WWYD? postdoc hiring mess

[Sambal2]

Help, please!

I have a big research project about to start (5 years, 3 postdocs, 2 PhD students) but a massive problem. My first postdoc was due to start next month, but I've now received a damning reference for him (from his supervisor!!). She says he is unable to meet deadlines, no analytical ability, etc etc. Even implied that he is dishonest. I have already delayed the project start 8 months as his completion was delayed. At the time, I thought this was fair enoughpandemic and all thatbut now it is clearly a big red flag. However, there is a risk the funder will pull the funding, as readvertising will take too long (and I have no idea if I can find someone for this very specialised role). So, do I: take the postdoc on for 6 months probation, and see if I can performance manage him better than his supervisor? Or reject him and risk losing the whole thing? If I do lose the project I don't think I will have the heart to carry on in academia, after years of increasingly unhappy working conditions.

Argh, I am not sure I would take on such a big set of red flags TBH. This might not work but when we need someone quickly we can sometimes get an internal postdoc on a secondment and just transfer them over from one budget to another for a few months, would that work? Even if you had someone part time with you, part time on their other contract, it might be enough to get the ball rolling.

Why did you delay the start just for him? Who are his other referees? Can you phone them? If he's dishonest and crap at analysing why did his supervisor let him submit and how did he get through his viva? And again why did you delay in order to wait for one person - presumably the other two post docs were available to start?

Why would you lose the whole thing? In the research fields I'm in/funders are used to last minute personnel changes, and you can start the four other people, then just use the 4 months to get someone else in for the next year. Post-docs leave all the time when they get better jobs/need to move on or the contract is running to an end. You need a discussion with your grant office and then them with the funder about how they want to handle this.

I would no way take someone with that reference and you would have at least 4 years of them so nope.

I should say I'm in social science, with funders like ESRC and Wellcome, I don't know if its different if its lab based work that is very tightly scheduled, but people come and go on any project, rarely to the timetables...

Thanks, everyone. Useful to know that none of you would consider taking him on!

I should have said that the project is 5 years, the three postdocs have three years each, starting year 1, 2 and 3. This is the first postdoc, funding clock starts with him. No 2 is yet to be recruited, no 3 is named on the grant app. Project is now past the stipulated max time between award and start (usually 1 year), which is why I think the funder may pull it now.

I stalled the project for postdoc 1 bc it's a very niche field--I need two specific languages, rare in the UK. He was very much the best candidate at interview and by CV. Pandemic delays seemed plausible. At the same time, my university was going through redundancies, there was a lot of uncertainty about my post, professional services like Research Office have been decimated. But in retrospect I should have just pushed forward.

As to why he his supervisor is passing him even though she has all these reservations... she told me she just wants to be rid of him, and will pass him on the lowest of four possibe grades (this is in Germany)

German referees are known for being brutal - there’s a meme about it

What I would do depends on the likelihood you can hire someone else quickly in his place. A bad person is worse than no person BUT if this is very niche skills, two languages, the whole project depends on someone starting soon and it’s already late - I’d be tempted to take him on and cautiously get him to do very managed tasks in the beginning

I would also immediately gen up (subtly) on what you need to do about probation and make sure you follow all procedures absolutely correct in case you want to get rid of him. Taking notes at all meetings, emailing summaries of progress meetings with actionable tasks, that sort of thing - which obv you should do anyway!

Yes, when I spoke to the supervisor she was very... severe. But I guess that was her honest opinion.

One of the other referees, same university, is also German but gave a positive (if rather generic) reference. I'm tempted to write to him as well but I can't think of a tactful way of asking if his colleague is a reliable judge of character!

I guess I could very carefully oversee the postdoc through probation but I could really do with someone who was actually a help rather than a hindrance! Argh.

i've had postdocs with a variety of different strengths & weaknesses. sometimes a person who is great at collecting data will be rubbish at writing it up, etc.

if the postdoc is going to be able to collect data in phase 1, and maybe you can give them just a 1 year contract, then it might be worth taking them on to get started. But do keep a very close eye on them and be ready to manage them out.

Otherwise, can you get a short term RA who knows the right languages & would be keen and rush out to get data. Again, that could be a short contract and you hire a postdoc later to do the analysis & write up.

Either way, get the grant started asap and then sort out the hiring later. A 5 year grant never runs to the original timeline, so as long as you manage to spend the money & publish something by the end of the 5 years, the grant agency will be happy. e.g. if the original timeline was
yr 1 - postdoc 1 collects data
yr2 - postdoc 1 analyses, postdoc 2 starts
yr 3 - postdoc 1 writes up, postdoc 2 does something ... etc

they really won't care if your real world timeline is
yr1 - 6 months PI prep work (ethics / setup etc) then postdoc1 starts
yr2 - postdoc2 starts early because that works for her timing
yr3 - postdoc 1 quits, 6 month gap while you hire someone else ... etc

Essentially, I have NEVER had a grant where the actual timeline looked anything like the planned timeline. So I reckon it is best to get on with stuff (any kind of stuff) first and worry about the grant agency later. Make a decision & if they complain, ask forgiveness. Don't ask for permission for decisions because they just don't know.

Yes I agree re grant timelines

Thank you, parietal and bigkidsdidit, that's reassuring. I'm slightly less panicky now!

I particularly like the 'don't ask for permission advice'... :) It bears out my experience of many things in academia!

I've now also heard from the other referee who basically said the candidate is good but will need very clear targets etc, and from another colleague that the third referee, who gave a very positive assessment, is firm but fair. So I think I can risk it, with 6 month probation. And get the other posts filled ASAP.

But frankly I think I need someone holding my hand through this! It slightly blows my mind that with no line-management experience I am just expected to get on with it. The best support and advice I've had so far has come from my own personal networkand Mumsnet!rather than my research office.

@Sambal2 , your later posts sound more reassuring. Give him strict probationary requirements, but don't set him up to fail ie ensure the probation goals/targets are achievable for him.

As for your experience: could you back-appoint an advisory group? People to whom you report each 6 or 12 months, and they advise?