponsor, someone who is going to go out of their way to advance your career. And so it's really about building those relationships, I think, and networks and meaningful relationships and networks, not just, hey, can I, you know, really investing in that person, so they understand you and your competencies, because what you don't want is the kind of Peter principle, right, to be kind of put forward for something that you're not competent for at that time in your career. Yeah, absolutely. So and I think what I like what Sumi touches on too is our responsibility of people who are now in more permanent, more secure kind of positions that we have a responsibility to to pass on and to help pave way for for ECR and PhD students too. So thank you. And thank you for, importantly, acknowledging the variety of structural and otherwise inequalities that continue to matter in how people navigate higher education, but in, you know, Ali is reflected to in other industries as well to write these things still tend to matter very much so. Malcolm, you're up. Well, first of all, I'm incredibly impressed with my fellow talent panelists who clearly done great things are doing great things and come from an entirely different background from me. I mean, I really am the late developer. I mean, my life was completely unbalanced. It was all sport and no work. And I was blessed to have talent in sport, and I became a double international and an Oxford blue and all this kind of thing. But at 16, I had gone and played at the schools junior Wimbledon championships. It was one week before all levels, I got one level at 16. And you can't do anything with one level. So I went to work in Oxford at a carpet store. And I sold carpets to Oxford University domestic versus. And I went to see these carpets being fitted. And I thought, this is a hell of a place. I mean, look at these all these bookshelves with books I've never even seen before let alone open. I mean, this is this would be cool. This would be cool to be in a place like this. And eight years later, I was doing my doctorate there. So it's a very, very unconventional background. Sport was I mean, I was completely obsessed with it. And work I was not obsessed with. School was was boring in many respects, unless I was on stage, or performing on the courts. But I've been incredibly lucky. And that's the one thing I would say I think there were a number of things I could say. But luck, you need it. You really do need it. And, you know, people say, well, yeah, but you can't create it. So what do you do? But I heard Ali say, you know, seize the opportunities. Things come to you. Come to some people, you must take them if they are there. It's a great opportunity. Sometimes you wonder about whether you can do this or not. But you have to have self confidence. This is another real issue. And self motivation. If you always need somebody to push you. It's not the same as if you've got something within you that says, Hey, let's do this. And never, ever imagine that it is, you know, but, you know, the inevitability factor will work. You'll never get it. Don't listen to the naysayers. Because if I had done that, well, I would never have gone towards it. The likelihood of selling carpets and then going and doing a doctorate at the same place. No, it didn't work. Not back. I'm much older than any of you here, apart from moving. And I can assure you, it didn't work back then. I mean, you were very much out on a limb. So you needed to rely upon yourself. You needed to come forward. And the thing I would want to say to young members of staff, people who are doing doctorates, who are GTAs and so forth is, look, I agree entirely with the rest of the panel. We need to help them. We need to be there. We need to be able. No, I'm not trying to kind of be, oh, yeah, I'll be a classic mentor. No, but just, but things can happen, you know, and to work at something and do it because you're interested. I didn't do a PhD to get a job in the academic world. I would have been a teacher and taught sport after school hours. I would have taught history or whatever at school would not have worried me at all. But I mean, I was lucky. I got an offer for a job when there were very, very, very few offers around. And I seized it. I went to Southeast Asia. I went to Singapore. It was an incredible experience. Absolutely incredible because I come from a very small North Parkshire village where we didn't see anybody, anybody different from the white Anglo-Saxon Protestant kind of group. So this Singapore represented an entirely different world. And one that I reveled in, I must say, and hugely grateful for. It's widened my world in a big way. So to those who are listening in or wondering about transitioning into or out of academia, look, do what you're interested in. Don't do the strategic thing because it's expected. Do the thing that really fires you. Because if you do that, then you don't mind putting in the work and the effort. And good things happen. You've got to beat your way to a potential employer. He's not going to beat his way to you. Thanks, Malcolm. I think some of your working class upbringing is similar to my own, where, yeah, neither of my parents had a high school diploma. I was the first one to get a degree or even think that that would be aspirational. After the military, I think the military, after I did that, I'm like, no, I definitely do not want to do this. What can I do? But yeah, just in seizing those opportunities, I think also just having what my parents did give me, and I'm so grateful for and I hope to pass it to everyone who's listening is to have the confidence in yourself that you are entitled to be in these spaces, right? These spaces aren't just for, you know, people who speak a particular way or who look a particular way that these spaces are for you to, you do belong here and you do enrich these spaces, right? So just to have that confidence, I think, in yourself and then, you know, build your community of people who will lift you up. Because as we've acknowledged here, this can be incredibly difficult spaces to work in, right? And to thrive and live in. And so find your communities early on that will support and sustain you and nourish you after various different setbacks and rejections and everything that we all face, right? But you'll have people who will dust you off and remind you of how brilliant you really are and remind you that you still, you know, you're entitled to these spaces too. So yeah, Mervyn, do you have any last comments before we add to some questions from some of the audience? I just have one or two, I agree with every word that Malcolm said. And I have one to add to that is that, for example, I set up with the BA in law and at the end of the BA, there was a chance to do one more year in political philosophy. My dad said to me, have you ever heard of anyone paying a political philosopher? That's a ludicrous idea to study political philosophy. And it was my first kind of bid against his discipline. And I said, I don't care. This is what I'm interested in. And I'll do that. So I did. And so that would be my general advice is to follow your interest. In my whole career, I've seen umpteen appointment committees. And the people who get the jobs are the ones who are following their interests. And the people who don't are the ones who have been clever in strategizing this and strategizing that. So the metaphor I use always is, work out what really interests you. And with that in mind, walk life and the doors will open. But when the doors open, you've got to be ready to walk right to no dithering, weighing up to pros and the cons. If you know what you want, the door opens, you've got to take your chances. So that's follow your passion is my last word. That's great. Thanks, Marvin. We've got, oh, so we have a question here about someone who is even just thinking about doing a PhD. And I think this is a really important question, right? And the person says, I currently work as a professional researcher in a think tank, but do you not have a PhD? I have an MSc. Could you talk a little about the pros, cons of pursuing a PhD alongside this sort of work? I'm conscious of having the right motivations for studying or even pursuing a PhD as it seems like it could be drawn or I could be drawn into it as a right of passage of or something that it was important to do. Could I not simply work on the same topic in my professional capacity? So I guess just broader reflections of, you know, in a specific to this person's comments, what would a PhD bring to their career or their life? But yeah, why should we do a PhD? More specific than that. But you know, it's just, yeah, it's thinking. And I think this is probably a reflection I should have thought of before I did my PhD too. I think I'm like Malcolm and Mervin. It was something I was really curious about, right? That's why I did a PhD. I'm like, this is really, you know, no one's doing research really on, you know, the gender and racial dynamics of privatization of security and private military and security companies. And I just got invited to Afghanistan to hang out with these security contractors. So yes, let's do this, right? And it was more curiosity, luck and privilege that I got into a PhD program. But I didn't think though on that. And it was while I was doing my PhD that I thought, I'm like, okay, what do I want from this? So who's more of a curiosity that drove me to do a PhD? I'm not sure if that's the best advice for everyone. But maybe just yeah, Nega, can we return to you of, you know, reflections on why do a PhD? Yeah, absolutely. You know, I'm just reflecting on comments that were made to me before actually doing my PhD, or starting my PhD three, four years ago. You have to be passionate about the topic. You have to, you are, at least in my case, you are sacrificing quite a bit for an undertaking. And you have to be passionate. I think you are challenged throughout the entire sort of lifeline of pursuing a PhD. You are challenged. You are questioned continuously. You're questioning yourself continuously. So you really need to be passionate about the topic or pursuing the PhD. You know, your topic could evolve and change throughout your writing process. And I think that is key and fundamental. At the end of the day, there are always ways to complement your work. If a PhD is required, there's always ways where you put additional years of experience or you have other certifications. But a PhD does require, does require that passion. So for me personally, I wanted to pursue a PhD almost two decades ago. And, yep, life changed opportunities arose. I went down a policy path, a policy career. But I was at a certain juncture in my life that I always wanted to pursue a PhD. And it was important for me to do that. It was, and of course, in the end, chose a topic that was entirely different than what I wanted to do decades ago. But it was a topic that I was passionate about, that I wanted to explore, that it was okay for me to put my career on hold, to go and pursue the PhD. I was told when I was moving to London to pursue the PhD that I was doing career suicide for doing that. But again, you have to, I think no matter where you are in life, you have to be passionate about the topic. And yeah, that's, that's my two cents. Thanks, Nika. Ali, let's move to you, especially since you've actually managed a very successful career that still has a lot of research orientated, you know, applicable to your PhD, but it's not in university. So I wonder if you can reflect upon that question too. Yeah, I think, I think one of the things I observed in doing my PhD and then seeing the success of my colleagues. And, you know, feel free to disagree. This is just really my experience is that there are very few people who you're doing your PhD with who are kind of the true academics for which this research is their vocation. Because I don't think you have hundreds of people going into PhD programs simultaneously around the world for whom this is all a vocation. And I think if you're, if you're really honest with yourself about that, and for me, being an academic was never a vocation. I never felt it of like, this is what I'm born to do. So I did really struggle actually, then going into a lectureship, because it was like really the tension between I wanted to do all these different things and had a really entrepreneurial mindset that I felt very confined in the, you know, publish X, do books, teaching excellence framework, research excellence framework, which I just feel is just total, you know, mindless bureaucracy piling over academia. And, and so I just had to think about, you know, I put I invested a lot into my PhD into those four years, and it was really about what do I want to do with this and what can I take forward. But also just being really honest with myself, instead of trying to swim up the river and be an academic in academia, which I just wasn't, I'm sure Mervyn can attest to that through some of our conversations, is to just realize and look around and see people like, you know, Matt Harries, who was on this panel with me last time, who's an incredible academic, extremely talented, and other people in the department for whom this really is a vocation and just knowing it's okay for academia not to be your vocation. And I really agree with everyone here that you follow your interest and I had a real interest in my PhD topic. But I mean, sociology is a contested, you know, discipline who is going to hire me really, outside of kings, I guess. So it was, I think it was just really looking at the reality of where I wanted to go and what I wanted to achieve. And then using the PhD as a true foundation to get there. And it completely catapulted my career. And I don't do any military sociology. But what I do do is some really exciting, interesting work at the intersection of academia and national security, but also national health and sustainability. And a lot of issues are kind of most pressing societal issues. And I would not have been able to do it had I not done the PhD. So I think it's taking that into consideration, in terms of whether if you're sitting here and you're trying to convince yourself, then just if you're already trying to do that, then you know the answer internally. So I think it's being very clear about whether this is your vocation and if it's not, then how do you achieve what you want if you are still, you know, determined to stay in academia. So I will say on the other part, Nega said, you are saying that you're, you know, you're passionate about your subject. And I hit Mervyn to everyone who said that. I don't know if I was passionate about what I researched. I was highly interested and engaged, probably wasn't passionate about it. But what I think it takes to get through a PhD is just sheer determination and being disciplined. So, you know, at some point, you have to submit. And I think that's such a great way to go into industry if that's what you want to do. Because when people will look at you kind of in an intellectual capacity, and I feel like it really reflects on your ability to manage your time, to build your own networks, to deliver a massive project, which many people never do on their own. So they have support of a big corporate or a company coming around them to help them take a project all the way through, you are your own project manager, you're responsible for every part of it. And not only that, it has to get to a really high quality to succeed. And if you can take those skills and you can translate them to kind of move out of academia, I think that's where people see a lot of the success and are willing to take you on, because they might not care about your topic, but they'll look at what you've been able to achieve, that discipline and that determination, and then the kind of, you know, very tangible skills of quantitative research, whatever you're doing. And I think that is a real asset. So bottom line, just be ruthlessly honest with yourself. Yeah, really solid advice. I'm going to be unfair to Sumi and that tag on, because I know Sumi is totally equipped to respond to this too. So with that, you know, a tag onto one of our attendees put in the question box commenting on, of course, we need to be passionate and curious about, you know, our topic to do a PhD, but more, I think, reflecting upon opportunities that arise that are presented to us and taking chances that are presented to us are also somewhat privileged markers, right? Not everyone gets the same opportunities and the same chances and more of, I guess, reflecting on, you know, concrete solutions or ideas or suggestions around people who don't have the same knowledge or working knowledge of how things work, working knowledge of who to reach out to the kind of the culture of academia. The hidden curriculum is also what it's kind of framed. How do those people, what sort of concrete advice might we offer those people who don't have that sort of knowledge so then they can take the opportunities or can actually be presented with opportunities to take up? So Sumi, I'm going to pass that over to you as a double pronged question. Why PhD and then that? Okay, thanks. I think I agree with what's been said before about why a PhD, I think the PhD is, you know, is it sort of is an immersion in knowledge production, right? And it's an absolute immersion in thinking about the kinds of questions or problems that move you. And I think people have spoken about passion and being super interested. I use the word move because, you know, what is it that moves you? What is it that you keeps you awake at 2am in the morning? And what are the kinds of things that will not go away, right? And you want sort of say, okay, I'll do something else and I'll go away and I'll forget about it. No, they will keep coming back all the time and then the demand to be addressed, right? So some people might call it passion, some others might call it another kind of, well, but I think it's that kind of when you find yourself in that mode where you are so moved by particular kinds of things and particular kinds of questions and you want to sort of look into them quite seriously, but also because there are lots of implications, right, that actually, that they are, that, you know, that they are, as I always ask my students, you know, what's at stake here, right? So always those kinds of things. What's at stake? Why does it matter? Why should we be interested in, in, in, in these questions? And I think when you can answer some of that, then you know, you're on a bit of a solid ground. And, and of course, as, as, as it's already been said, you know, when that commitment to knowledge production then produces various, comes with various kinds of skills, it produces a particular kind of a commitment, produces particular kinds of skills and it, and very importantly, it allows you or it opens up a community, a community of scholars and a community of scholarship, right? Which, which I think is really super important. Now, the thing is about, I've started, you know, the intro, my intro by saying that that community of scholars and scholarship is very, very, you know, and, and as you said, Amanda, you know, these are very difficult spaces to navigate. So these are by no means democratic spaces. And as though your, your, and your questionnaires also sort of pointed that, you know, these are difficult spaces, particularly if you are, don't fit the ideal type of who an academic must be, right? Or is, right, whether belonging to a particular class, sexuality, race, you know, gender and so on, and, and, and carrying on, actually. And, and if you don't quite fit, then these are quite difficult spaces. We know the, what's sort of seen as the all boys network in the academy, and so on, who will open up the doors for you, who will sponsor you. But those things are not just about who will sponsor you and so on. Actually, it depends very much if you do very different kinds of research, which don't fit the normative agenda. I don't know very much about critical military studies or security. I don't know quite what the normative, I could take a very kind of broad guess. But I, but you know, if you were to do the kinds of things, you know, that don't fit, then you're going to find a big problem in finding that community and finding those sponsors and finding people. Because, you know, we know that, right? We know really well. It's just that, it's those kinds of things that are not spoken about, right? You just have to look across who holds professorships, who holds all the grants, who holds a PhD funding, which PhDs are being funded, which are not. I mean, these are open secrets. I mean, and I think that we have to kind of talk about these things more and more. It's not a level playing field at all, right? And so I take very much the, you know, the point for what the questioner has said. I'm sorry, I don't know their name about, you know, and I think that more and more, one of the things about decolonizing the academy, all of those moves are very much around making opening up spaces for non-normative groups, actually. And I think that, and that is why I was saying earlier, be quite careful about departments, about, you know, institutional spaces that you want to also enter, because the kinds of opportunities that are available differ from place to place. And so I just, yeah, I wish I could be much more encouraged, you know, much more upbeat and so on, but I think that would not reflect the real state of play. And so, yeah, and I absolutely take your point, Amanda, and I know you've been stressing it is so important about, you know, having community, supportive community of scholars around you, I mean, feminist scholars, we always say, pay it forward. We pay it forward because we don't have an old boys network behind us who have, you know, through which we have come, right? And so you have to make it happen for other people to come through, and so on. So we, you know, we use, of course, pay it forward. But I absolutely get the point of the questioner, and yeah, I just think that we just have to work harder and strive harder for, as I say, for producing, you know, not only conditions of thinkability of different kinds of knowledge, but also for the, for different people to stay within the academy and not just be pushed out. Yeah, absolutely. And I think that ties nicely with the previous question around, you know, the further compounds, colleagues of ours, ECRs and PhDs from the Global South who want to navigate to the Global North for work, you know, there's the further structural issues around that of how, how they do that. And, you know, I don't think there's any easy answer to addressing that, because there's, there's, I mean, even more, I think Sylvia, to Mail wrote, I recently wrote a book, Afrofeminism or Afrofeminism Decolonization and Afrofeminism. And there was a particular chapter in there where she lays very stark the political economy of knowledge production, of feminist knowledge production across the continent and how difficult it is to do that research, just the, just having open access journals or just, and even access to, you know, the paywall of if we want to produce a journal and we don't have an institutional association that has, you know, the subscription to these journals, how do we even produce that. So, you know, these are huge structural issues that I think Sumi you're right, they just need to continue to be on our minds, they need to be made open, open discussions, they need to move away from the open secrets to, you know, to having these concrete discussions. Amanda, can I, can I jump in a little bit here and maybe be kind of controversial in a way, not to this point, because I believe with everything and agree with what you and Sumi have said. But, you know, academia, we don't all deserve to be there. So, even though you've done your PhD, and, you know, you have good research, it's still a competitive marketplace for talent at the end of the day. So, just as you would go out to a company is just because you've done your PhD and you've passed with, you know, no corrections or whatever corrections you have and you're talented, does not, does not mean you deserve a place in academia. And I think that mindset, it is a highly competitive job market to go into, especially now. And so, if you think about it, not only is it highly competitive, it's an extraordinary amount of work for very low pay. And there's a lot of pressures on you to excel in your career. So, I think that as you're thinking about going through the PhD and you want to really understand your own economic trajectory, the great news is coming out as a PhD, you're, you will probably always only ever increase your salary from there. So, you're not in a position where you would probably dip back down unless you voluntarily wanted to. So, I think it's great to start a trajectory. But as we talk about being accepted and I fully take on board, and I have seen those barriers through my colleagues who, you know, from the Global South have been doing research, and it was more difficult for them than it was for me to do my research. And I'm fully aware of that. But I also think we need to get away from the mentality that we all deserve to be here. And we all are equal in our research, because the matter is we're simply not. And so, if you look at it as a very competitive marketplace, so you do have to be strategic about some things. But I do think into getting those jobs as Mervyn said, you do have to have that passion and that genuine interest. So, I just wanted to kind of pipe up and say that this to me isn't like a happy clappy. We're all joined in and we all deserve a chance. It's probably one of the most competitive job markets in the world. So, you have to be really ruthless about what you're going for. And you do have to put a plan in place. So, if you want to get to that professor by a certain age, you should be planning on what publications you're going to be putting them into, at what rate. So, you can meet the Teaching Excellence Framework and the Research Excellence Framework and all of the kind of wider policies around the department and what you need to do to get there. And then you need to execute on it. And that execute, that experience comes from finishing your PhD. But I just thought maybe I would bring, I don't know about bad news, more empowering, I think, way to look at it. Yeah, I appreciate that, Ali. Absolutely. And I think this is the, we were talking about different sides here. So, Sumina are talking about how the structures suck and how, you know, merit, how the criteria for which getting an academic post continues to rest upon a particular ideal academic subject who has time, space, social capital, all of that to get the grants, to have the space, to get publications and to be mentored properly to all of that sort of stuff. And, you know, reflecting upon what we lose as departments when we have that as our only standard for which to hire people. But, you know, at the same time they exist, we need to have some sort of criteria, right, to get academics or two. And these exist beyond, you know, the college level. They're set by REF, they're set by UKRI, right, of what's exceptional, what universities need. So, yes, I think this is the two prong, Ali, absolutely. You need to know the rules of the game, right? You need to know what is valued and what's not and make strategic plans based on that. Absolutely. And then, meanwhile, the rest of us who are on the other side with secure employment will keep mining away and tinkering away to try and make these spaces a bit more level playing field for these exceptional colleagues that just face structural barriers but should have an equal and equal ability to apply and to be considered for these posts. So, yes, but thank you for that important intervention, too, because I think that's important for, yeah, the discussion is, it's nice that the, you know, we acknowledge that structures suck, but for people who are at a position of, you know, who are feeling those structures, what now? So, Ali, that's useful advice. Yeah. So, we're running out of time. So, Malcolm, there's a question that's pointed to you. So, I think we'll drop the, why do you have PhD, Malcolm? And just ask you, the question was, when you were talking about your pathway into academia, you said eight years before you got into PhD program at Oxford, what did you do in those eight years? Were you mentored? Who supported you? So, I guess the, to answer that. And then there's just for the rest of the panel, I guess to reflect on too. The one question is, oh, well, yeah, one question is, I think this is a good one. Have you ever regretted not taking an opportunity and how has this shaped your career journey since? So, maybe just a reflection on failure or not taking up an opportunity? And then the last one is perhaps not enough time for the question, but following on the issues of precarity in academia as a highly competitive marketplace, do we in higher education have an ethical responsibility to be more transparent to prospective students and PhDs about the difficulties with pursuing an academic career? That is a good question. Yes. Okay. So, Malcolm, I'll let you go first to maybe reflect upon those three. One, what were you doing in those eight years? Two, did you ever regret taking an opportunity and how that might have shaped your career? And three, do we have an ethical obligation to actually be totally transparent with our upcoming PhD students about how crap higher education is right now, our job market in higher education is right now? Okay. Well, thank you so much. And once again, Ali's intervention was very important, because I was going to say, look, when I finished my degree at Oxford, I didn't know anybody else doing modern history, modern the last 300 years at that place, who had an academic job to go to. And so what was happening at Oxford was that they were telling, where the dons were telling their best students, don't do a doctorate, because there's no guarantee you're going to get a job at the end of it. In fact, the likelihood is that you won't get a job at the end of it. You'll spend four or five years doing something and at the end of it, boom! And there were an enormous number of people who started on this process, who expected and wanted and were good enough, they were talented enough to get a job, they didn't get it. And that was an incredibly sad thing. So yeah, it's a problem. I mean, we produce vast numbers of PhDs. And there are not the positions for that number of people. So people are going to, you know, not be fortunate enough to be in the kind of position that the rest of us here are. So that's a blow. You can't guarantee it. So you better be enjoying it. If you're going to do it, do it because you're interested in it, not because it can lead necessarily to a job in academia. It might lead to a job elsewhere. We hope it does, of course. But there's no guarantee about academia. It's a cut vote business. And I've been on selection panels for so long when the kind of issues that Sumi has raised have come up. And I have seen how the misogynistic elements of the economy work against anybody who isn't, you know, the conventional type. And it's appalling. And I've always stood out against it. And that's why I am such a big equality, diversity and inclusivity person. I believe this. Now, as for the eight years, I worked down hard for once in my life that wasn't sports related. I recognised that I was unbalanced, of course. I was a very social individual. I had a great time, fantastic, wonderful sport and everything. And I just didn't do the work well. The most embarrassing night of my life was going to an O level, end of term, end of class, end of school situation, and being asked how many O levels I had. And from people who I knew, I was far brighter than them. And they had the O levels and I didn't. This was, I mean, pride. Wow. It was savage. So I thought, man, the only way I can do something about this is working. And so night school, postal tuition, you know, this kind of thing. I built up, built up and then went to university, did an undergraduate, wouldn't even think of going to Oxford. My God, no, of course not. Far brighter than me. No chance that I would do that. But I went to Leeds, which was fantastic. And I enjoyed it enormously. And then got a scholarship to Oxford. And that was also fantastic as well. So that's it. I can't remember what the second question was, Amanda. But I've spoken to enough and let the other panellists address that issue because I don't want to take the rest of your time. And I must go off to my class here in Trento, because they're already half an hour. I told them I'll be there in 45 minutes. So that's, that gives me 11 minutes to get to the university. Thank you so much. Thanks, Malcolm. Thank you. And I hope the rest of the time goes really wonderfully as well. Thank you very much. Thank you. You're invited. Okay. Thanks, Malcolm. I am conscious we're already four minutes over. So let's just do a round of quick last minute statements from the rest of the panellists at anything you really want to respond to, whether do we have an ethical obligation to our new coming PhD and ECRs or to tell them about a sobering kind of reminder of what the market is and what the market's like and have there been any sort of failures that have or missed opportunities that have also impacted the trajectory of your career? Mervyn? Yeah, I have just one thing to add to that is that I think a lot of people are disappointed about the lack of opportunities. But quite often they're looking at opportunities in the fancy places. In other words, they want an opportunity in Oxford, Cambridge, London, Paris, any of the great American cities and so on. And my advice always is look wider afield. There are umpteen smaller universities in places you've never heard of. And one can get jobs there and jobs come up then and they seek out people. And I think one must never be too proud to start there and then have as an ambition to work your way to the metropole. But there are more opportunities than one thinks. Thanks, Mervyn. I actually, you know, coming from Newcastle University to two Kings and seeing how PhDs are supported and broader ECRs are supported, I have to say Newcastle was pretty damn amazing in its institutional support of its PhD students and its ECRs. And something, you know, I think Kings, our department in particular school could learn a lot from them too. So yeah, I totally agree with that. You know, just again, and that's echoing Sumi too, her advice be look at the places where you want to work and study, look who's there and look at the, you know, the broader support that that brings. So thank you for that, Mervyn. That's Nega, last final words. Just to piggyback off of what Mervyn just mentioned too, but from a different perspective, I think, again, when we think about rejection, you have to look at other opportunities that are out there, even if it's and again, yes, academia is an extremely, extremely competitive market. But if again, going back to what we originally started as well, if there are opportunities that come about, if there are other creative ways of trying to achieve what you want to achieve, pursue it. You never know that one opportunity can open up 10 other doors or it can open up that one golden door that you wanted to pursue five years earlier. So you just, you never know. And I do think if you are sometimes yes, luck, and sometimes you place yourself in the right place in the right time. And so being able to be open to various different pursuits, trying to achieve what your goal is from different angles does work. It takes a lot of time, it takes a lot of effort and ambition. And there will be plenty of failures along the way. There will be plenty of rejections along the way. But you do learn and grow from that process. And to what Ali's point was earlier too, you do through these trial and errors, you do realize what you're good at and what you're not. And so every decision you make will be a bit more weighted and calculated when opportunities arise. So I guess my overall suggestion would be pursue whatever your ambition and goal is from various different angles. It will work, maybe not in the clear path that you would assume, but it will work. So anyhow, that's my suggestion. My very best of luck to everyone. It is tough. It is not easy. It's just easy to talk about it. But thank you, Amanda, for putting this together. Really, really enjoyed this. Thank you so much, Nega. So Sumi, the last word is to you. Crikey. Okay, right. Let me just say my thanks to you, Amanda, and also to all the panelists for Mickey Time and for everyone who's come to hear us today, to hear our conversation today. I absolutely echo what Nega was saying earlier, that while just sitting and thinking through all that's been said, it's so much, one realizes both the enormity of what's the context, especially for people who are actually facing it in real time. Yes, but also how much easier it is to talk about it. So I take that, you know, that vast gulf, you know, that that Nega was pointing to. And I also think that, you know, what Mervin was saying earlier about, you know, and also actually Nega, about sort of, you know, being open to various kinds of, you know, maybe not even appear as a choice in that particular point, but it might just appear as an opening of some kind. And you don't quite know where it might take you. But I think it's okay. And I think it's quite important that actually, to just be open to things which might seem adventurous or risky, even. And I just, you know, taking from that, as I was saying right in the beginning, that, you know, I did give up my permanent post in IR in two months or three months, I think, and I took up admittedly, you know, a very, very nice postdoc. But it was only for two years, Andrew Mellon postdoc for fellowship. And then, and that, of course, was followed by another postdoc for another year before, you know, getting my permanent job at the LSA. And, you know, things could have been much easier had I just stuck my permanent post, I wouldn't have had to make, you know, being a non permanent post for three years and then teach, you know, three different courses every year for all of that time and all the kind of time that takes away from your academic work, right, if you're constantly teaching new things every term, not just one of us say two or three and so on. So I do think, but that then opened up a little bit of a door here at the LSE and that's where I've been, right? Oh, my academic, most of my academic life. So I do take that point entirely. And I think that that's quite, it's sometimes when you're facing that when somebody tells you it's okay to take risks and be open, I think it helps. You know, I think it really helps when there's another voice sort of saying it's okay, you know, and I and I also tell people it's okay to do your thing. It's absolutely okay. It's, you know, you have to do your own thing at the end of the day, you are responsible for the knowledge that you produce. And it must be something that you can stand by. So it's okay to do your thing and don't make too many compromises along the way to fit in. Because then that power when it is your own thing kinds of gets reduced, right, that attractiveness of knowledge which is has that kind of power and, you know, which goes with that, you know, it just kind of, if you're trying to make too many compromises to fit this one here and fit that one there and and so on, it just kind of grinds down a little bit. And, and I, and I think about the ethical obligation you asked us whether we should tell, you know, ethical obligation to sort of say what the real stage of play to our students and that, you know, think quite carefully before you start your PhD and think very carefully about your beginning academic career. Yes, I do. But I also think we shouldn't let the markets dictate us completely in everything we do. I think it's so important. And I think that we should really turn the lens on our own selves and say, yes, we have ethical obligations to make conditions better. Right. But in the institutions that we work in, both personally, institutionally, whatever, you know, people talked about being on various committees, whatever committees you're on, make that difference. Right. Don't just, you know, we cannot just rest easy on self saying the market is bad, we can't. I think we also have to take some responsibility, quite a lot of responsibility to make sure that we, you know, a keep doors open, but also make the place a much better place experientially for those who follow behind us. Thank you very much. Thanks. I mean, that's a great ending. I have nothing else to add except my deep gratitude to all of you who've attended and, you know, your panelists for taking valuable time from your day to share your experiences and have this important conversation, which is going to be no doubt conversations, right? Numerous conversations on these topics. So thank you all so much for participating in the seminar series. And let's be in touch. But for now, enjoy your afternoon. Do something nice.