Hill, who has been hiring scientists for three decades, says she has noticed a similar shift in younger generations of jobseekers. Although candidates tend to be more diverse and polished than before, which she says is really positive, there is less tolerance for the long hours that she thinks can be essential for a successful research career. Nowadays, some applicants look for more of a nine-to-five job, she says. “That’s difficult in science, where flexibility is crucial. I see a research career as more of a vocation, which is its own reward and where you get out what you put in.”

Casey Greene, a bioinformatician at the University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus in Aurora, thinks that engagement is a better term for what the hirers surveyed by Nature feel is missing in applications. “There can be a lack of engagement sometimes, where a candidate might not do any research about a lab or a company or their products” before being interviewed, he says. To show engagement, applicants should prepare for their application carefully and mindfully, he adds. According to the survey, a lack of knowledge about the prospective employer’s research is the most common mistake applicants make (42% of hirers selected this as a ‘key mistake’), with giving generic answers in interviews a close second (37%).

Greene says that applicants can do their homework by looking at a few of the most recent papers or preprints from the lab they might be joining to find up-to-date information on what the lab is working on. If the research has a coding or informatics element, then looking up the team and its projects on code-sharing platforms such as GitHub would be worthwhile, he says.

Greene says that such preparation can be not only a recipe for success, as documented by the survey responses, but also a more comfortable path for most early-career job applicants “than the feeling that you have to turn it up to 11”.