What type of content (depth/breadth) is expected for a short presentation for Asst Professor interview in the UK? I have been recently offered an interview call for my dream job - Asst. Professor (above lecturer grade, but below Assoc Prof/Reader grade in the UK) in a newly founded research group at a mid-tier UK university.

I have just finished my PhD last month (Mar 2019) from a top-tier (Oxbridge) university in the UK and had applied for this position without really expecting an interview call. At the start of the interview, I am asked to deliver a 10 minute presentation titled "Your 3-year plan to become an independent academic"

My current problem is that this interview is scheduled immediately (within 2 days), and this doesn't give me sufficient time to contact my former PhD supervisor(s) for their valuable advice.

I have zero post-doc experience as an independent researcher. My questions are:


How deeply technical should I go in the presentation slides for such an opportunity? (i.e. are details at the equation-level required and journal citations expected?)
Should I have identified specific research methodologies, potentially leading to the PhD title for the students I shall be supervising?
Is it appropriate to be more modest and aim to only co-supervise (rather than be primary supervisor for) my first PhD student?
Is an individual year-wise breakdown/Gantt chart expected at such faculty interviews?
Should I identify the grants that I shall be applying to (in particular, the specific EPSRC schemes that exist for early career researchers)?
Are there any other aspects that I may have completely missed here?


I am really sorry to be naive in asking a lot of questions here. This faculty position is in the exact same area as my PhD (in energy engineering/alternative fuels) and I'd like to give it my best.
While really short, 10 minute job talks in the UK are the standard and I actually think they work pretty well in that they do a good job of weeding people out. Sure, there were applicants that we turned down because they screwed up the job talk, but generally if the job talk went well, we were happy with the candidate. The best job talks accomplish 4 things.

First, they demonstrate ownership of your research. Many recent graduates were handed a PhD project and really never made it, or a portion of it, there own. Schools want to hire people that own their research. Talk about what your supervisor envisioned the project as being and how you transformed it into something even better.

Second, they frame the research in a way that makes it broadly accessible and highlights links to other members of the faculty. You don't need to hit the faculty member over the head, but you can talk about how your work on underwater basket weaving is important to consider when studying transportation of goods. During the Q/A portion of the talk, there is almost always a question about how your work relates to someone else's in the department. Alice may ask you how your work links with Bob's.

Third, they highlight which aspects of the technical details you have mastered and what things you still need to master. They will want to see that your current technical skills will allow you to pull off an interesting and funding worthy project. The best talks bring the audience to the weeds, acknowledge you are at the weeds and that you are happy to talk about them all day/night, all without actually going into the weeds. At the end of the talk you will inevitably get a probing technical question about some detail of your method from someone who has read your papers and understands what is going on (at least in a narrow scope). For these questions you apologize to the audience that you are about to jump into the weeds and give the technical answer.

The final thing is that they present a set of aims of the next research question. Ideally, the whole talk builds towards these so the faculty can see how your previous work leads to the aims and that your skill set will let you answer them. Even better is when a couple of other faculty can see ways to collaborate with you on the project. You do not need titles of sub projects or a timeline. Having identified a funding mechanism is always nice. You don't want to sound too independent at this stage, rather you want to come off as receptive to input and willing to modify the project to capture the strengths of the school. If there is a dinner/lunch afterwards, this will be the foundation of many of those discussions.