A cross-sectional study of the use and effectiveness of the Individual Development Plan among doctoral students

Abstract

Background: The Individual Development Plan (IDP) was introduced as a tool to aid in career planning for doctoral trainees. Despite the National Institutes of Health and academic institutions creating policies that mandate the use of IDPs, little information exists regarding the use and effectiveness of the career planning tool. Methods: We conducted a multi-institutional, online survey to measure IDP use and effectiveness. The survey was distributed to potential respondents via social media and direct email. IDP survey questions were formatted using a five-point Likert scale (strongly agree, agree, neutral, disagree and strongly disagree). For data analysis purposes, responses were grouped into two categories (agree versus does not agree/disagree). The data were summarized as one-way frequencies and the Pearson chi-square test was used to determine the statistical significance of univariate associations between the survey variables and an outcome measure of the effectiveness of the IDP. Results: Among all respondents, fifty-three percent reported that they are required to complete an IDP while thirty-three percent reported that the tool is helpful to their career development. Further, our data suggests that the IDP is most effective when doctoral students complete the tool with faculty mentors with whom they have a positive relationship. Respondents who are confident about their career plans and who take advantage of career development resources at their institution are also more likely to perceive that the IDP is useful for their career development. Conclusion: Given the nuanced use and effectiveness of the IDP, we call for additional research to characterize the overall use and effectiveness of the IDP and to determine whether there are unintended negative consequences created through the use of the tool. Furthermore, we recommend an enhancement of career development infrastructure that would include mentorship training for faculty in order to provide substantially more career planning support to trainees.

Use and effectiveness of the Individual Development Plan among postdoctoral researchers: findings from a cross-sectional study

“…In general, the trends presented here for postdoctoral researchers are similar to our recent findings on the use and effectiveness of the IDP in PhD students 5 , but there are some nuanced differences. For example, compared to the rates in PhD students, the rates of required completion of the IDP among this study’s postdoctoral researchers are lower; the rates of completing the IDP but not discussing it with a PI/advisor are higher; and the rates of reporting that the IDP process is helpful to one’s career development are lower.…”

“…Among the respondents that completed an IDP, 38.4% found the tool helpful ( Supplementary File 3 ). As we have recently shown with PhD students 5 , the effectiveness of the IDP among its users is associated with positive mentorship relationships ( Figure 2 and Supplementary File 3 ). For example, 62.2% of those respondents who indicated that they could have an honest conversation with their PI/advisor found that the IDP process was helpful to their career versus 26.3% of those who disagreed (p < 0.001).…”

“…The authors report on the usage of IDPs by postdoctoral scholars, which is both a timely and fundamental topic within the broader graduate and postdoctoral professional development community. This work extends beyond the authors’ recently published article on IDP usage among doctoral students 1 to showcase how the instrument is currently being used by postdocs. The aforementioned manuscript on doctoral IDP usage extensively discusses policy and other issues surrounding IDPs, while this manuscript is lean on discussion.…”

The Dark Side of Development: A Systems Characterization of the Negative Mentoring Experiences of Doctoral Students

“…For instance, some mentees might desire more input and oversight, while others might want more independence. Entering Mentoring addresses how to align one's supervisory styles to meet particular mentee needs and desires (more or less supervision), including using individual development plans to create mutual expectations for graduate student progress and developing clear and shifting supervisory style over the course of a doctoral student's education (from more to less supervision; Clifford et al, 2013;Vanderford et al, 2018). Although there is some evidence of the effectiveness of Entering Mentoring (Pfund et al, 2014), future research is needed to determine whether participating in mentoring professional development mitigates or prevents negative mentoring experiences.…”

Career planning courses increase career readiness of graduate and postdoctoral trainees

“…Career awareness activities are most strongly associated with a career decision-making paradigm whereby the process begins with completing a career interest inventory with the purpose of narrowing career options that best match their personality type ( Hartung et al, 2015 ). In response to new advances in career theory such as Life Design ( Savickas, 2016 ; Savickas et al, 2009 ) and increasing disruptions in the world of work brought about by technology and globalization ( Schwab, 2019 ), made even more relevant by current job market trends related to the global response to COVID-19 ( Mathur, 2020 ), the focus on self-exploration skills has been used to bring more focus on skill-building activities that help individuals learn how to identify their skills, interests and values (including in graduate education; Vanderford et al , 2018a & Vanderford et al , 2018b ) and examine whether and how these transfer into a wide range or career opportunities ( Solberg, 2019 ).…”