5 ms·

Most humanities PhDs don't offer compelling prospects for professors. Accounting is the one PhD that seems to have favorable supply / demand economics. I used

Most humanities PhDs don't offer compelling prospects for professors. Accounting is the one PhD that seems to have favorable supply / demand economics. I used to work at a Big 4 accounting firm and they would pay you a generous salary, on top of your stipend, to get an accounting PhD. They were actively looking to fill the shortage of accounting professors that train their workforce. Anyone know of any other PhD programs that have good supply / demand fundamentals. I used to work with a bunch of econ PhDs and the tenure professor track is really hard for them too (but they have much better private sector opportunities than humanities PhDs).

twic 5y ago
I'd never thought about people doing research in accounting. What do they do? What are the frontiers in the field?
- czzr 5y ago
  https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/1475679x https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/1475679x
- genericresponse 5y ago
  As with most fields a lot of it relates back to the first principles of the field. A lot of it is around what the best way to classify, measure, and show an economic transaction. One example that comes to mind is the development of Activity Based Costing in the late '80s as an improvement on traditional cost accounting.
Vaslo 5y ago
Maybe this works in Big 4 firms but this is my third Fortune 250 Company Finance role and 15 years and I couldn’t imagine any reason why you would need a PhD in accounting to work in it or teach it. I’d rather my employees learn from a controller who worked in accounting for 5 years rather than someone in an ivory tower who has never worked anywhere telling professionals how they should be doing accounting.
Naga 5y ago
I'm probably one of the few people to have experienced both the accounting program in university and the history program in university. My original degree is in history, and I ended up going back to school to train as an accountant (I'm a CPA now working at a non-Big 4 public accounting firm). It could be just my school, but the quality of professors in each program were light years apart. To a person, the history professors were personable, smart and good lecturers. They cared about their students and helped them succeed. Accounting professors, on the other hand, largely stood up in front of the class, read directly from their slideshows, and answered any questions with "read your textbook". My thought is that this is related to the supply and demand between the two fields. In history, universities can afford to hire the best of the field. They can picky and wait for the right person to come along. In accounting, the best of the field go make big bucks somewhere else. Professors pay well, but not nearly as well as working at a firm. I can't imagine working at a Big 4 firm and teaching as well, just with the hour commitment of their full time job! As an aside, when I was completing my history degree and considering next steps, I consulted with one of my professors who basically told me I should give up my dream of becoming a PhD just because of how horrible the job market is. I ended up applying for my masters anyways and was rejected, which I take now as a blessing. I made more in my entry level job in accounting that I probably would be making now if I had ended up with my PhD.
cycomanic 5y ago
Every student I have supervised has had a job lined up immediately after graduating and often had multiple offers. The jobs outside academia in industry R&D pretty much all required a PhD and as a masters student you would be more like a technician (there are exceptions but only very few). I work in optical telecommunications, so at the interface of engineering and physics. So if you want to do actual R&D work in this area you absolutely should be doing a PhD. Considering that you are quite well paid during the studies as well is also a plus.

twic 5y ago

I'd never thought about people doing research in accounting. What do they do? What are the frontiers in the field?

czzr 5y ago
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/1475679x https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/1475679x
genericresponse 5y ago
As with most fields a lot of it relates back to the first principles of the field. A lot of it is around what the best way to classify, measure, and show an economic transaction. One example that comes to mind is the development of Activity Based Costing in the late '80s as an improvement on traditional cost accounting.

Vaslo 5y ago

Maybe this works in Big 4 firms but this is my third Fortune 250 Company Finance role and 15 years and I couldn’t imagine any reason why you would need a PhD in accounting to work in it or teach it. I’d rather my employees learn from a controller who worked in accounting for 5 years rather than someone in an ivory tower who has never worked anywhere telling professionals how they should be doing accounting.

Naga 5y ago

I'm probably one of the few people to have experienced both the accounting program in university and the history program in university. My original degree is in history, and I ended up going back to school to train as an accountant (I'm a CPA now working at a non-Big 4 public accounting firm). It could be just my school, but the quality of professors in each program were light years apart. To a person, the history professors were personable, smart and good lecturers. They cared about their students and helped them succeed. Accounting professors, on the other hand, largely stood up in front of the class, read directly from their slideshows, and answered any questions with "read your textbook". My thought is that this is related to the supply and demand between the two fields. In history, universities can afford to hire the best of the field. They can picky and wait for the right person to come along. In accounting, the best of the field go make big bucks somewhere else. Professors pay well, but not nearly as well as working at a firm. I can't imagine working at a Big 4 firm and teaching as well, just with the hour commitment of their full time job! As an aside, when I was completing my history degree and considering next steps, I consulted with one of my professors who basically told me I should give up my dream of becoming a PhD just because of how horrible the job market is. I ended up applying for my masters anyways and was rejected, which I take now as a blessing. I made more in my entry level job in accounting that I probably would be making now if I had ended up with my PhD.

cycomanic 5y ago

Every student I have supervised has had a job lined up immediately after graduating and often had multiple offers. The jobs outside academia in industry R&D pretty much all required a PhD and as a masters student you would be more like a technician (there are exceptions but only very few). I work in optical telecommunications, so at the interface of engineering and physics. So if you want to do actual R&D work in this area you absolutely should be doing a PhD. Considering that you are quite well paid during the studies as well is also a plus.