How to Decide Whether You Should Get Your Ph.D. (6-Step Process that Anyone Can Use)

How to Decide Whether You Should Get Your Ph.D.

A Six-Step Process that Anyone Can Use

by Doctor Doctor

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

STEP ONE

Calculate the number of hours you will spend on your program.

Let's say 20 hours per week at 48 weeks per year for three years. That's 20 * 48 * 3 = 2,880.

STEP TWO

Determine the monetary value of this time. This is your opportunity cost.

Let's say that each week, you forgo 5 hours of sleep, 5 hours of time with your family, 5 hours of extra effort towards advancing your career (extra assignments, networking, etc.), and 5 hours of hobbies. Sleep is worth $25 per hour, family time is worth $50 per hour, and hobbies are worth $20 per hour.

Thus, you forgo $18,000 from sleep (720 hours * $25), $36,000 from family time (720 hours * $50), and $14,400 from hobbies (720 * $20).

If you spent an extra five hours on professional activities, you would, in three years, have a 33% chance at getting a better job with a $30,000 pay increase for three years. Using probability concepts, 33% * $30,000 * 5 years = $49,500. This, in turn, affects job prospects further into the future. You also need to add the monetary-value of the additional satisfaction you get from the better job and higher pay. However, we won't complicate the math with this.

Additionally, for this and other steps, you should discount all the monetary values to present value terms using an appropriate discount rate for each activity. For simplicity, we won't do this, either.

The total opportunity cost comes out to $18,000 (sleep) + $36,000 (family time) + $14,400 (hobbies) + $49,500 (career development) = $117,900.

STEP THREE

Calculate the direct costs of getting your Ph.D.

Tuition & Fees: $40,000
Books: $1,000
Stress and Adverse Health Consequences at $25/hour * 2,880 hours: $72,000

Total: $113,000

STEP FOUR

Calculate the benefits of getting your Ph.D.

Enjoyment at $10/hour * 2,880 hours: $28,800
Pride of being called "doctor": $5,000
Value of enhanced job prospects (using probability and discounting concepts): $50,000
Personal satisfaction: $5,000 (for some people, this may be worth millions)

Total: $88,800

STEP FIVE

Subtract the direct costs and opportunity costs from the benefits. This gives you *YOUR* actual value of getting a Ph.D.

Benefits: $88,000
- Opportunity Costs: $117,900
- Direct Costs: $113,0000
= ($142,900)

STEP SIX

If the actual value > 0, then *YOU* should get a Ph.D.
If the actual value = 0, then *YOU* should be indifferent about getting a Ph.D.
If the actual value < 0, then *YOU* should not get a Ph.D.

AFTERWORD

This formula works for everyone. Differences will arise, however, in how people attach monetary values to factors such as family time and personal satisfaction.

 

Funny idea - you really got to be in love with the quantitative methods
But I guess for many it is just a capstone in life. Like getting a baby, becoming millionaire or driving a Porsche. It probably really depends/changes on what stage of life someone is - in your "formular" his is probably than the "personal satifaction factor".

 

This is all well and good (not sure where you came up with the 33% chance at getting a better job but anyway) but how about if you actually got a promotion due to the knowledge gained while working on a PhD? Now what does that do to your model? If I got, let's say, a 50% increase in pay since I started the PhD program in the Fall of 2004, then what?

 

The 33% figure is just an example. Actually, all the figures and factors are examples. Only the broad categories apply to everyone (opportunity costs, direct costs, and benefits).

Your pay increase will fall under the "benefits" category, regardless of whether your pay comes during your studies or after. *How* you include pay is a matter of math. You would take the present value of that pay increase and include that value in the broad "benefits" category. Obviously, a pay increase you receive during your studies is worth more than a pay increase you receive at the conclusion of your studies, assuming the pay increase is for the same amount. Of course, you may have to use probability concepts because you may not know for a fact that you would receive a pay increase. Remember that this model is for people considering a Ph.D. program, although it can also be used by current students who are deciding whether to drop out of their programs.

Note that there are numerous way to receive pay increases. In your case, you received a pay increase due to your Ph.D. studies. However, you must balance this benefit with the opportunity cost. What could you have achieved had you not spent so much time on your studies? Could you have improved other skills, gained more experience, published some professional literature, or networked your way to a similar, or even better, pay increase? You would have to include these costs in the opportunity costs despite receiving a pay increase. For further illustrative purposes, think of this: If you can achieve end-result Z by following either path A or path B, which would you follow? You would follow the less costly path.

The gist of this formula is simple: Value = benefits - cost. Any factor you think of can be classified as a cost or benefit.

Sometimes, a factor will, in a sense, have both cost and benefit characteristics. For example, consider the act of doing homework for your courses or research for your dissertation. There is a direct cost (stress, mental anguish, eye strain and possibly deteriorating vision from doing so much reading) and an opportunity cost (lost of time for sleep, hobbies, and other activities), but there is also a benefit (enjoyment of learning and gaining knowledge).

 

Other things to consider - I spent a lot of my study time when I was on a plane or in a hotel. Time well spent with not much else to do. This is a great model you created and I think it is a great way to start to look at things logically.

 

Thanks.

In this case, your opportunity costs for studying will be low. The alternative to studying would be low-valued activities that you can do in a hotel, such as watching TV or sitting in the lounge. Of course, if someone happens to really love watching TV or sitting in a lounge, then these activities would be valued more highly and the opportunity cost would be greater.

Under the model, value = benefits - costs.

By having low opportunity costs, you increase the value of your Ph.D. program.

 

An EdD/PhD in Education

Here's a scary thought. If I were to get an EdD/PhD related to education and stayed in my current position, I would only make an additional $768 a year. (Don't ask me how the division came up with that number...) Let's say I were to do a PhD program from Walden which would be around $40K. At $768 a year, it would take me 52 years to earn back that money with the pay raise I would have received. I guess that's a good reason why most K-12 teachers do not have doctorates.

My Walden MS was about $10K. I'm earning $2,000 more a year because of it, so it will take me 5 years to pay it off. I'm currently in year two. Of course, you could factor in tuition reimbursement and such, but the gist I'm seeing is that for public educators, doctorates just aren't worth it UNLESS you plan on getting a promotion with it.

-Matt

 

For me, the biggest consideration (by far) would be whether or not a person has academic interests. A Ph.D. is a research degree, so prospective students need to have a passion about intellectual inquiry. If people aren't really interested in their subjects, then they probably should think twice about presenting themselves as authorities on them.

(Strangely, intellectual interests are rarely mentioned on Degreeinfo. I don't know whether people take them for granted or whether nobody cares.)

My second consideration would be clarifying the degree's anticipated function and utility.

In some professions, a doctorate is basically the price of admission. The sciences are like that. In other situations, a doctorate might provide some competitive advantage in hiring, some prestige on a business card, or maybe a pay boost. For other people, it's largely the opportunity to pursue the subject that they love as far as it will lead them, and they would dream of pursuing a doctorate even if it had no economic utility at all. It's a labor of love with them.

The question at that point is whether a doctorate is really necessary in order to achieve the goal. Are there other things that a person could be doing instead to accomplish the same purposes more efficiently? If the Ph.D. is for prestige or competitive advantage, might some recognized professional accomplishments speak more loudly? If intellectual growth is the focus, then are there alternative avenues for engaging with the subject outside of school?

If a Ph.D. still seems viable at that point, then what are the costs and trade-offs?

Do we want to do a very expensive low-prestige DL doctorate, or perhaps seek admission into a more prominent full-time B&M program that offers housing allowances, financial stipends and research budgets? (If we want to make our careers as professors or as scientists, then that's almost certainly what we should be doing.) Would we be happy with a modest lifestyle while we study full-time? What kind of lost wages would we be looking at? Do we have a mortgage? Is there a wife/husband/significant-other whose views need to be listened to? Do we have kids to support?

If we go the part-time DL route, are we really willing to put in the time and effort necessary? Or are we kidding ourselves, with a DL doctoral program prioritized somewhere beneath family, job, entertainment and idle ass-scratching? Are there more enjoyable and/or productive uses for the same time and money?

 

This is exactly why I tell my fellow teachers to look into the research PhD like UNISA, especially if it is for pay purposes, because like you said the rate of return is a shorter wait.

 

Great job!

Suggestions:

In Step 3, the total tuition costs are actually variable depending on how long you are prevented from completing your dissertation. I recommend that you double any tuition estimate provided in the sales / marketing literature of the school. (If this were a masters degree w/o a thesis or with a finite thesis, you could assume a fixed tuition costs plus inflation, not so for the doctorate.)

In Step 4, your benefits should be modified with some sort of expected value percentage for completing the degree; if the "drop out" rate in the doctoral program is 50%, then your expected value would be halved in your calculation. For example, if the drop out rate is 90%, the expected value is $80,000 x (1-0.90) = $8,000. There are many ways to estimate expected value, but you must consider the unlikeliness of the degree being conferred on the average person starting the program.

 

Where is the factor for moving frolm an indsutry job of 70 hours per week, to a job 8 hours in class, the rest flexible (40 total probably). Summers off (if I want), if not, a good chuck of $$$ for a car, landscaping or the such. Also, the time with my kids.

 

This is true provided you're not in your first three or five year contract going for tenure at a research university. Most of those guys I know personally, are losing their minds going for the big top tier publication even with the time with family and the summer stipend on top of salary etc. Beyond that point it's gravy.

If you're teaching solely. Sure. But you don't need a PhD to do that.

 

Good points.

 

This comes under the broad category of "benefits." Of course, you'll also need to use probability concepts, as Dave Wagner mentioned. You are not guaranteed that dream job (and you might want to look more deeply into the life of a tenure-track professor, but that's another topic). So you'll need to attach a monetary value to that dream job and multiply it by the percent chance you'll actually get that job. That gives you the benefit value.

It seems like the possibility of this new job means a lot to you. However, it would be unreasonable to attach a value of infinity to this factor. Do not forget that the grass always seems greener on the other side of the fence.

On the other hand, if you truly know what you're getting into, then you should assign a very high value to this happiness benefit. This, in turn, will increase the total value of your Ph.D. program. To you and others, this one benefit alone may far outweigh any direct and opportunity costs of getting your Ph.D.

 

LOL! All too true. I am there now (not a R-1 school, but in the fight for tenure). Between conferences, revise and re-submit, and service, it is an uphill battle to say the least, but there is a light at the end of the tunnel.... I hope.

 

There is also a factor of masochism that is not represented into the formula.

Your ability to withstand and even thrive under a sustained level is a key determinant.

You have no free time and deal with constant additional demands and re-writes.

Self-motivation is the sustaining factor! You have to want it more than the pain and sacrifice to get there

 

As I was reading some of the posts here, I thought ... I wonder if people go through an analysis like this when they decide to have a child?

I mean, it's not the same thing obviously. But it's arguably an even greater decision (in terms of time, money, commitment) and it seems like many people don't consider this sort of stuff beforehand. Having a child is a lifetime commitment after all (or, rather, should be) not just a 4-5 year commitment. Some of the same intrinsic factors seem to apply too: Having no free time for yourself, dealing with constant demands, really needing to love your (subject/child) enough to get through it ...

Um, anywho ... that is all, back to discussing PhDs ...

Disclaimer: I have neither any children nor a PhD

 

I can advise that my wife and I did. Others, mileage may vary. That stated, we're the sort of quantitative people that would put a metric on time to open a ketchup bottle if we thought we could optimize it.

 

I have done both. Same sort of analysis (but we weighed ours in more of a "should we have kids, for them are we financially ready, etc.). Now, doing both at the same time (which I did) is NOT advised.

 

You are correct in that one must also consider ability. If you lack the motivation and drive to get your PhD, then you probably should not pursue the program, regardless of its value.

That being said, my model does incorporate this factor. This comes under the broad "benefits" category. As Dave Wagner discussed, you should multiply your benefits by the percent likelihood of achieving those benefits. That will give you your expected benefits for use in the value formula. If you lack the drive and motivation to follow through with the program, then your percent-chance is going to be low. This will reduce the benefits, which, in turn, will reduce the value. It may reduce the value so much to the point where the costs outweigh the benefits.

With the average drop-out rate of dissertation-phase students at 50-70%, one's likelihood of success should not be ignored when calculating benefits.