I don't think just because they teach in business schools, they receive much more remuneration. It must be fair to other professors as well due to similar job scopes.

Based on my estimation, assoc professors should earn somewhere above 6k. Full fledged probably at about 8k +. Unless you are in harvard.. then.. but i think NBS and NUS should be around that range. Not typically quite high flyers on salary. But if you wish to join academia, that's something you should have thought about at the start.

Nope. My professor at NTU earns 14k/mth as an associate professor. It is not easy to be granted the title of associate prof...you need enough publications to be even considered for that position. Full fledge professor is 20k/mth.

That high? Any source?

I have no source but I'm unsure if you could find online. Teaching fellow without profession title already 8k. My source is from my own professors ...it is up to you to believe.

Just analyze logically. You think it is easy to become even an assistant professor? You know how many publications you need to even fulfill the basic criteria? It is damn difficult and we have lots of bright post-docs from other countries who could devote their time 24/7 to research. And you are talking about NUS NTU...

I honestly don't think it's that high. I like to trust statistics.
And also logical reasoning. Salary is determine by how much value you bring in to an industry. Whether you like it or not, it's a rule in economics. For this reason, this is why bankers who only knows how to do one plus one earns more than a quant doing complex mathematical models within the same bank, because one does bring in revenue directly, and one is trying to bring in with no conclusive results.

For academia or teaching staffs, no doubt it's hard to get that status with the publications, they don't actually value add the university in revenues. They take up money instead, the money they spend on their own research.

We know for a universal fact that polytechnics lecturer is 5k to 6k. As i explained earlier with the stats in MOM, someone earns 8k per month. Who can it be? If like what you say, that an assoc prof earn $14k, the graph will look funny as it come to some point and it will jump from a $6k to a $14k. There isn't a gradient. It's a vertical climb.

Granted, it's hard to get professorship. The amount of publication you have to do, the years you have to set aside for PHD education, resulting in the lost of opportunity cost. Even if you factor all these in, how much difference can it be?

I don't have a formula to calculate that, but i'm sure the difference will not be a 8k per month ($96000 PA) .

Furthermore i found something that you may like.

ExpatSingapore - Is S$90,000 salary good for a NUS senior fellow

10 years prof offerred $90k annual package by NUS in a bid to pull him to Singapore.

I may be wrong on some grounds, but the idea is there. They can't be fetching that high salary.

Appreciate yr reply :)
My basic degree is in Electrical Engineering. I am currently doing an MBA (part time). I hope that upon completion, I can enrol in a PhD program in finance and be a lecturer.

Yes, it's true that lecturers live in a controlled 'laboratory-like' environment. But I feel strongly that I belong in such a world. I have been in the corporate world long enough to acknowledge this.

So wrt my plan, how feasible is it? :D

I hope your MBA is in some prestigious university? At least ranking top 50 in world.
Why so is because academia is very very selective and particular about your origin of education.

Try to get your PhD from a prestigious university as well. The path is hard, you may need to set aside five to six years of your life studying. Or at least, doing a simple job that gives you time to study but remain stagnant in pay and progression.

But I have no doubts in your abilities. Electrical engineering is a tough degree, just completing it shows that you are of some calibre, definitely cut for finance mathematics. And well be prepared to answer people's question to you that why your path is so different. Engineering, business and finance is worlds apart! One technical, one management, and one technical in ANOTHER new field.

Have you thought about it? Is it worth it?

And also bear in mind the risk. My friend went ahead and complete his PhD without much thoughts. Got his PhD from some australian university. Not recognised anywhere, except that on the letter of rejection they address him as Dr. Lim. You should consider all these factors out there.

I'm trying to analyse it logically like you say from an economics point of view. Main idea being, they can't be paid that high because they don't bring remuneration value to company (university)

It's just fair that company pays for the people who brings in the revenue. This concept isn't new, and it's why derivatives analysts in bank earns less than a equally competent mortgage banker because of the value they add to the company. This phenomenon is criticised in many books because it's just confusing. Why does someone who has much better mathematical skills earn lesser than someone who doesn't? We can be sure that quants are the brightest in banks, many coming from prestigious university with PhDs. But they don't earn much. This concept is written in many books and i shall not dwell deeper in case i will bore you.

Underlying logic, we can think of quants in a bank as academia, people who do nothing but just research and come up with theory. If quants with PhDs can't exceed a 20k celling working for a bank that earns billions from their models, how can a full-fledged professor be earning 20k?

Professor, though prestigious, do not earn that much. They don't bring in direct revenue for the organisation. It's a hard truth, and people are not willing to accept it. How can some one who spend so much time and money on education not be earning as much as i thought? Because it's the economic model. Hence explain the saying "the people who only knows how to do plus minus divide and multiply can in fact earn more than the professor in mathematics". The only reason is the economic model.

And i found a link that you may be interested in. Two in fact.

NUS Asst. Prof can't afford HDB Flat. Got his PhD from imperial college UK.

Walao, even NUS asst prof also cannot afford to buy HDB flat..!!!!!!!!

Senior Prof with ten year experience in states offered a $90k annual package by NUS.

ExpatSingapore - Is S$90,000 salary good for a NUS senior fellow

They may be dated, but there's no way $90k p.a can become your said $240k p.a (you mentioned at least $20k a month) for a full prof in two years.

You're welcomed.

SMU finance profs make more than 200k, already a pittance compared to the average banker / trader they help produce.

Yep. They do.

All the answers that give vastly varying figures from 6k/month to 20k/month are all correct. The pay for profs is heavily dependent on a number of factors like:
1. What is your specific Phd in. A Phd(Finance) from a tier 1 American university is damn rare, and the prof will very easily get 30k a month starting. A Phd(Economics) from the same university will probably get at most 15k - 20k a month, simply because that Phd is easier to get from a Finance Phd.

2. Amount of academic research the Prof has done.
3. Amount of industry experience. (This factor doesn\'t weigh as heavily as academic research, since profs are academics after all.

4. You can\'t compare a poly lecturer pay to a university professor. it\'s really... very different.

5. How rich the university is, and the current strategy the university is employing. SMU is trying to grow their faculty very rapidly, and they are also very rich. They simply offer the NUS and NTU profs more money, and so they switch over to SMU. So assoc. profs in SMU easily get 300k - 400k /year, while those in NUS get 200k - 300k for teaching the exact same thing. [For 300k range, i\'m assuming Phd in Finance, Law or Business. Other types of Phd don\'t get so much].

6. And of course, it also depends on how well the Prof teaches.