Imagine spending five years conducting research, publishing in peer-reviewed journals, presenting at national and international conferences, and contributing to the intellectual life of a university. Then, upon entering the labour market, you are told: “Sorry, you are not eligible. You have zero work experience.” This is not a hypothetical scenario. It is the lived reality of thousands of doctoral graduates in India every year. The degree celebrated as the pinnacle of academic achievement is treated as if it never happened.(Sign up for THEdge, The Hindu’s weekly education newsletter.)Skill underutilisationIndia awards thousands of Ph.D.s every year. However, the number of permanent faculty positions to absorb them is limited. This mismatch forces many doctoral graduates to seek careers in research, consulting, and other knowledge-intensive sectors. Yet these jobs often require three to five years of prior work experience. Because time spent pursuing a Ph.D. is rarely recognised as formal work experience, many Ph.D. graduates are filtered out at the very first stage of recruitment. Not because they lack required skills, but because their doctoral work does not fit a rigid definition of work experience.Join THEdge LinkedIn groupThe consequences are already visible. Many doctoral graduates accept temporary positions to accumulate the narrowly defined work experience. These jobs often offer low salaries, limited or no social security, and no assured annual increments. The uncertainty of contract renewals, coupled with the risk of termination at any time, leaves many in prolonged financial insecurity and psychological distress. Many apply for Group C and D government positions that require only a Class X qualification, drawn by the promise of permanent employment and basic job security. Labour economists describe this as qualification mismatch or skill underutilisation: highly educated individuals are employed in jobs far below their qualifications and capabilities.Waste of public investmentIn the most troubling cases, some abandon research altogether and drift into informal work, selling fruits and vegetables on the roadside or driving taxis to make ends meet. These stories are often portrayed as inspirational tales of entrepreneurship and resilience. In reality, they represent the failure of the labour market to absorb and utilise highly trained human capital. For the state, this is a waste of public investment. For Ph.D. graduates, it leads to professional frustration and disillusionment. For younger generations, it weakens the aspiration to pursue doctoral studies. If this trend continues, India’s future pool of research talent may shrink.Part of the problem lies in how work experience is defined. It is often defined as time spent in formal employment, evidenced by the receipt of a salary and the maintenance of service records. Since Ph.D. scholars in India are formally classified as students rather than employees, they receive fellowships instead of salaries and are generally not issued service records or employment benefits. As a result, the years spent pursuing a Ph.D. do not fit this conventional definition of work experience. The University Grants Commission (UGC) Regulations, 2018, also state that the period spent pursuing an M.Phil or Ph.D. shall not count as teaching or research experience for faculty appointments. In the context of faculty recruitment, this distinction has a legitimate rationale. Classroom experience cannot be assumed from a doctoral degree alone. The problem begins when this understanding of work experience spills over into the wider labour market.What exactly is work experience?Work Experience is not simply the passage of time in a paid job or the receipt of a salary. In economic terms, it serves as a signal of productivity; in organisational terms, it signals workplace readiness. It provides evidence of competence: the ability to solve problems, work independently, manage responsibility, collaborate with others, adapt to uncertainty, and consistently deliver results. The substance of experience matters more than its institutional label. By this standard, doctoral research is a form of high-level work experience. Doctoral researchers identify problems, formulate research designs, collect and analyse evidence, manage long-term projects, respond to expert criticism, and produce measurable outputs within strict timelines, often while teaching and mentoring students. These are not passive learning activities; they are forms of professional labour. Yet because this labour takes place under the institutional label of “student” rather than “employee”, it remains invisible under rigid definitions of work experience.One common criticism is that doctoral years cannot be equated with industrial or corporate experience. Industry professionals work under market pressures, deal directly with clients, manage commercial risks, and operate within organisational hierarchies. Doctoral researchers, too, work under intense performance pressures, compete for funding and publication opportunities, respond to rigorous peer scrutiny, and are continuously evaluated on measurable outputs.Examples from the globeThe issue is not whether doctoral experience should substitute for industrial experience. Academic and industrial settings develop different forms of expertise, each valuable in its own right. The problem arises when one form of professional experience is recognised and rewarded while the other is treated as though it has no value at all. Currently, the recognition flows one way. The UGC’s Professor of Practice framework explicitly enables higher education institutions to appoint distinguished industry practitioners without requiring a Ph.D. Yet doctoral research often receives little recognition as professional experience in the wider labour market.Several European countries, including Germany, the Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden and Norway, have already made this correction. They do not treat doctoral candidates merely as students but as early-career researchers who contribute to knowledge creation. Accordingly, Ph.D. candidates are employed on formal contracts, earn salaries, receive employment benefits, and build recognised work records while pursuing their doctorates. In the United States and the United Kingdom, too, employers routinely recruit Ph.D. graduates into research, analytics, policy, and consulting roles, recognising the doctorate as evidence of advanced professional capability rather than a lack of experience.As India aspires to become a global knowledge powerhouse and innovation-driven economy, it cannot afford to undervalue the very people who produce knowledge. A necessary policy correction is to formally recognise doctoral research as relevant professional experience, at least for consultancy and research-intensive roles. Such recognition will not eliminate the challenges faced by doctoral graduates overnight, but it would correct a long-standing inconsistency in how professional experience is understood. It would recognise a simple truth: the intellectual labour involved in producing knowledge is real work and should not be treated as zero work experience.(The author holds a Doctorate in Economics of Education from NIEPA and is currently associated with NCTE. Views expressed are personal.)