Missed opportunities for engagement
Most students we spoke with said they had never encountered defence-related career options during high shool career talks, university internships, or even graduate expos. For many, the first time they thought about defence as a workplace was during our interview. This lack of early exposure means that by the time students make career decisions, defence is rarely part of the conversation.
Misconceptions, stereotypes and blind spots
Even when students are aware of the sector, outdated assumptions often shape their impressions. Many still associate national security or defence careers with military roles, combat, secrecy, or rigid hierarchies. Few realise that the sector also includes cutting-edge work in AI, robotics, space, cybersecurity, and climate resilience. In fields like renewable energy systems and quantum technologies, defence offers roles that are intellecturally stimulating as those in startups or big tech, but students do not see that picture clearly.
Perceived value misalignment
Underlying all of this is a perceived values gap. Today’s STEM students are purpose-driven and socially conscious. They are drawn to organisations that champion innovation, collaboration, diversity and impact. Defence, by contract, is often viewed as hierarchical, conservative and at odds with values such as non-violence or creative freedom. This perception, whether accurate or not, largely deters many students from exploring careers in the field.
So, what can be done to bring the next generation of STEM professionals into national security? We recommend the following strategies, which are informed by the initial results of our research.
First, the defence sector needs to rethink how it represents itself to the public. Employer branding needs to evolve beyond traditional military imagery and language. Students need to see more real, engaging stories of engineers developing disaster-response drones, cybersecurity experts protecting critical infrastructure, and researchers advancing medical technologies for humanitarian missions; for example, through social media platforms like Instagram, TikTok, and YouTube. Framing defence as a site of innovation, impact, and diversity and inclusion, not just command and control, will resonate more deeply with a younger audience.
Second, engagement should start earlier and run deeper. For example, to demystify the sector and generate interest long before university, the defence could consider introducing students to defence careers in primary and high school through filed trips, compeitions, and interactive events. Partnering with schools to integrate defence technologies into STEM education could also help shift perceptions and spark curiosity.
Third, greater transparency needs to be ensured. STEM students expressed concern that career pathways within the field are not well-communicated to the broader public. Students want to know what a career in defence looks like over time. Can they shift roles? Build specialisations? Move into leadership or policy?
Currently, many students are unclear about these pathways. To address this, we recommend that recruitment campaigns clearly communicate not just what jobs exist, but how those jobs evolve, and how young STEM professional can grow within them.
Finally, the defence must connect its work to purpose. For many STEM students, contributing to national security is a meaningful ambition, if they understand how their skills make a difference. Working on cutting-edge technologies that prevent cyberattacks, mitigate climate threats, or support peacekeeping missions could be a powerful motivator. The key is to make that purpose visible, relatable and authentic.
In a wolrd where global competition for STEM talent is fierce, Australia must ensure its defence sector is not left behind. Attracting bright, motivated students into national security roles is no longer just a strategic goal. It is an urgent national priority.
The good news? Australian STEM students want to contribute. But first, we have to meet them where they are.
Authors: Professor Joe Jiang, Dr. Haiying Kang, Associate Professor March To
