Are we turning postdoctoral fellowships into long-term careers?

The original purpose of postdocs

Postdoctoral fellowships were originally intended as a launchpad- a focused, time-bound springboard between completing a PhD and entering a stable, long-term position [1]. Yet for many researchers today, that bridge feels less like a path forward and more like a stagnant waiting room. Across the system, more and more PhD graduates are moving from one postdoctoral fellowship to the next, often with no clear direction, no long-term security, and no honest conversation about what comes after. Somewhere along the way, a training opportunity designed to prepare people for careers has started to look like a career in itself. The scale of this cohort has also grown substantially: South African public universities recorded 357 postdocs in 2003 and 2,867 in 2019 [2].

The current reality: Productivity without progression

A postdoc was never meant to be a destination. It was meant to sharpen expertise, grow independence, and help early-career researchers position themselves for the next stage of their professional lives. The real purpose was movement, not maintenance. However, many institutions still define postdoctoral success in narrow terms. The usual scorecard is predictable: more publications, more citations, more grant contributions, more academic output, an endless chase for “more” of the same. Fellowship advertisements often reinforce this by linking renewal to publication targets, as though the clearest sign of progress is simply to earn another temporary contract. But that raises an uncomfortable question: should the reward for doing a postdoc well really be another postdoc? Kerr [3] similarly describes this as an “academic treadmill”, where the language of development can create the appearance of movement without a clear route into secure employment. That is where the model begins to lose its way. Another paper is valuable. Another project may be useful. But another short-term contract, without a clear pathway beyond it, is not the same thing as career development.

The irony is that postdoctoral fellows are often some of the most productive people in the system. They publish at a high level, supervise students, support proposal writing, manage lab or project activities, and contribute significantly to the research reputation of their institutions. In practice, many are already carrying serious professional responsibility. However, on paper they remain temporary trainees. So, the problem is not that postdocs are failing to contribute. The problem is that the system often benefits from their contribution without being equally intentional about their progression.

Beyond academia: Expanding career pathways

Part of the issue is that many fellowship models still seem to be built around an old assumption: that academia is the main, or even the only, proper destination for a PhD graduate. That may once have been a comfortable story to tell. It is no longer the full picture.

Today, research expertise is needed far beyond the university. Governments need people who can interpret evidence and shape policy. Industry needs researchers who can lead innovation and research and development. Research councils, start-ups, development agencies, innovation hubs, and technology platforms all need people who can think critically, solve problems, and translate knowledge into action. If that is the world researchers are entering, then postdoctoral fellowships should be preparing them for that world. This broader range of outcomes has led researchers to call for postdoctoral careers to be tracked across sectors, job types and the nature of the work performed, rather than through academic appointments alone [4].

That means that the conversation has to move beyond the publication counts. Publications matter, but they cannot be the only language of value. Skills such as leadership, project management, policy engagement, stakeholder communication, entrepreneurship, intellectual property awareness, digital capability, and science communication are not optional extras added on the side of “real” research work. They are part of what makes a researcher effective, mobile, and relevant in a changing knowledge economy. When these capabilities are ignored, a mismatch occurs. Fellows are trained for a labour market that no longer looks the way it did when the traditional postdoctoral model was designed. They are encouraged to build impressive output records but not always guided on how to align those strengths with real opportunities beyond the next fellowship call.

Practical reforms: Designing fellowships for real careers

This is why the idea of the “perfect postdoc” can be misleading. On paper, the formula can look impressive: strong publications, visible research outputs, excellent technical ability, another fellowship secured. But without alignment, positioning, and a clear sense of where all of this is heading, the picture is incomplete. A polished CV is not the same thing as a pathway.

The better question then is not simply whether there are enough academic jobs. The deeper question is whether postdoctoral fellowships are designed for the careers that actually exist. If the answer is no, then success must be redefined. A successful postdoc should not only be the person who stays in academia. It should also be the person who moves into government and strengthens science policy, the person who leads research and development in industry, the person who supports technology commercialisation, the person who joins a research council to tackle national priorities, or the person who builds a research-based enterprise. These are not second-best outcomes. They are meaningful destinations for high-level research talent.

Leaving the academic sector does not mean leaving research behind. It certainly does not mean failure. A researcher does not stop being a researcher simply because the setting has changed. This is why postdoctoral fellowships need to be framed more honestly and strategically. They should be structured as professional development opportunities with clear goals, broader exposure, and intentional career planning from the beginning. Fellows should be supported not only to publish but also to build the capabilities and networks that help them move into long-term, meaningful roles. That could include placements or partnerships with industry, government departments, research councils, innovation agencies, and policy organisations. It could include stronger mentorship, exposure to non-academic career paths, and clearer conversations about where a fellowship is meant to lead. Most importantly, it would mean evaluating postdoctoral success by progression and positioning, not by output alone. This emphasis on intentional career development and preparation for diverse pathways is also reflected in international recommendations on improving the postdoctoral experience [1].

South Africa has invested heavily in producing highly skilled researchers. That investment should not end in a cycle of temporary fellowships with no clear landing place. If the country is serious about building a strong research and innovation system, then it must also be serious about how postdoctoral talent is developed, recognised, and deployed. This approach also aligns with South Africa’s STI Decadal Plan, which emphasises human-capability development and stronger connections across the National System of Innovation [5].

Times have changed. The labour market has changed. The meaning of research careers has changed. The way postdoctoral fellowships are designed, measured, and imagined must change too.

References

1.   National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2014). The Postdoctoral Experience Revisited. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. DOI: 10.17226/18982.

2.   Prozesky, H., & van Schalkwyk, F. (2024). The profile of postdoctoral research fellows in South Africa: Trends over the past two decades. South African Journal of Science, 120(1/2). https://doi.org/10.17159/sajs.2024/15898

3.   Kerr, P. (2022). Academic Pipeline or Academic Treadmill? Postdoctoral Fellowships and the Circular Logic of ‘development’. South African Journal of Higher Education 36 (3):72-90. https://doi.org/10.20853/36-3-5080.

4.   Xu, H., Gilliam, R. S., Peddada, S. D., Buchold, G. M., & Collins, T. R. (2018). Visualizing detailed postdoctoral employment trends using a new career outcome taxonomy. Nature biotechnology, 36(2), 197-202. https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.4059

5.   Department of Science and Innovation. 2024. Science, Technology and Innovation Decadal Plan 2022-2032. Pretoria: Department of Science and Innovation. https://nstiip.naci.org.za/knowledge-base/strategies/policies-and-strategies/185-science-technology-and-innovation-decadal-plan-2022-2032