How to pick a PhD programme

Questions to ask before doing a PhD in molecular life sciences

You have a good overview of the leading PhD programmes in molecular life sciences around the world, with Europe being increasingly popular in recent years. How many come to mind when you try to think of the top programmes in Europe only, and which features make the Vienna BioCenter PhD Program stand out from the others?

I think first we would need to define what we mean by “top”. The PhD programmes that I know and follow in detail are, like that of the Vienna BioCenter, mainly focused on basic research in molecular life sciences and they all put the science first; then they are very international in their student body, offer access to good core facilities, offer exclusively English-language work environments, and care for their students’ development both as researchers and personally. Alumni of these programmes are well-equipped for postdocs at leading institutions at any good research institute or university, but also for careers in the private sector, from start-ups to pharma corporations. All these programmes are highly selective and very demanding but also train great future scientists and have impressive publication records to show for their students. So, there will be an element of personal bias in my “top” PhD programmes, but I think at least in academia my biases are widely shared. [laughs]

So, the number of “my” top programmes in Europe that meet these criteria… probably around ten, of which maybe five or six would be within the EU, the others in the UK or Switzerland. All of these would be excellent and competitive globally, not just in Europe. They are internationally minded, and thinking of it, also very interconnected. I meet my counterparts from these programmes regularly at European coordinator meetings we organise. I think this points at an indirect perk of them – once you are at a “top” place, it becomes easier to identify other places that meet the same standards.

So, what makes the Vienna BioCenter PhD Program stand out? I think we have some research subjects that are particularly attractive due to a critical mass of world-class labs working on them, such as genome organisation or work at the interface of structural biology and function, then also organoid research and stem cell biology including regeneration, or RNA biology - and also others. Then there is an exceptionally open culture of sharing ideas, reagents, data, across campus. Many scientists here find the collaborative atmosphere the most striking feature of the Vienna BioCenter. We see this also in the many publications with authors from more than one research group and even institutes. Collaboration is something the PhD programme actively fosters by measures such as our weekly campus seminar, in which students and postdocs present to the entire community here. It is not just a crucial means to train our students’ presentation skills and give them a platform for collecting feedback on their work, it is also an extremely effective means for everybody to know what other labs are working on.

And a softer aspect: Vienna is a very nice city to live in with many great perks, and I think one can live very well here on our student salaries if I compare this to other cities and programmes.

Which research institutes offer the best facilities and core technologies and how would a potential PhD student go about evaluating these?

I think the answer is two-fold: the presence of good and diverse facilities together with expert staff that can offer guidance; and the conditions under which facilities may be used by individual research groups and students.

Simply checking the available core facilities should be easy: research organisations list them on their websites. In the case of the Vienna BioCenter, there are campus-wide ones, the Vienna BioCenter Core Facilities, and all individual institutes have additional in-house core facilities. It should be straightforward to either review a programme and research site yourself or simply ask an LLM to put together a breakdown.

The “accessibility” of core facilities is harder to check. Some institutions charge user fees, others do not; in some use is overwhelming and people must wait for access. I think ideally you want to talk to current members of the campus or alumni, and you could find people for example on LinkedIn or listed on labs’ websites or talk to them during your interviews. You can also review media coverage on core facilities, or the extent to which they publish methodological papers, or are acknowledged in publications from the campus.

Compared with other institutions I worked at, at the Vienna BioCenter, the core facilities and the ease with which you can use them are exceptional. Postdocs immediately realise this and appreciate it greatly; with PhD student applicants, I often see that they don’t have the research experience to immediately recognise the asset we have with the core facilities here. But they learn this quickly when they spend more time here and talk to peers from other universities or institutes. Both annual student and postdoc surveys continuously praise the facilities at the highest level across all institutes.

What makes a PhD programme a good fit for someone interested in molecular biology, genetics, cell biology or biotechnology?

I think the subject label alone tells you surprisingly little. A genetics project can involve a lot of cell biology, and a molecular biology project might require you to learn quite sophisticated computational approaches. So, I would start with the questions that genuinely interest you: what would you like to understand, and how would you like to investigate it? Look at what the research groups actually do, rather than whether the programme’s name matches the title of your master’s degree.

Then ask what you want to get out of a PhD. If you enjoy trying to understand fundamental biological mechanisms, a basic research programme such as the Vienna BioCenter PhD Program could be a very good fit. If your main motivation is to develop a particular technology or work towards a clinical application, look carefully at whether the available projects offer that. Basic research can certainly lead to applications, but that does not mean every project will have an applied component. My advice at the stage of PhD would also be – keep an open mind. There are many fascinating topics out there – many you may not yet have come across. When applying to a programme, make sure to explore all positions offered and their topics with care – you may get hooked on something you didn’t expect and increase your chances of finding a good fit for your PhD.

And finally, there is the environment. You want a place where you can develop beyond your individual project: learn new methods, discuss ideas with people who have different expertise, and get support when things become difficult. Here at the Vienna BioCenter, we put great emphasis on the community and on connecting people across research groups and even institutes. This way, we aim to make our research more collaborative, with a mindset that I think transpires from many features of our programme.

I would put the quality of the science first, and then look for clear expectations, the flanking support for professional development beyond the pure research, and a culture that makes you feel comfortable asking questions. A good fit is not just somewhere that wants to recruit you; it is somewhere you can imagine doing demanding work, learning from setbacks, and becoming more independent over several years. And of course, all at a place where you can see yourself living well for a significant part of your life.

At the Vienna BioCenter, you apply for the PhD Program first and then you look for a specific lab. How can I assess the quality, such as mentoring style or scientific output of potential PhD supervisors?

I would separate those two things initially. Scientific output is relatively easy to investigate: read some recent papers from the lab, including the work led by PhD students. Do the questions interest you? Can you understand what the students contributed? Look beyond journal names and ask whether the work is thoughtful, convincing, and moving the field forward. A publication list needs context, too: a newly established group will naturally have a different record from a lab that has been running for twenty years. So, looking at the work itself is key.

Mentoring is harder to assess from a website, so you need to talk to people. During interviews ask the supervisor how often they meet students, how projects are developed, and what happens when a project does not work. How much direction do they provide at the beginning, and how do they help students become independent? There is no single ideal mentoring style. Some students appreciate very close guidance; others want more freedom. But freedom should not mean being left without support.

Then talk to current students and, if possible, former lab members, ideally without the supervisor present. Ask concrete questions: when you need feedback, can you get it? Can you disagree with your supervisor? What happens when an experiment fails repeatedly? What do you wish you had known before joining? Those questions tend to tell you more than simply asking whether someone is happy.

During the selection process for the Vienna BioCenter PhD Program, we take great care that there are time and space for these interactions so candidates can get this information.

I think applicants sometimes feel that the interview is only about proving themselves. But you are also evaluating the lab. The supervisor will be a very important person in your working life for several years, so asking how that relationship would work is not being difficult. It is making an informed choice.

How competitive is admission to the Vienna BioCenter PhD Program, and what do successful applicants typically “have on their CVs”? Are there any key achievements that recruiting PIs look out for?

It is highly competitive, we get up to 2000 applications per year for 60 positions, which is roughly in line with other internationally leading PhD programmes. This may sound disheartening for a potential applicant, but I would not worry too much and especially not obsess over an “impressive” CV, because our scientists know that they better look for potential than accomplishment. I will get to this again later but let me first explain the harder criteria that candidates need to meet.

A very sound academic record, at least six months of relevant research experience, and certain skills that come with lab experience are requirements that cannot be negotiated. International exposure is a valuable asset, but simply listing techniques or prestigious institutions tells us relatively little about how you think. This is where we move to your potential.

What matters is whether you can explain your work: what was the question, why did it matter, and how did your experiments address it? What was your own contribution? If something did not work, how did you investigate the problem? I think those are much more revealing questions than how many methods someone has used.

A publication or an award can certainly strengthen an application, but I would be careful about treating these as a checklist. Students have very different opportunities to contribute to publications, and a project’s outcome is not entirely under their control. A thoughtful account of a difficult project can tell you a great deal about someone’s potential.

Recruiting PIs are looking for curiosity, scientific understanding, creativity, and the motivation to keep working through uncertainty. Mind that different PIs will look for slightly different things. Communication matters, too: science is not something you do entirely on your own, and research at the Vienna BioCenter is especially collaborative. My advice would be to make your contribution and your thinking visible in your application, rather than trying to make every experience sound spectacular. And – do not submit a generic, AI-generated application! Show us your potential.

How should I tailor my motivation letter and interview answers for a highly competitive molecular life sciences PhD programme such as yours?

Be specific and make it your own. Saying that you are passionate about science and want to join a world-class institution does not distinguish you from other applicants. Tell us what interests you scientifically, which experiences shaped that interest, and why the research available here is a good next step.

I would identify a few recruiting groups on campus whose questions genuinely appeal to you, read some of their work, and explain the connection to your interests. You do not need to propose a complete PhD project or pretend that you already understand everything. But you should be able to say more than “this lab uses a technique I would like to learn”. What could that technique help you discover?

For the interviews, know your own research well. Be prepared to explain the reasoning behind your experiments, the controls, the limitations of your conclusions, and what you would do next. Practise discussing your work with someone outside your immediate field; that helps you distinguish the central idea from the technical detail.

And do not memorise polished answers so closely that you cannot have a conversation. If you do not know something, say so, and then explain how you might approach it. Being able to think through an unfamiliar question is more useful than trying to sound as though you have all the answers.

While some PhD programmes offer rotations, students in the Vienna BioCenter PhD Program go straight into their research group’s lab. Potential applicants may ask themselves: Should I apply to a programme with laboratory rotations? Which pros and cons do you see, and why have you decided to place students with their lab from the start?

I think rotations and direct entry can both work very well. The important question is what you need in order to make a good decision. If you are still exploring quite different research areas, rotations give you an opportunity to experience them before committing. They can also help you understand which working environment and mentoring style suit you.

There are limitations, though. A short rotation is only a snapshot of a lab, and a rotation project may not resemble the longer-term project you would eventually pursue. You also spend time repeatedly learning new systems and settling into new groups. And applicants should check how the final matching works: does admission to the programme guarantee a place in a lab they would be happy to join?

Our approach puts that decision before the start of the PhD. Through the selection process, conversations with potential supervisors and students, and a campus visit, applicants can investigate the scientific and personal fit. The advantage is that you join your research group and begin developing your project from the outset, with continuity in your supervision and training.

But direct entry makes careful preparation particularly important. Joining a group does not mean that your scientific interests must become narrow: on a big and diverse campus such as the Vienna BioCenter, seminars and collaborations are a crucial part of your experience. I would choose between these models based on how ready you feel to make an informed lab choice, rather than assuming one is inherently better.

What questions should I ask current PhD students to understand a programme’s culture, workload, and supervision quality?

Ask about what happens in practice, not just what is supposed to happen. “How often do you meet your supervisor, and what are those meetings like?” is more useful than “Is the supervision good?” Likewise, “What happened the last time your project ran into difficulty?” can tell you a lot about the support available. You can also ask if there is systematic student progress monitoring and thesis advisory committee support built into the programme.

For workload, I would ask what a typical week looks like, whether evenings and weekends are occasional necessities or routine expectations, and whether students feel comfortable taking their holidays. Experimental work can require flexibility, and you may want to work long hours because you are excited about the outcome of that experiment, but that is different from a culture in which being constantly present is treated as evidence of commitment. Programme managers may have answers – at the Vienna BioCenter, for example, we have annual surveys on student wellbeing, and we have a precise picture of the time students put into their research and how they are coping with it, and we can share such information upon request.

Then ask about the relationships within the lab and across the programme. Do people help each other? Can students question an interpretation or admit a mistake? Are they able to attend courses and explore collaborations? If a problem cannot be resolved with the supervisor, do they know whom to approach, and would they feel comfortable doing so? Again, programme managers may be ready to provide insights; at the Vienna BioCenter, we have a tight support network with designated staff that oversees student development as well as supervisors and separate advisors, but also external support via ombudspeople and a professional coach that advises on a range of issues. We have concrete actions that aim to help our students to thrive even under the inevitable pressure of doing a PhD in an elite environment. This is something you might want to look out for.

And finally: talk to more than one person, ideally at different stages of their PhD. A first-year student and someone writing their thesis will have different perspectives. One question I particularly like is: “What do you wish you had known before joining?” and maybe also: “What is something you will certainly miss when you leave the campus?” It gives people room to talk about both the strengths and the things they found difficult.

How well does a PhD at the Vienna BioCenter prepare graduates for careers in academia versus biotech and pharma?

The scientific foundation is relevant to both. You learn to turn an open question into a research strategy, evaluate evidence critically, work with complex methods, and communicate your conclusions. You also learn to manage a project that does not come with a reliable instruction manual. And you learn how to work in a team and with a supervisor. Those abilities are valuable in academic research and in biotech and pharma, and so we generally believe that excelling in academia will also give you a head start for any attractive position in the private sector.

For an academic career, the research environment, your scientific work, and the relationships you build can provide a strong starting point for a postdoc – this is where the Vienna BioCenter PhD Program can bring most to the table. The networks of our scientists, the critical mass on campus, the exceptional standard of our research, the global visibility of the Vienna BioCenter, the excellent service facilities. We have everything for you to use your PhD as a stepping stone to a stellar research career.

For industry, I would encourage students to explore what different roles involve. “Biotech and pharma” cover very different jobs, and an excellent basic research background does not automatically teach you about drug discovery and product development, regulatory requirements, or working towards commercial milestones. Depending on your interests, you may need to complement your research training with knowledge of those areas. Speaking from my experience here, while our focus in the programme is clearly academic, the proximity to start-up companies and big pharma industries is a defining feature of the Vienna BioCenter. It is very common for alumni to find opportunities on site, and the start-up incubator in the neighbouring building is full of familiar faces.

I think the important thing is not to treat an industry career as something to consider only if academia does not work out. Explore both early, talk to alumni, and use professional development opportunities to understand your options. You do not have to know your final destination when you start, but you should leave your PhD better informed about it.

What is it like to live in Vienna as an international PhD student, including salary, housing, healthcare and social life?

An important starting point is that our PhD students are employees of their research institute, rather than relying solely on a scholarship. Their contracts include health insurance and other social insurance benefits, even contributions to a pension plan. Salaries vary slightly among institutes, so applicants should ask for the current figures and understand the difference between gross salary and take-home pay before planning their budget.

I think our programme, which is fully funded, and the cost of living in Vienna offer a very good balance between salary and quality of life. Housing is an important part of that calculation. Whether you share a flat or live alone makes a difference. I would ask current students what they actually spend, how they found accommodation, and what they would recommend to a newcomer. Remember to budget for the move and any upfront housing costs, not just your monthly rent.

The programme provides support with visas and residence permits, and Vienna is a city where you get by with English perfectly well.

Socially, an international research community such as ours gives you a good starting point: you meet people who have also moved countries and understand the experience. But I would encourage students to build a life outside the lab as well, whether through music, sport, cultural activities, or simply exploring the city. A PhD is demanding, and having things you enjoy beyond your project is part of making it sustainable.

About Eva Schmid

Eva Schmid is the Head of Scientific Training at the Vienna BioCenter, where she directs the campus-wide training portfolio, including the flagship Vienna BioCenter PhD Program, the international Summer School, postdoctoral development initiatives, and the Vienna BioCenter Leadership Program. In her role, Eva leads the strategy and coordination of comprehensive training programmes across the campus’ research institutes and partner universities, dedicated to equipping early-career researchers with the scientific and professional skills needed to thrive in modern academia and industry.

A biochemist and cell biologist by training, Eva brings nearly two decades of international research experience to scientific education and talent development. She earned her diploma in microbiology from the University of Vienna before her PhD in biochemistry and molecular biology at the University of Cambridge (MRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology). Following her doctoral studies, she conducted postdoctoral research as a Miller Fellow and subsequently served as a research scientist at the University of California, Berkeley, where her work focused on membrane biophysics, synthetic biology, and immune cell mechanics.

Since returning to Vienna in 2020 to lead the Scientific Training Unit, Eva has focused on cultivating an inclusive, empowering research culture for the next generation of life scientists. Addressing the widespread lack of leadership training in academic pathways, she established the Vienna BioCenter Leadership Program to cultivate supportive, effective leaders who shape positive research environments. Alongside her team, she also launched the Vienna BioCenter Alumni Program and Network, connecting current researchers with alumni mentors who have transitioned into successful careers across academia and industry. An active collaborator within a leading network of European training coordinators - including partners at EMBL, the Francis Crick Institute in London, ETH Zurich, the CRG in Barcelona and many more - Eva exchanges cutting-edge best practices in graduate and postdoctoral education, bringing a global, strategic perspective to advising prospective PhD candidates on building impactful life science careers.

About the Vienna BioCenter PhD Program

The Vienna BioCenter PhD Program is one of the top molecular biology PhD programmes in Europe and offers fully funded doctoral training in molecular life sciences in an international research community in Vienna, Austria. It brings together more than 60 research groups across four institutes: the Research Institute of Molecular Pathology (IMP), the Institute of Molecular Biotechnology (IMBA), the Gregor Mendel Institute (GMI), and the Max Perutz Labs. The programme is a joint doctoral school of the University of Vienna and the Medical University of Vienna.

Students join their research group from the outset, pursuing an independent project supported by specialist scientific facilities, mentorship and a structured curriculum. Research spans molecular mechanisms, genome biology, cell biology, developmental biology and related fields. Scientific training and professional development help students build the skills for careers within and beyond academia. The four- to five-year PhD is based on an employment contract with benefits. The programme is recognised for its academic rigour and the outstanding scientific record of its graduates.
More: https://training.vbc.ac.at/phd-program/

About doing a life science PhD in Europe

A growing number of locations in the European Union, Switzerland and the United Kingdom offer exceptional doctoral opportunities in molecular life sciences, defined by highly international research communities, world-class core facilities, and the increasing integration of experimental biology with computational and physical sciences. Leading research hubs often span more than one institution and include Amsterdam, Barcelona, Basel, Cambridge, Dresden, Freiburg, Heidelberg, London, Mainz, Munich, Oxford, Utrecht, Vienna, and Zurich. With tightening visa restrictions in other parts of the world, many of the better European programmes report an uptick in overseas applications.

Doctoral structures vary considerably across the continent, and prospective students must examine both funding models and institutional frameworks. Programmes typically span four years, but arrangements range from predoctoral fellowships, such as those at EMBL, to fully salaried employment contracts that include social and health insurance, as provided at the Vienna BioCenter. When evaluating potential programmes, applicants should carefully weigh guaranteed funding duration, supervisory culture, and local living costs alongside the scientific fit of individual labs. To help prospective students develop a better understanding of the opportunities in the European life science scene, several life science PhD programmes under the leadership of the Vienna BioCenter PhD Program host an annual information event, the Doctoral Insights Symposium. The event is virtual and presents information on more than a dozen of Europe’s best molecular biology and biomedicine PhD programmes. Participation is remote and free.
More: https://www.doctoralinsights.at/