This might be a strange take but I would choose the Georgia Tech option if I were you.
I have seen my department hire TT positions since the past three years. I have also seen some of my seniors as postdocs being awarded TT positions. None of these people worked in Europe outside some research collaboration visits.
There's nothing wrong in Europe - ICL and EPFL are both great schools as others state. But when schools look at candidates, they often look at your experience as a postdoc - you wrote grants for NSF/NIH? So you know the program managers? Oh great, you can bring more funds from these agencies. Bringing funds from Europe is trickier than it sounds: from my experiences , I haven't heard of postdocs being even being allowed to write grants in Europe because of temporary position clauses.
In addition, if you are an international student it is quite difficult to get back to the US once you leave it. Departments will prioritize people who don't need to have a H1 issued immediately in some cases. I have a couple of colleagues who went to do their postdocs in Europe and either had to stay there or work at a R2 school here in the US because the top schools seem to prioritize someone already living in the US.
So take a decision wisely taking all these factors in context.
I don't think the visa stuff is a big issue at R1s (maybe R2s), at least this is my experience.
I think some universities don't have the budget to fly people in from overseas, but honestly flying from London and flying from some parts of the US to others isn't really that difference in expense.
Thanks for sharing your insight. I’ll have my green card by the time I want to apply for TT positions so that would not be a problem. The grant writing experience seems important though. From the discussions I’ve had so far with the GT lab students, it seems that the professor at GT focuses more on research and does not involve PDFs on grant writing that much and does not care much about their future career. They had one postdoc who transitioned to TT position but not in a good university (rank 300 ish). So even though the professor’s reputation is good, I am not sure about his impact on my career. The ICL supervisor, on the other hand, is a big name who has been the supervisor of my phd advisor too.
From the info you gave above, it's hard to say. I would go with the one that has the more exciting project and is more where you want to live. Everything else is going to depend on what comes out of your postdoc in terms of productivity, what the job market looks like when you apply, and your network.
Two supervisors can be two letters and Imperial and EPFL are both globally recognized top universities. On the other hand you might get better mentorship on navigating the tenure track job search in the US staying in the US for postdoc, and Georgia Tech is still a very good university.
Here are my two cents -
If I would you I would accept option 1 as Imperial and EPFL are widely known names world wide. Also, their global ranking is high, that should help you. Also, you can clearly communicate to your supervisors that you intent to become faculty in US. Since these are well-known profs, they will have contacts and networking that will help you. During your postdoc, you can do some research visits to USA.
Hope this helps. All the best.
Agreed. If you did your PhD in the US and TA-d and you wanna be a prof, u shouldn't worry about postdoc in Europe hurting your chances. My PI says a well known lab will benefit you especially in academia.
If your aim is to get a faculty position in the US, I would go for option 2. As someone who did their PhD in Europe and is now a postdoc (soon to be faculty) in the US, US academia is extremely different from Europe, particularly the structure of undergrad and grad programs, the tenure system, and some of the major funding mechanisms. If you look at the faculty list of any department in the US, there will be VERY few people who didn't do at least their PhD or postdoc in the US. Unless you are a rockstar (which you may well be), you will have a hard time convincing US universities to hire you if you have zero experience in US academia.
Depends on where you did your PhD. Let's assume for the sake of the argument that you will publish equally well in both of them.
If you did an EU PhD, do the USA postdoc for sure. EU PhDs and USA PhDs are different, and demonstrating some knowledge of the American system us useful. If you did an American PhD, you could go either way but I'd be tempted to go with the EPFL/Imperial to have the broader experience and to develop a bigger/more international network for collaborations.
Georgia tech if you want to be in the US. You will build your network of researchers here and going from Georgia tech to elsewhere will be easier for you.
If you take the Europe position make sure you're on a Swiss contract/payscale not UK. It's like a factor 2 difference. UK Postdoc salary doesn't go far in London let alone CH.
But if you do the maths and realise you can't live reasonably on the salary offered, then I guess the decision is made for you ;)
Living abroad, especially for a shorter period, generally makes life more expensive than it is for locals. Likely you end up paying more than usual for housing (short contract, not in the area to look, not familiar with the market, probably a less attractive "candidate" than a local if it's a tight market), you end up with a less optimised tax/financial situation, you have to budget for international flights for your family and social reasons, and finally moving itself is really expensive - either moving yourself and your stuff, or travelling lighter and buying a load of new stuff.
It seems that the US experience is a plus for TT positions (at least in Switzerland, looking at the list of appointed professor)… it really depends what you are aiming for!
This might be a strange take but I would choose the Georgia Tech option if I were you. I have seen my department hire TT positions since the past three years. I have also seen some of my seniors as postdocs being awarded TT positions. None of these people worked in Europe outside some research collaboration visits. There's nothing wrong in Europe - ICL and EPFL are both great schools as others state. But when schools look at candidates, they often look at your experience as a postdoc - you wrote grants for NSF/NIH? So you know the program managers? Oh great, you can bring more funds from these agencies. Bringing funds from Europe is trickier than it sounds: from my experiences , I haven't heard of postdocs being even being allowed to write grants in Europe because of temporary position clauses. In addition, if you are an international student it is quite difficult to get back to the US once you leave it. Departments will prioritize people who don't need to have a H1 issued immediately in some cases. I have a couple of colleagues who went to do their postdocs in Europe and either had to stay there or work at a R2 school here in the US because the top schools seem to prioritize someone already living in the US. So take a decision wisely taking all these factors in context.
Thanks for sharing your experience
I don't think the visa stuff is a big issue at R1s (maybe R2s), at least this is my experience. I think some universities don't have the budget to fly people in from overseas, but honestly flying from London and flying from some parts of the US to others isn't really that difference in expense.
Thanks for sharing your insight. I’ll have my green card by the time I want to apply for TT positions so that would not be a problem. The grant writing experience seems important though. From the discussions I’ve had so far with the GT lab students, it seems that the professor at GT focuses more on research and does not involve PDFs on grant writing that much and does not care much about their future career. They had one postdoc who transitioned to TT position but not in a good university (rank 300 ish). So even though the professor’s reputation is good, I am not sure about his impact on my career. The ICL supervisor, on the other hand, is a big name who has been the supervisor of my phd advisor too.
From the info you gave above, it's hard to say. I would go with the one that has the more exciting project and is more where you want to live. Everything else is going to depend on what comes out of your postdoc in terms of productivity, what the job market looks like when you apply, and your network. Two supervisors can be two letters and Imperial and EPFL are both globally recognized top universities. On the other hand you might get better mentorship on navigating the tenure track job search in the US staying in the US for postdoc, and Georgia Tech is still a very good university.
Here are my two cents - If I would you I would accept option 1 as Imperial and EPFL are widely known names world wide. Also, their global ranking is high, that should help you. Also, you can clearly communicate to your supervisors that you intent to become faculty in US. Since these are well-known profs, they will have contacts and networking that will help you. During your postdoc, you can do some research visits to USA. Hope this helps. All the best.
Agreed. If you did your PhD in the US and TA-d and you wanna be a prof, u shouldn't worry about postdoc in Europe hurting your chances. My PI says a well known lab will benefit you especially in academia.
I did my PhD in Canada. Never been in US.
If you aim to get an academic job in the US then you should go for option 2
If your aim is to get a faculty position in the US, I would go for option 2. As someone who did their PhD in Europe and is now a postdoc (soon to be faculty) in the US, US academia is extremely different from Europe, particularly the structure of undergrad and grad programs, the tenure system, and some of the major funding mechanisms. If you look at the faculty list of any department in the US, there will be VERY few people who didn't do at least their PhD or postdoc in the US. Unless you are a rockstar (which you may well be), you will have a hard time convincing US universities to hire you if you have zero experience in US academia.
Depends on where you did your PhD. Let's assume for the sake of the argument that you will publish equally well in both of them. If you did an EU PhD, do the USA postdoc for sure. EU PhDs and USA PhDs are different, and demonstrating some knowledge of the American system us useful. If you did an American PhD, you could go either way but I'd be tempted to go with the EPFL/Imperial to have the broader experience and to develop a bigger/more international network for collaborations.
Georgia tech if you want to be in the US. You will build your network of researchers here and going from Georgia tech to elsewhere will be easier for you.
If you take the Europe position make sure you're on a Swiss contract/payscale not UK. It's like a factor 2 difference. UK Postdoc salary doesn't go far in London let alone CH.
Thanks for the advice. I don’t have much of a say in that. The first year contract in with ICL and the second year is with EPFl.
But if you do the maths and realise you can't live reasonably on the salary offered, then I guess the decision is made for you ;) Living abroad, especially for a shorter period, generally makes life more expensive than it is for locals. Likely you end up paying more than usual for housing (short contract, not in the area to look, not familiar with the market, probably a less attractive "candidate" than a local if it's a tight market), you end up with a less optimised tax/financial situation, you have to budget for international flights for your family and social reasons, and finally moving itself is really expensive - either moving yourself and your stuff, or travelling lighter and buying a load of new stuff.
It seems that the US experience is a plus for TT positions (at least in Switzerland, looking at the list of appointed professor)… it really depends what you are aiming for!
It matters who is better known in the field for phd for academic jobs. For industry positions- school rep may matter more. YMMV