how to manage your phd supervisor

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

View all journals
Explore content
About the journal
Publish with us
Sign up for alerts
CAREER COLUMN
10 December 2021

Managing up: how to communicate effectively with your PhD adviser

Lluís Saló-Salgado 0 ,
Angi Acocella 1 ,
Ignacio Arzuaga García 2 ,
Souha El Mousadik 3 &
Augustine Zvinavashe 4

Lluís Saló-Salgado is a PhD candidate in the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge. Twitter: @lluis_salo.

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Angi Acocella is a PhD candidate in the Center for Transportation & Logistics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge. LinkedIn: @angi-acocella.

Ignacio Arzuaga García is a PhD student in the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge. LinkedIn: @ignacioarzuaga.

Souha El Mousadik is a PhD student in the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.

Augustine Zvinavashe is a PhD candidate in the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.

When you start a PhD, you also begin a professional relationship with your PhD adviser. This is an exciting moment: interacting with someone for whom you might well have great respect and admiration, but who might also slightly intimidate you.

Access options

Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals

Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription

24,99 € / 30 days

cancel any time

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 51 print issues and online access

185,98 € per year

only 3,65 € per issue

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-03703-z

This is an article from the Nature Careers Community, a place for Nature readers to share their professional experiences and advice. Guest posts are encouraged .

Competing Interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Why you need an agenda for meetings with your principal investigator

Research management

Londoners see what a scientist looks like up close in 50 photographs

Career News 18 APR 24

Deadly diseases and inflatable suits: how I found my niche in virology research

Spotlight 17 APR 24

How young people benefit from Swiss apprenticeships

I dive for fish in the longest freshwater lake in the world

Female academics need more support — in China as elsewhere

Correspondence 16 APR 24

Researchers want a ‘nutrition label’ for academic-paper facts

Nature Index 17 APR 24

How we landed job interviews for professorships straight out of our PhD programmes

Career Column 08 APR 24

Postdoctoral Position

We are seeking highly motivated and skilled candidates for postdoctoral fellow positions

Boston, Massachusetts (US)

Boston Children's Hospital (BCH)

Qiushi Chair Professor

Distinguished scholars with notable achievements and extensive international influence.

Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China

Zhejiang University

ZJU 100 Young Professor

Promising young scholars who can independently establish and develop a research direction.

Head of the Thrust of Robotics and Autonomous Systems

Reporting to the Dean of Systems Hub, the Head of ROAS is an executive assuming overall responsibility for the academic, student, human resources...

Guangzhou, Guangdong, China

The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (Guangzhou)

Head of Biology, Bio-island

Head of Biology to lead the discovery biology group.

BeiGene Ltd.

Quick links

Explore articles by subject
Guide to authors
Editorial policies

Research Voyage

Research Tips and Infromation

A Guide to Changing Your PhD Supervisor

Embarking on the challenging yet rewarding journey of a PhD is a commitment that extends beyond the confines of research papers and scholarly pursuits. Central to this academic odyssey is the relationship forged with a guiding force—the PhD supervisor. A symbiotic connection that shapes the trajectory of research, personal growth, and the overall PhD experience.

However, as the academic landscape evolves, students may find themselves at a crossroads, contemplating a decision that could reshape the course of their doctoral pursuit—changing their PhD supervisor. In this exploration, we delve into the intricate fabric of this decision-making process, dissecting the reasons behind such contemplation and weighing the nuanced pros and cons associated with altering the academic compass.

Join us on this reflective journey as we navigate the delicate terrain of academic mentorship, dissecting the potential for alignment or misalignment of research interests, the dynamics of mentorship and support, and the profound impact of diverse perspectives. Yet, with change comes disruption—weighing the cost of potential setbacks in research progress, administrative hurdles, and the intricate dance of managing relationships within the academic ecosystem.

In this discourse, we aim to unravel the layers of complexity surrounding the decision to change a PhD supervisor. Through anecdotes, insights, and careful analysis, we seek to equip Ph.D. candidates with the tools needed to make informed decisions, fostering an environment where academic and personal growth can thrive.

Embark with us on this intellectual exploration, where the nuances of change intersect with the pursuit of knowledge, and the delicate dance of transition unfolds in the pursuit of academic excellence.

Introduction

Pros of changing your phd supervisor, cons of changing your phd supervisor, how to convey my supervisor regarding change of supervisor decision, download the template here.

The foundation of any successful PhD journey lies in the dynamic between the student and their supervisor. This relationship extends beyond the academic realm, shaping not only the trajectory of research but also influencing personal and professional development. A supportive and symbiotic connection with a supervisor fosters an environment where ideas flourish, guidance is paramount, and the doctoral candidate gains invaluable insights from a seasoned mentor. This relationship becomes a cornerstone, influencing the overall satisfaction and success of the Ph.D. experience.

Despite the significance of the supervisor-student relationship, there are instances when students find themselves contemplating a change. This may arise from a variety of factors such as misaligned research interests, challenges in communication, evolving career aspirations, or even shifts in personal circumstances. A brief exploration of these reasons sets the stage for understanding the complexities that prompt candidates to reassess and, potentially, redefine this pivotal connection.

At the heart of this blog post is the examination of a decision that carries both weight and consequence—the choice to change one’s PhD supervisor. The thesis of our exploration is to provide a comprehensive analysis of the pros and cons associated with such a decision.

We also delve into the delicate process of communicating this decision, recognizing the sensitivity and significance of such conversations. Just as a change in academic direction requires thoughtful consideration, conveying this decision to a supervisor demands a careful blend of professionalism, gratitude, and clarity. As we navigate through the nuances of this academic crossroads, we aim to provide insights, tips, and a sample script to assist students in approaching this conversation with respect, transparency, and a focus on the academic journey ahead.

A. Alignment of Research Interests

Examples and Anecdotes: Picture yourself passionate about unravelling the mysteries of renewable energy sources, only to find your initial supervisor specializes in historical architecture. By making the courageous decision to change supervisors, you align yourself with an expert in sustainable energy. This shift not only reignites your enthusiasm but also establishes a connection between your passion and your research, turning your academic journey into a fulfilling exploration.
Impact on Research Productivity and Satisfaction: The impact of this alignment on research productivity and satisfaction cannot be overstated. Your newfound synergy with a supervisor who shares your research interests streamlines the process. Meetings become more fruitful, discussions more engaging, and the satisfaction derived from your work transforms from a mere academic obligation to a genuine intellectual pursuit.

B. Better Mentorship and Support

Illustrative Cases: Consider the case of Sarah, who initially struggled with a lack of communication and mentorship in her first year. Changing supervisors led her to Dr. Rodriguez, known for her hands-on mentoring approach. This shift not only transformed Sarah’s academic journey but also instilled a sense of confidence and direction, illustrating the profound impact of effective mentorship.
Personal and Academic Development: The metamorphosis brought about by improved mentorship extends beyond academic realms. Dr. Rodriguez’s investment in Sarah’s personal and academic growth not only refined her research skills but also nurtured her self-confidence. Sarah emerged from this mentorship with a more profound understanding of her strengths and a fortified sense of academic purpose.

C. Diverse Perspectives

Experiences of Gaining Different Perspectives: Enter the world of Alex, who transitioned from a supervisor entrenched in qualitative research to one with a robust quantitative background. This shift opened avenues for Alex to integrate diverse methodologies, leading to a more comprehensive and nuanced research approach. The amalgamation of these perspectives not only enriched the research process but also broadened Alex’s intellectual horizons.
Enrichment of Research and Academic Growth: The exposure to diverse perspectives became the catalyst for academic growth. Engaging with varied viewpoints became a cornerstone of Alex’s intellectual development. This enrichment not only strengthened the quality of the research but also equipped Alex with a versatile set of skills crucial for navigating the intricate landscape of academia.

D. Career Opportunities

Stories of Enhanced Opportunities: Meet James, who, through a change in supervisor, found himself immersed in collaborative projects and international conferences. This shift not only enhanced his academic portfolio but also created avenues for industry collaborations. The diverse experiences gained under the new supervision became stepping stones for James’s future career opportunities.
Broadening Professional Networks: Changing supervisors often means entering new academic circles. In Lily’s case, this shift broadened her professional networks, exposing her to different conferences, workshops, and collaborative opportunities. The ripple effect of these connections extended beyond the academic realm, positioning Lily for a more expansive and interconnected professional journey.

E. Personal Growth

Adapting to New Challenges: Imagine the story of Mark, who faced unforeseen challenges upon changing supervisors. The adjustment period, though daunting, became a testament to Mark’s adaptability. This ability to navigate uncharted waters not only demonstrated resilience but also contributed to Mark’s personal growth, reinforcing his capacity to thrive amidst academic uncertainties.
Building Resilience and Adaptability: Mark’s journey highlights that personal growth extends beyond the realm of academia. The challenges faced during the transition nurtured not only resilience but also adaptability. These qualities, now ingrained in Mark’s academic persona, serve as invaluable assets not just for his PhD journey but for his future professional endeavours.

A. Disruption in Progress

Impact on Research Timeline: Consider the case of Emily, who, midway through her PhD, changed supervisors due to a shift in research focus. This transition resulted in a temporary disruption in her research timeline as she needed to recalibrate her methodologies and refine her research questions. The adjustments, while necessary for alignment, extended the overall duration of her Ph.D. project.
Strategies for Minimizing Disruptions: To minimize disruptions, Emily proactively engaged in regular communication with both her previous and new supervisors. This strategic approach allowed for a smoother transition, as she could carry forward valuable insights from her initial work while incorporating the guidance of her new supervisor. Open and transparent communication became the cornerstone for mitigating the impact on her research timeline.

B. Administrative Hassles

Navigating University Procedures: John’s decision to change his supervisor involved navigating complex university procedures. From obtaining approvals to filling out paperwork, the administrative process proved to be a bureaucratic challenge. The intricacies of university protocols can be time-consuming and stressful, adding an administrative layer to an already nuanced decision.
Addressing Logistical Challenges: John tackled administrative hassles by seeking guidance from academic advisors and administrative staff. Proactive planning and careful adherence to university guidelines helped streamline the administrative process. By addressing logistical challenges promptly, John mitigated the bureaucratic hurdles associated with changing supervisors.

C. Limited Options

Challenges in Finding a Suitable Alternative: Amy faced the challenge of limited options when searching for an alternative supervisor. The specialized nature of her research narrowed the pool of available academics with expertise in her field. This limitation created a dilemma, as finding a suitable alternative proved to be a meticulous process requiring careful consideration of academic compatibility.
Exploring Available Options within the Institution: Amy expanded her search by exploring potential supervisors within her institution who had overlapping interests. Collaborating with academic advisors and department heads, she identified alternative mentors who could provide the necessary guidance. While challenging, this exploration within the institution allowed Amy to make a well-informed choice, considering both expertise and compatibility.

D. Potential for Miscommunication

Addressing Communication Challenges During the Transition: Michael encountered communication challenges when transitioning to a new supervisor, leading to misunderstandings regarding research expectations. The potential for miscommunication became apparent during the initial stages of the transition, affecting the clarity of project goals and timelines.
Strategies for Clear Communication: Recognizing the importance of clear communication, Michael initiated regular meetings with the new supervisor. Setting clear expectations, discussing project milestones, and seeking feedback became integral components of their communication strategy. By addressing potential miscommunication head-on, Michael established a foundation for a more effective working relationship.

E. Impact on Relationships

Navigating Interpersonal Dynamics with the Previous Supervisor and Colleagues: When Emma changed supervisors, she faced the delicate task of navigating interpersonal dynamics with her previous supervisor and colleagues. This transition required tact and diplomacy, as maintaining positive relationships with the academic community was crucial for a harmonious academic environment.
Maintaining a Positive Academic Environment: Emma proactively engaged in open and honest conversations with her previous supervisor, expressing gratitude for the mentorship received. She also communicated transparently with colleagues about her decision, emphasizing that the change was driven by research alignment. By approaching the transition with professionalism and respect, Emma succeeded in maintaining a positive academic environment, fostering goodwill among her peers.

1. Choose the Right Time and Setting:

Schedule a meeting with your current supervisor in a private and comfortable setting.
Ensure that you have enough time for a thorough discussion without interruptions.

2. Be Prepared:

Reflect on your decision and be clear about your reasons for wanting to change supervisors.
Consider preparing a brief outline or notes to help you articulate your thoughts during the conversation.

3. Start Positively:

Begin the conversation on a positive note by expressing your appreciation for the guidance and support you have received so far.
Acknowledge the contributions of your current supervisor to your academic journey.

4. Be Honest and Direct:

Clearly state your decision to change supervisors. Use straightforward language to avoid any ambiguity.
If applicable, briefly explain the reasons behind your decision. Focus on academic or research-related factors rather than personal issues.

5. Highlight Your Goals:

Emphasize that your decision is driven by your academic and research goals. Highlight the importance of aligning your research interests with your supervisor to ensure a more productive collaboration.

6. Express Gratitude:

Express gratitude for the time and effort your current supervisor has invested in your academic development.
Reinforce that your decision is about finding the best possible fit for your research objectives.

7. Offer Solutions:

If applicable, suggest potential solutions or ways to ease the transition. This could include a plan for completing any ongoing projects or assisting in the search for a replacement.

8. Be Open to Discussion:

Encourage an open dialogue. Allow your supervisor to express their thoughts and ask questions.
Be receptive to feedback and be willing to discuss any concerns your supervisor may have.

9. Follow Up in Writing:

After the meeting, send a follow-up email reiterating your decision and expressing gratitude.
Include any agreed-upon next steps or arrangements for a smooth transition.

10. Maintain Professionalism:

Throughout the conversation, maintain a professional and respectful tone.
Avoid placing blame or speaking negatively about your current supervisor.

Sample Script:

“Thank you for taking the time to meet with me. I want to express my sincere appreciation for your guidance and support during our collaboration. After careful consideration, I have made the decision to change supervisors. This decision is driven by a desire to align my research interests more closely with my academic goals. I believe this change will contribute positively to my academic journey. I am committed to ensuring a smooth transition and am open to discussing any concerns or suggestions you may have. I value the time we’ve spent working together and appreciate your understanding.”

Remember that communication is key in these situations, and approaching the conversation with professionalism and clarity will contribute to a more constructive dialogue.

Email Template to Convey Your Decision to Change Supervisor

Subject: Request for a Meeting to Discuss Research Direction

Dear [Supervisor’s Name],

I trust this message finds you well. I appreciate the support and guidance you have provided throughout our collaboration. Your insights have been invaluable to my academic journey.

After careful consideration and reflection, I have come to the decision to explore a change in my supervisory arrangement. This decision is rooted in my commitment to align my research interests more closely with my academic goals, and I believe that a different supervisory dynamic may better support the direction I intend to take with my research.

I would like to request a meeting to discuss this matter further. I believe that an open and honest conversation will allow us to explore the best path forward. I am committed to ensuring a smooth transition and would like to discuss any concerns or suggestions you may have. Your feedback is important to me, and I want to ensure that this decision is made with the utmost professionalism and consideration.

I propose we schedule a meeting at your earliest convenience. Please let me know a time that works for you, and I will make the necessary arrangements.

Thank you once again for your support, and I look forward to discussing this matter with you.

Best regards,

[Your Full Name]

[Your Program/Department]

[Your Contact Information]

Read my article on ” Can you do a PhD without a supervisor” . This article will guide you on how one can do PhD without a research supervisor.

In the intricate tapestry of a Ph.D. journey, the decision to change supervisor stands as a pivotal crossroads, demanding careful contemplation and strategic navigation. As we explored the myriad facets of this complex choice, it became evident that the pros and cons are as diverse as the academic landscapes each student traverses.

Upcoming Events

Visit the Upcoming International Conferences at Exotic Travel Destinations with Travel Plan
Visit for Research Internships Worldwide

Enhancing Wellness in Higher Education

Managing your relationship with your phd supervisor.

The relationship we have with our academic supervisors can make or break the experience of a PhD. So it is no surprise that supervisor relationships are often the number one issue students highlight to me when I ask them to identify their top frustrations with the PhD. There seems to be something in the nature of the supervisor-supervisee relationship that can feel inherently disempowering.

In the years that I’ve worked with PhD students, I’ve heard my fair share of horror stories ranging from unresponsive supervisors to those who micromanage their students or give insulting feedback. But I’ve also heard more promising stories about supervisors who are available, encouraging and completely supportive of their students.

While it may seem as though it’s just the luck of the draw, I wouldn’t leave everything up to chance. There are things you can do to foster a better relationship with your academic supervisor. Below I will share some top tips for enhancing the supervisor-supervisee relationship.

OWN YOUR PROJECT

Many students approach the relationship with their supervisors through the lens of an employer/employee dynamic. In reality, your supervisor should be working for you! Even though your supervisor is more senior than you, this is your project and it is highly likely that you are more of an expert on your specific topic than they are. Supervisors are there to guide you through the process, but at the end of the day, this is your project and it’s up to you to shape it the way that you want.

COMMUNICATE YOUR NEEDS

Whether it’s more frequent contact, clearer feedback, or joint meetings if you have multiple supervisors, don’t hesitate to ask for what you need. While it’s not uncommon to hear students complaining about their supervisors, the truth is that your supervisor can’t read your mind and if something isn’t working well, it’s up to us to communicate what your needs are. This will first involve identifying your needs and then making a clear and direct request to your supervisor.

SET EXPECTATIONS IN ADVANCE

Unfortunately, there is no guidebook on how supervisors and supervisees should interact. It is often down to the individuals involved to determine how this important relationship will function. As with any relationship, we have an opportunity to establish what the expectations are and set out how those expectations are going to be fulfilled. For instance, when it comes to constructing a timetable for completion, you might wish to jointly work on this with your supervisor. In setting out the timetable, you commit to specific dates for submitting individual chapters to your supervisor, while your supervisor commits to specific dates for returning their feedback to you. In this way, you set a mutually workable timetable that establishes what work needs to be done by each person and by what date.

ADMIT WHAT YOU DON’T KNOW

If there is something you don’t understand, don’t shy away from admitting to your supervisor that you are confused or unsure about it. Pursuing research at the doctoral level will necessarily involve probing into unfamiliar territory or even a particular methodology that is brand new for you. You don’t need to have all the answers, so let go of the expectation that you should be an expert on everything that is related to your research area.

DON’T TAKE IT PERSONALLY

As I mentioned in my previous post, ‘Coping With Academic Criticism’ receiving a lot of negative feedback from a supervisor can feel extremely demoralising. Remember that it’s your supervisor’s job to spot potential holes in your research so try not to take it personally. Of course, it can be challenging not to take negative feedback to heart. What I encourage students to do is to sift through the feedback and ask yourself: ‘will this feedback ultimately strengthen the project?’ If the answer is yes, it may help you to view it more constructively.

ASK FOR CLARITY

It could be that your supervisors’ feedback or comments to you are unclear or contradictory to something else they said to you previously. Not only does this often lead students to feel stuck and uncertain about how to proceed, it can also be incredibly frustrating. Don’t hesitate to ask your supervisor for more clarity. It could be that they have overlooked their previous advice to you or that they need to explain their feedback to you more fully. However awkward it may feel to ask for clarity on something, you’ll save yourself a lot of time in the end by having this conversation.

BROADEN YOUR NETWORK

It is not uncommon to see students becoming overly reliant on their supervisors throughout the PhD – depending on them not only for advice about their thesis, but advice more generally relating to job applications, publishing, teaching, funding opportunities and much more. While it’s great to draw on the experience and wisdom of your supervisor, it’s also important to broaden your circle of support throughout the PhD, beyond the tiny bubble of you and your supervisor. For this reason, I encourage students to make their own contacts and connections throughout the PhD, and to take advantage of opportunities to share their work with others. Expanding your connections in the field will not only enrich your research by exposing you to other viewpoints, it will also put less pressure on the relationship with your supervisor.

REMEMBER THEIR EXPERIENCE IS NOT YOUR EXPERIENCE

Another reason to seek other avenues of support beyond your supervisor is because their experience is not your experience. The world may have changed a lot since they did their PhD and as a consequence, the advice they may be able to offer you about – for instance – job applications, may be quite limited. So graciously accept their advice when it is offered, but don’t treat everything they say as gospel. Talk to others and, above all, follow your own instincts.

Ten types of PhD supervisor relationships – which is yours?

Lecturer, Griffith University

Disclosure statement

Susanna Chamberlain does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Griffith University provides funding as a member of The Conversation AU.

View all partners

It’s no secret that getting a PhD is a stressful process .

One of the factors that can help or hinder this period of study is the relationship between supervisor and student. Research shows that effective supervision can significantly influence the quality of the PhD and its success or failure.

PhD supervisors tend to fulfil several functions: the teacher; the mentor who can support and facilitate the emotional processes; and the patron who manages the springboard from which the student can leap into a career.

There are many styles of supervision that are adopted – and these can vary depending on the type of research being conducted and subject area.

Although research suggests that providing extra mentoring support and striking the right balance between affiliation and control can help improve PhD success and supervisor relationships, there is little research on the types of PhD-supervisor relationships that occur.

From decades of experience of conducting and observing PhD supervision, I’ve noticed ten types of common supervisor relationships that occur. These include:

The candidate is expected to replicate the field, approach and worldview of the supervisor, producing a sliver of research that supports the supervisor’s repute and prestige. Often this is accompanied by strictures about not attempting to be too “creative”.

Cheap labour

The student becomes research assistant to the supervisor’s projects and becomes caught forever in that power imbalance. The patron-client roles often continue long after graduation, with the student forever cast in the secondary role. Their own work is often disregarded as being unimportant.

The “ghost supervisor”

The supervisor is seen rarely, responds to emails only occasionally and has rarely any understanding of either the needs of the student or of their project. For determined students, who will work autonomously, the ghost supervisor is often acceptable until the crunch comes - usually towards the end of the writing process. For those who need some support and engagement, this is a nightmare.

The relationship is overly familiar, with the assurance that we are all good friends, and the student is drawn into family and friendship networks. Situations occur where the PhD students are engaged as babysitters or in other domestic roles (usually unpaid because they don’t want to upset the supervisor by asking for money). The chum, however, often does not support the student in professional networks.

Collateral damage

When the supervisor is a high-powered researcher, the relationship can be based on minimal contact, because of frequent significant appearances around the world. The student may find themselves taking on teaching, marking and administrative functions for the supervisor at the cost of their own learning and research.

The practice of supervision becomes a method of intellectual torment, denigrating everything presented by the student. Each piece of research is interrogated rigorously, every meeting is an inquisition and every piece of writing is edited into oblivion. The student is given to believe that they are worthless and stupid.

Creepy crawlers

Some supervisors prefer to stalk their students, sometimes students stalk their supervisors, each with an unhealthy and unrequited sexual obsession with the other. Most Australian universities have moved actively to address this relationship, making it less common than in previous decades.

Captivate and con

Occasionally, supervisor and student enter into a sexual relationship. This can be for a number of reasons, ranging from a desire to please to a need for power over youth. These affairs can sometimes lead to permanent relationships. However, what remains from the supervisor-student relationship is the asymmetric set of power balances.

Almost all supervision relationships contain some aspect of the counsellor or mentor, but there is often little training or desire to develop the role and it is often dismissed as pastoral care. Although the life experiences of students become obvious, few supervisors are skilled in dealing with the emotional or affective issues.

Colleague in training

When a PhD candidate is treated as a colleague in training, the relationship is always on a professional basis, where the individual and their work is held in respect. The supervisor recognises that their role is to guide through the morass of regulation and requirements, offer suggestions and do some teaching around issues such as methodology, research practice and process, and be sensitive to the life-cycle of the PhD process. The experience for both the supervisor and student should be one of acknowledgement of each other, recognising the power differential but emphasising the support at this time. This is the best of supervision.

There are many university policies that move to address a lot of the issues in supervisor relationships , such as supervisor panels, and dedicated training in supervising and mentoring practices. However, these policies need to be accommodated into already overloaded workloads and should include regular review of supervisors.

professional mentoring
PhD supervisors

Sydney Horizon Educators (Identified)

Senior Disability Services Advisor

Deputy Social Media Producer

Associate Professor, Occupational Therapy

GRAINS RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION CHAIRPERSON

We use cookies on this site to enhance your experience

By clicking any link on this page you are giving your consent for us to set cookies.

A link to reset your password has been sent to your email.

Back to login

We need additional information from you. Please complete your profile first before placing your order.

Thank you. payment completed., you will receive an email from us to confirm your registration, please click the link in the email to activate your account., there was error during payment, orcid profile found in public registry, download history, how to develop an excellent phd supervisor relationship.

Charlesworth Author Services
24 April, 2020
Researcher Career Development

How to develop an excellent PhD Supervisor relationship

The working relationship that a PhD student has with their supervisor can be the most important factor for determining the success and enjoyment of their doctoral journey. Unfortunately, however, this is an aspect of PhD life that students are seldom alerted to before beginning their research.

When searching and applying for PhDs, people often look for supervisors who are well known in their field or who have conducted renowned, key research in the subject area. However, although this can lend prestige to your own PhD, it is very important to realise that if their working style strongly conflicts with yours or if they do not offer adequate support to their PhD students, then their academic accolades will do little to help you in your own research.

This article outlines some important things to consider, both when you’re selecting your supervisor and PhD programme, and when you’re doing your doctoral research.

Finding the right PhD supervisor

If you’re just starting to apply for PhDs and thinking about where you would like to undertake your research, pay attention to who will be working with you as your supervisor and/or principal investigator. Spend some time clarifying how you work best, what you hope to get out of your PhD, and how someone can best support you to do this. Bear these criteria in mind as you set out to select a supervisor – how and whether they can support your research will ultimately be more important to your research than impressive credentials.

This will be the person whom you should have the most contact with throughout your PhD. They will be the one to help you develop your thesis, and give you guidance and feedback to progress successfully in your research. As such, it is crucial that you select someone you will be able to work with well.

When you have an idea of someone you would like to work with, email them personally before you begin your application. Introduce yourself, tell them about your academic goals and enquire if they are currently taking on any supervisees. Try to start a conversation with them and begin some preliminary discussions about the research you intend to do.

If they are open to discussing further details of doing a PhD with them and in their department/institution, ask them how they usually work with their students, outline any concerns you have and enquire about the support that you can expect to receive as a doctoral candidate there.

By this stage, you should have some idea of how responsive and supportive they are, and whether or not they would be interested in supervising you (and whether you would like to work with them). Some may even agree to talk to you via phone or video chat, or connect you to some of their current students so you can find out more about working with the department.

Selecting the right supervisor and establishing some contact before you begin your application can be a lengthy progress so make sure you plan well ahead. It may feel time consuming at first, but remember that a PhD can take three to seven years to complete (depending on where you’re studying and whether you are studying full- or part-time). This is a long time to be working closely with someone so investing time early on to find the right fit for you will pay off in the long run.

Making the most of your PhD supervisor relationship

When you start your PhD, you still need to figure out the best ways of communicating and working with your supervisor. This working relationship will be unlike any other you’ve had: a supervisor is not like a teacher who will give you assignments or mark your work; neither are they like a work boss to whom you are accountable. They are there to guide and support the development of your thesis, not someone you report to as you would in a school or workplace.

For many doctoral students, the PhD is an independent project (unless you are working as a part of a wider PhD research team under the management of a PI; your work life and responsibilities may then more closely resemble a job). As such, you need to determine what kind of guidance you need, what working structure would help you progress effectively, and what type of feedback would be most helpful for you. Discuss these issues early on in your PhD with your supervisor so that expectations are clear on both sides.

Students who are at the beginning of their PhD and need more guidance may meet their supervisors more regularly (e.g. once a month) and prepare some kind of work in advance to be discussed during the meeting (e.g. an essay or literature review). As you progress, some students may like more frequent communication, for instance on a weekly basis; while others may prefer working independently and check in only as necessary.

Whatever the frequency and mode of contact you decide on, be sure that this is clear to both yourself and your supervisor. Remember too, that academics often juggle multiple responsibilities and may be supervising several researchers at the same time. The supervisor is not there to ‘look after’ you and you need to be responsible for following up on meetings or sending reminders to them if needed.

Finally, know that a good supervisor will often also offer you pastoral support for your wellbeing. The PhD has its own unique challenges and you may find yourself having to deal with more than just the academic demands of the research. Try to find out from your supervisor early on in your PhD what kind of support is available to you; either from them, the department or the university.

Be upfront and honest with them about aspects of your personal life that may affect your work, such as any family or mental health issues. A good supervisor should support you, find the most effective ways for you to work alongside these issues and direct you to further support if required.

It may take a while to settle into a comfortable working arrangement with your supervisor, but rest assured that once expectations are clearly set and managed, this relationship can be one of the most rewarding aspects of your PhD. You’ll be challenged, have the opportunity to share insights with an experienced academic and be led to make your own excellent research discoveries.

Maximise your publication success with Charlesworth Author Services.

Charlesworth Author Services, a trusted brand supporting the world’s leading academic publishers, institutions and authors since 1928.

To know more about our services, visit: Our Services

Share with your colleagues

Finding the Right PhD Supervisor

Charlesworth Author Services 02/08/2021 00:00:00

Finding the Right Place to do your PhD

Charlesworth Author Services 25/05/2021 00:00:00

Dealing with a Difficult Supervisor in research and academia

Charlesworth Author Services 05/04/2022 00:00:00

Related webinars

Bitesize webinar: Researcher Mental Health - Module 1 - Researcher wellbeing

Charlesworth Author Services 09/03/2021 00:00:00

Bitesize Webinar: Researcher Mental Health - Module 2 - Let's talk about anxiety and depression

Bitesize Webinar: Researcher Mental Health - Module 3 - Let's talk about imposter experiences

Bitesize Webinar: Researcher Mental Health - Module 4 - Tackling the imposter experience and other insecurities

Four top tips for making the most of your PhD

Charlesworth Author Services 10/01/2020 00:00:00

How to find your best work rhythm as a PhD student

Charlesworth Author Services 07/05/2020 00:00:00

Finding and maintaining the Motivation to keep Writing during your PhD

Charlesworth Author Services 22/01/2020 00:00:00

Managing up: how to communicate effectively with your PhD adviser

CEE members Lluís Saló-Salgado, Angi Acocella, Ignacio Arzuaga García (Communication Fellow), Souha El Mousadik (Communication Fellow) & Augustine Zvinavashe published a Nature career advice article based on a September 2021 CEE Comm Lab panel event:

They will have their own management style, but ‘managing up’ is important, so you need to identify the style that will help you to thrive academically, and communicate that to your adviser.

In September, we ran a panel discussion for new graduate students in the department of civil and environmental engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge. One focus of the panel was how to communicate effectively with your PhD adviser; we based this on skills we have developed since starting our programmes three to five years ago. Our different nationalities, genders, academic backgrounds, research fields and advisers have led to five different experiences. But we agree on the following set of guidelines…

Read the full article here in the Nature Career column .

Community Blog

Keep up-to-date on postgraduate related issues with our quick reads written by students, postdocs, professors and industry leaders.

What Makes A Good PhD Supervisor?

By Dr Harry Hothi
August 12, 2020

A good PhD supervisor has a track record of supervising PhD students through to completion, has a strong publication record, is active in their research field, has sufficient time to provide adequate supervision, is genuinely interested in your project, can provide mentorship and has a supportive personality.

Introduction

The indicators that you’ll have the best chance of succeeding in your PhD project are multi-factorial. You’ll need to secure funding, find a research project that you’re interested in and is within your academic area of expertise, maybe even write your own research proposal, and find a good supervisor that will help guide you through PhD life.

As you research more into life as a doctoral student, you’ll appreciate that choosing a good supervisor is one of the most important factors that can influence the success of your project, and even If you complete your PhD at all. You need to find a good supervisory relationship with someone who has a genuine research interest in your project.

This page outlines the top qualities to look for as indicators of an ideal PhD supervisor. But before we get to that, we should be clear on precisely what the supervisor is there to do, and what they are not.

The Role of a PhD Supervisor

A PhD supervisor is there to guide you as you work through PhD life and help you make informed decisions about how you shape your PhD project. The key elements of their supervisory role include:

To help ensure that you stay on schedule and maintain constant progress of your research so that you ultimately finish your PhD within your intended time frame, typically three to four years.
To advise and guide you based on their knowledge and expertise in your subject area.
To help you in the decision-making process as you design, prepare and execute your study design.
To work with you as you analyse your raw data and begin to draw conclusions about key findings that are coming out of your research.
To provide feedback and edits where necessary on your manuscripts and elements of your thesis writing.
To encourage and motivate you and provide ongoing support as a mentor.
To provide support at a human level, beyond just the academic challenges.

It’s important that you know from the outset what a supervisor isn’t there to do, so that your expectations of the PhDstudent-supervisor relationship are correct. A supervisor cannot and should not create your study design or tell you how you should run your experiments or help you write your thesis. Broadly speaking, you as a PhD student will create, develop and refine content for your thesis, and your supervisor will help you improve this content by providing you with continuous constructive feedback.

There’s a balance to be found here in what makes a good PhD supervisor, ranging from one extreme of providing very little support during a research project, to becoming too involved in the running of the project to the extent that it takes away from it being an independent body of work by the graduate student themselves. Ultimately, what makes a good supervisor is someone you can build a rapport with, who helps bring out the best in you to produce a well written, significant body of research that contributes novel findings to your subject area.

Read on to learn the key qualities you should consider when looking for a good PhD supervisor.

Qualities to Look For in A Good PhD Supervisor

1. a track record of successful phd student supervision.

Good PhD Supervisor taking students to Completion

A quick first check to gauge how good a prospective supervisor is is to find out how many students they’ve successfully supervised in the past; i.e. how many students have earned their PhD under their supervision. Ideally, you’d want to go one step further and find out:

How many students they’ve supervised in total previously and of those, what percentage have gone onto gain their PhDs; however, this level of detail may not always be easy to find online. Most often though, a conversation with a potential supervisor and even their current or previous students should help you get an idea of this.
What were the project titles and specifically the areas of research that they supervised on? Are these similar to your intended project or are they significantly different from the type of work performed in the academic’s lab in the past? Of the current students in the lab, are there any projects that could complement yours
Did any of the previous PhD students publish the work of their doctoral research in peer-reviewed journals and present at conferences? It’s a great sign if they have, and in particular, if they’re named first authors in some or all of these publications.

This isn’t to say that a potential supervisor without a track record of PhD supervision is necessarily a bad fit, especially if the supervisor is relatively new to the position and is still establishing their research group. It is, however, reassuring if you know they have supervision experience in supporting students to successful PhD completion.

2. Is an Expert in their Field of Research

As a PhD candidate, you will want your supervisor to have a high level of research expertise within the field that your own research topic sits in. This expertise will be essential if they are to help guide you through your research and keep you on track to what is most novel and impactful to your research area.

Your supervisor doesn’t necessarily need to have all the answers to questions that arise in your specific PhD project, but should know enough to be able to have useful conversations about your research. It will be your responsibility to discover the answers to problems as they arise, and you should even expect to complete your PhD with a higher level of expertise about your project than your supervisor.

The best way to determine if your supervisor has the expertise to supervise you properly is to look at their publication track record. The things you need to look for are:

How often do they publish papers in peer-reviewed journals, and are they still actively involved in new papers coming out in the research field?
What type of journals have they published in? For example, are most papers in comparatively low impact factor journals, or do they have at least some in the ‘big’ journals within your field?
How many citations do they have from their research? This can be a good indicator of the value that other researchgroups place on these publications; having 50 papers published that have been cited only 10 times may (but not always) suggest that this research is not directly relevant to the subject area or focus from other groups.
How many co-authors has your potential supervisor published with? Many authors from different institutions is a good indicator of a vast collaborative professional network that could be useful to you.

There’re no hard metrics here as to how many papers or citations an individual needs to be considered an expert, and these numbers can vary considerably between different disciplines. Instead, it’s better to get a sense of where your potential supervisor’s track record sits in comparison to other researchers in the same field; remember that it would be unfair to directly compare the output of a new university lecturer with a well-established professor who has naturally led more research projects.

Equally, this exercise is a good way for you to better understand how interested your supervisor will be in your research; if you find that much of their research output is directly related to your PhD study, then it’s logical that your supervisor has a real interest here. While the opposite is not necessarily true, it’s understandable from a human perspective that a supervisor may be less interested in a project that doesn’t help to further their own research work, especially if they’re already very busy.

Two excellent resources to look up publications are Google Scholar and ResearchGate .

3. Has Enough Time to Provide Good PhD Supervision

PhD Supervisor should have enought time to see you

This seems like an obvious point, but it’s worth emphasising: how smoothly your PhD goes and ultimately how successful it is, will largely be influenced by how much time your research supervisor has to provide guidance, constructive academic advice and mentorship. The fact that your supervisor is the world’s leading expert in your field becomes a moot point if they don’t have time to meet you.

A good PhD supervisor will take the time to meet with you regularly in person (ideally) or remotely and be reachable and responsive to questions as and when they arise (e.g. through email or video calling). As a student, you want to have a research environment where you know you can drop by your supervisors’ office for a quick chat, or that you’ll see them around the university regularly; chance encounters and corridor discussions are sometimes the most impactful when working through problems.

Unsurprisingly, however, most academics who are well-known experts in their field are also usually some of the busiest too. It’s common for established academic supervisors to have several commitments competing for their time. These can include teaching and supervising undergraduate students, masters students and post-docs, travelling to collaborator meetings or invited talks, managing the growth of their academic department or graduate school, sitting on advisory boards and writing grants for funding applications. Beware of the other obligations they may have and how this could impact your work relationship.

You’ll need to find a balance here to find a PhD supervisor who has the academic knowledge to support you, but also the time to do so; talking to their current and past students will help you get a sense of this. It’s also reassuring to know that your supervisor has a permanent position within your university and has no plans for a sabbatical during your time as a PhD researcher.

4. Is a Good Mentor with a Supportive Personality

A PhD project is an exercise in independently producing a substantial body of research work; the primary role of your supervisor should be to provide mentoring to help you achieve this. You want to have a supervisor with the necessary academic knowledge, but it is just as important to have a supportive supervisor who is actively willing and able to provide you constructive criticism on your work in a consistent manner. You’ll likely get a sense of their personality during your first few meetings with them when discussing your research proposal; if you feel there’s a disconnect between you as a PhD student and your potential supervisor at this stage, it’s better to decide on other options with different supervisors.

A good supervisor will help direct you towards the best outcomes in your PhD research when you reach crossroads. They will work with you to develop a structure for your thesis and encourage you to set deadlines to work to and push you to achieve these. A good mentor should be able to recognise when you need more support in a specific area, be it a technical academic hurdle or simply some guidance in developing efficient work patterns and routines, and have the communication skills to help you recognise and overcome them.

A good supervisor should share the same mindset as you about finishing your PhD within a reasonable time frame; in the UK this would be within three to four years as a full-time university student. Their encouragement should reflect this and (gently) push you to set and reach mini-milestones throughout your project to ensure you stay on track with progress. This is a great example of when a supportive personality and positive attitude is essential for you both to maintain a good professional relationship throughout a PhD. The ideal supervisor will bring out the best in you without becoming prescriptive in their guidance, allowing you the freedom to develop your own working style.

Finding a PhD has never been this easy – search for a PhD by keyword, location or academic area of interest.

To sum up, the qualities you should look for in a good PhD supervisor are that they have a strong understanding of your research field, demonstrated by regular and impactful publications, have a proven track record of PhD supervision, have the time to support you, and will do so by providing mentorship rather than being a ‘boss’.

As a final point, if you’re considering a research career after you finish your PhD journey, get a sense of if there may any research opportunities to continue as a postdoc with the supervisor if you so wanted.

An abstract and introduction are the first two sections of your paper or thesis. This guide explains the differences between them and how to write them.

Learning how to effectively collaborate with others is an important skill for anyone in academia to develop.

The scope of the study is defined at the start of the study. It is used by researchers to set the boundaries and limitations within which the research study will be performed.

Join thousands of other students and stay up to date with the latest PhD programmes, funding opportunities and advice.

Browse PhDs Now

A thesis and dissertation appendix contains additional information which supports your main arguments. Find out what they should include and how to format them.

This post explains where and how to write the list of figures in your thesis or dissertation.

Dr Benzi gained his PhD in Data Science from the Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne in 2016. He is now a professional data artist and head of research at a tech company in Paris, as well as a trained public speaker.

Dr Grayson gained her PhD in Mechanical Engineering from Cornell University in 2016. She now works in industry as an Applications Portfolio Manager and is a STEM Speaker and Advocate.

Join Thousands of Students

What makes a good PhD supervisor? Top tips for managing the student-supervisor relationship.

Jan 8, 2020

When I started my PhD, the entire cohort of incoming students had an induction session in the university’s great hall. There were around 500 of us, from every department and every imaginable discipline.

The induction itself was tedious, but there was one comment in particular that stood out immediately and stuck with me throughout my entire PhD journey. When a professor was asked in a Q&A what advice he would give incoming PhD students, he said to remember that, after your mother, your supervisor will be the most important person in your life.

Interested in group workshops, cohort-courses and a free PhD learning & support community?

The team behind The PhD Proofreaders have launched The PhD People, a free learning and community platform for PhD students. Connect, share and learn with other students, and boost your skills with cohort-based workshops and courses.

Now I’m at the other end of the PhD and I’ve graduated, I’ve got some advice of my own to add to his. You see, the professor overlooked something really important, and that is that, by the time we were sitting in the induction, we had already chosen our supervisors (or had them assigned, as in my case).

Why should that matter? Primarily because whether or not your supervisor becomes the most important person in your life depends how good that supervisor actually is, how well they are executing their duties, and how well you are managing the student-supervisor relationship.

In this guide, I want to dig in a little more into what makes a good supervisor, before discussing what they should and shouldn’t be doing, why you need to please them (and how you can go about doing so), and how to make the

How to choose a PhD supervisor

The most important piece of advice for someone about to embark on a PhD and looking for a potential supervisor is to actually make an effort to talk to them about your research proposal.

Now, for many, your potential supervisor may be someone you already know, such as a lecturer, Master’s dissertation supervisor or tutor. Or, it may be someone from your department who you don’t know so well, but whose work fits your research interests.

In either case, chances are you’ve interacted with them in a teacher-student kind of relationship, where they lecture and you take notes. Well, when thinking about your PhD and their role as a potential supervisor, it’s time to put on a different hat and approach them as a peer. Email them or call them and schedule a phone call or face-to-face meeting to talk about your proposal and solicit their advice. Be explicit about wanting them to supervise you and tell them why. They won’t bite. In all likelihood, they’ll be flattered.

Now, the same applies even if it’s someone you don’t know or have never interacted with (perhaps if it’s someone from a different university or country). Approach them, explain what you intend to do and tell them exactly why you think they should supervise you.

As you ask these questions, you’ll get a pretty good idea of what to look for in a potential supervisor. For one, their research interests need to align with yours. The closer they align the better. But, more than that, you need to consider whether they have published in your field (and whether they’re continuing to do so).

Often, though, the more high-profile academics will already be supervising a number of students. Try, if you can, to get an idea of how many PhD students they are currently supervising. This will give you a good idea of whether they’ll have the time required to nurture your project over the years it will take you to complete it, or whether they’ll be stretched too thin. Also, look at how many students they have supervised in the past and how many of them completed successfully. This will give you a good insight into their experience and competence.

Remember back to that advice I got on my first day: the person you’re choosing to supervise your study will become the most important person in your life, so you need to consider the personal dimension too. Do you actually get on with them? You’ll be spending a lot of time together, and some of it will be when you’re at your most vulnerable (such as when you’re stressed, under incredible pressure or breaking down as the PhD blues get the better of you). Do you think this person is someone with whom you can have a good, friendly relationship? Can you talk openly to them? Will they be there for you when you need them and, more importantly, will you be able to ask them to be?

Once you’ve considered all this, don’t be afraid to approach them at a conference, swing by their office, drop them an email or phone them and run your project by them. The worst they can do is say no, and if they do they’ll likely give you great feedback and advice that you can take to another potential supervisor. But they may just turn around and say yes, and if you’ve done your homework properly, you’ll have a great foundation from which to start your PhD-journey. They’ll also likely work with you to craft your draft proposal into something that is more likely to be accepted.

Your PhD Thesis. On one page.

Use our free PhD Structure Template to quickly visualise every element of your thesis.

What is the role of a supervisor?

Think of your supervisor like a lawyer. They are there to advise you on the best course of action as you navigate your PhD journey, but ultimately, the decisions you make are yours and you’re accountable for the form and direction your PhD takes.

In other words: they advise, you decide.

I appreciate that is vague, though. What do they advise on?

Primarily, their job is:

8. To a certain extent, they often provide emotional and pastoral support

How many of these jobs they actually do will vary from supervisor to supervisor. You have to remember that academics, particularly those that are well known in their field, are often extremely busy and in many cases overworked and underpaid. They may simply not have the time to do all the things they are supposed to. Or, it may be the case that they simply don’t need to because you already have a good handle on things.

What does a supervisor not do?

Your supervisor is not there to design your research for you, or to plan, structure or write your thesis. Remember, they advise and you decide. It’s you that’s coming up with the ideas, the plans, the outlines and the chapters. It’s their job to feedback on them. Not the other way around.

Unlike at undergraduate or masters level, their job isn’t to teach you in the traditional sense, and you aren’t a student in the traditional sense either. The onus is on you to do the work and take the lead on your project. That means that if something isn’t clear, or you need help with, say, a chapter outline, it is up to you to solicit that advice from your supervisor or elsewhere. They won’t hold your hand and guide you unless you ask them to.

Having said that, their job isn’t to nanny you. At PhD level it is expected that you can work independently and can self-motivate. It is not your supervisor’s job to chase you for chapter drafts or to motivate you to work. If you don’t do the work when you’re supposed to then it’s your problem, not theirs.

It’s also not their job to proofread or edit your work. In fact, if you’re handing in drafts that contain substantial fluency or language issues (say, if you’re a non-native English speaker), it’s likely to annoy them, particularly if you’re doing so at the later stages of the PhD, because they’ll have to spend as much time focusing on how you’re writing as they do on what you’re writing.

More troubling would be if you explicitly ask them to correct or edit the language. They won’t do this and will take a dim view of being asked. Instead, hire a proofreader or ask a friend with good writing skills to take a read through and correct any obvious language errors (check the rules laid out by your university to see what a proofreader can and cannot do though. As with everything in your PhD, the onus is on you to do things properly).

What you need to do to please your supervisor

The lines between what your supervisor will and will not do for you are blurred, and come down in large part to how much they like you. That means you should pay attention to pleasing them, or at least not actively irritating them.

There are a few simple things you can do that will make their life easier and, with that, boost their opinion of you and their willingness to go beyond their prescribed role.

First, and by this stage you shouldn’t need to be told this, meet deadlines, submit work to them when you said you would, and turn up to your supervision meetings on time. If you meet the deadlines you’ve set, they’re more likely to return work quicker and spend more time reading it prior to doing so.

Wrapping up

Managed well, you too can ensure that your supervisor is the most important person in your life. And you want them to be. Those who succeed in their PhDs and in their early academic careers are those who had effective supervision and approached their supervisor as a mentor.

Things don’t always go according to plan, though, and sometimes even with the best will in the world, supervisors under-perform, create problems or, in more extreme cases, sabotage PhD projects. This can be for a variety of reasons, but it leaves students in a difficult position; in the student-supervisor relationship, the student is relatively powerless, particularly if the supervisor is well known and highly esteemed. If this is the case, when things don’t go well, raising concerns with relevant channels may prove ineffective, and may even create more problems. In these extreme cases, you’ll have to draw on levels of diplomacy and patience you may never have known you had.

Hello, Doctor…

Sounds good, doesn’t it? Be able to call yourself Doctor sooner with our five-star rated How to Write A PhD email-course. Learn everything your supervisor should have taught you about planning and completing a PhD.

Now half price. Join hundreds of other students and become a better thesis writer, or your money back.

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Search The PhD Knowledge Base

Most popular articles from the phd knowlege base.

Cover Image

The cover image is a ceramic tile stained with bovine blood used to train operators in proper forensic cleaning techniques. For further information see the article ‘“Out, Damned Spot”: The art and science of forensic restoration’. Image courtesy of Jennifer DeBruyn.

Your supervision filter

Opportunities for ‘associate’ supervision, supervision as practice, a model for supervisory leadership, communicating your supervision principles, final thoughts, further reading, author information, a beginner’s guide to supervising a phd researcher.

Split-Screen
Article contents
Figures & tables
Supplementary Data
Peer Review
Open the PDF for in another window
Cite Icon Cite
Get Permissions

Kay Guccione , Rhoda Stefanatos; A beginner’s guide to supervising a PhD researcher. Biochem (Lond) 31 October 2023; 45 (5): 11–15. doi: https://doi.org/10.1042/bio_2023_140

Download citation file:

Ris (Zotero)
Reference Manager

This beginner’s guide to supervision has been created for anyone who supports postgraduate researchers (PGRs) with any aspect of their research or the completion of their degree. The supervision of PGRs is a complex and time-consuming job, with a high degree of responsibility. Good supervision is a key component of PGR success and is vital to the health of our research as a nation as well as the health of our individual researchers. In the recent research literature, supervision has been shown to impact on PhD completion time, retention of students, their success, their perceptions of the value of the PhD, their mental health and well-being and their career choice. In acknowledgement, the UKRI statement of Expectations for Postgraduate Training states that “Research Organisations are expected to provide excellent standards of supervision, management and mentoring … ” and the UK’s Quality Assurance Agency states that therefore “Supervisors should be provided with sufficient time, support and opportunities to develop and maintain their supervisory practice”. Noting that “supervisors represent the most important external influence in the learning and development that occurs in students’ training” the International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology’s Committee on Education details interpersonal responsibilities of the supervisor that cover the need to work as partners, see the student as a whole person, be aware of power imbalance and develop strategies for the resolution of relationship difficulties, as well as giving academic and career support.

Despite the life-shaping level of impact a supervisor has, learning to supervise well is not always a top priority for researchers in the often-intense early stages of building their career, and a great many supervisors find themselves having to learn to supervise in a hurry, as they take on their first formal responsibilities. With this in mind, please resist the temptation to save this article for ‘when problems arise’ – a proactive approach will help to avoid issues down the line. Those of you who are moving towards a future supervisor role may be tempted to bookmark this article for ‘when you are officially supervising’ – and so the point we would like to start by making is that if you are interacting with PGRs in the course of your work, you are already engaging with elements of supervisory practice. Supervision is not something you will switch on once you take a formal supervisor role, but a part of your practice that can and will develop. There is a great deal you can be learning, and indeed contributing to the PGR experience, long before your first ‘official’ (or first ‘challenging’) PhD student comes along. While we draw your attention here to several important areas of practice, this is not a guide that aims to simply hand you all the information you need to get started. Rather, it is intended to offer you some ideas to ignite your thinking about yourself and the experiences that have shaped you, about how you understand the role you play in ensuring successful doctoral completion and about your power and position, all of which influence how you react to and respond to others. An ill-considered approach may, after all, have lasting negative impact on your student.

The interpersonal nature of the job means that there is no single right way to supervise, and so creating your own personal blend of approaches is going to be important. What you choose to include in that blend will depend greatly on your own context, and your prior educational and workplace experiences. Consider your own educational journey to date, your family background and social context, your status and position, your personal values, what has challenged you, who has supported you and the privileges and power that you hold ( see here for a handy graphic to help you analyse these ). The cumulative effects of these factors and experiences have given you a filter through which you interpret your role and your purpose, as a supervisor.

Indulge us in a quick experiment. From your current perspective, how would you finish this sentence: The most important thing a supervisor can do is…. Now consider how you might have finished that sentence at the start of your PhD and the many thousands of ways it could have changed through the journey. Every PGR you encounter could finish this sentence differently, and it is good to be aware of that. Your own experience of being supervised will also tint and tone your supervision filter. There is a strong instinct to emulate what we have experienced as being ‘good supervision’, and to strongly reject what we perceive to be ‘bad supervision’. It’s easy to see how this approach can have limited effectiveness, for example if you and your supervisee’s perceptions of what constitutes ‘good supervision’ are very different. A clash in expectations can cause issues that persist through the PhD and influence your entire relationship

Thinking critically and systematically about how your personal experience influences your approach is important. Supplementing that, by engaging with a wide range of opportunities, resources and conversations is important in giving you the flexibility to be able to supervise across a wide range of people, situations and expectations.

So where to begin? As an ‘unofficial’ or, as we prefer to refer to it, an ‘associate’ supervisor, building up your experience and skills can be challenging. What activities to engage with, and what opportunities to support PGRs might be available to you? The answer will of course depend on your university, your department and the support and opportunities you have from specialist supervisor developers. We know not all universities (yet) offer the opportunity for research staff to be formally added to supervisory teams and so here we make suggestions that you can seek out or even create in your workplace, without formal supervisor status.

Day-to-day PGR support . The simplest form of associate supervision is found in the support, guidance, advice and training you offer to the PGRs that you share a workspace with. Welcoming new students, helping them adjust to the environment, rhythms and demands of the PhD and supporting them with research problem solving are all hugely valuable supervision work.

Creating collaborative spaces . Leading journal clubs, practice presentation sessions or writing groups, retreats or other peer-led support groups will give you opportunities to build specific knowledge of how PGRs learn to read critically, synthesize their reading and discuss their findings in line with the academic style and conventions of your discipline. As this is often a steep learning curve in the PhD, knowing how to support students in this will stand you in great stead.

Mentoring . Engaging with formal or informal opportunities to be a mentor will help you to sharpen your skills in how to deliver a powerful and meaningful conversation. Good-quality mentoring discussions can give PGRs an opportunity to make sense of their experiences, reset their expectations and remotivate themselves to get to the PhD finish-line. All incredibly useful elements of supervision.

Leading workshops . There may be opportunities to lead workshops as part of PGR induction week, research methods courses, research ethics or integrity workshops, skills development programmes or careers sessions. All will allow you to consider what PGRs need to know to succeed, and how you can best help them to do that learning.

Consider which of the aforementioned opportunities you are already doing, those that are available to you and those that are right for you – it’s not an ‘all or nothing’ approach so consider what is timely and sustainable for you. Decide what you might need to know, read, discuss or understand in order to perform those roles to the best of your ability. Below, we make some starter suggestions for ways to complement the experiential learning listed earlier, through engaging with a range of supervisor development activities and materials. Don’t forget that the Concordat to Support the Career Development of Researchers states that you are entitled to 10 days every year, to engage with professional learning and development, and this could be a perfect way to spend some of that time:

Read your institutional ‘PGR Code of Practice’, which sets out what PGRs can expect, what support they will receive and what they must agree to contribute and abide by. Perhaps your university also has a ‘statement of expectations for supervision’ type document too?

Understand the breadth of learning that supervisors should ensure takes place within a PhD by glancing at the UK’s national framework for PhD skills development, the Researcher Development Framework .

Read about the 10 areas of practice described by the UK Council for Graduate Education’s Good Supervisory Practice Framework and the accompanying Research Supervisor’s Bibliography.

Attend workshops and courses on supervision and join supervisor communities and conversations at your institution.

Read and subscribe to the Supervising PhDs Blog which publishes short, evidence-based articles, as quick 5-minute reads.

Observe experienced supervisors in practice. This can be done formally (by agreement, as a guest sitting in on a supervision meeting) or informally by observing interactions in your group, at conferences and in other shared spaces. Listen closely to what impact supervisors have on their PGRs and consider both supervisor and PGR perspectives.

Shadow formal processes. Associate supervisors can most commonly struggle with the opportunities to see the procedural checkpoints associated with PhD supervision. Arranging to support, deputize or shadow the supervisory team at PGR interviews, annual progress reviews and viva proceedings (where possible) can give you real insight into how to manage these tricky processes.

But before getting too immersed or overwhelmed in what is a vast wealth of supportive and enlightening material on PGR supervision, we would like to invite you to reflect on what opportunities to develop as a supervisor you are already engaged in and to offer you a framework for developing your supervisory practice.

Supervision is a practice . It is something you do, not merely something you are, and it is something you can learn and develop over time, not something that is innate. It’s helpful to recognize that you are continually learning from the experiences you have attained, and the further experiences, documents, advisory articles and training courses you will encounter. Supervision is commonly thought of as a research practice, in which we as the more experienced researcher advise the PGR, sharing the benefits of our knowledge of the subject area, of the research process and of the conventions and norms of our discipline. This process of socialization into the local and global research communities is important in creating a strong scientific identity.

Supervision should also be thought of as an educational practice because the PGR is learning from us, and in order to support them to gain their doctoral qualification, we deploy different ways of helping them learn. The learning in a PhD extends beyond the project or subject scope and includes knowledge of how to accrue skills and experiences that prepare them for a range of different future career options. A supervisor doesn’t have to be a careers advisor, but their support and open-mindedness to career exploration are greatly valued by those they supervise – especially since the vast majority of PhD graduates will find their long-term career success in roles beyond academic research and teaching.

Further, we would like to focus on the idea that good supervision must also be thought of as a leadership practice, as it is one through which we leverage our status and knowledge of the culture in which we work to show our PGRs how to operate successfully within the research environment and how to secure resources and opportunities. A good leader also holds the ability to relate to those they lead and to motivate and sustain them as they take on new responsibilities and challenges – highly relevant within a research degree context.

As you might already be imagining, these different ways of thinking about supervision and the different tasks they involve can overlap and intersect with each other.

Now you have had a chance to think about who you are and what you value as a supervisor, we present a leadership framework for thinking about what you do in practice as a supervisor. It is outdated to think of supervision as purely an academic pursuit, focused entirely on the task – the research project – yet many of the policy documents we encounter will naturally focus their attention on the formal processes and checkpoints of the doctorate. Emerging in the last decade, we have seen a welcome escalation of research literature and guidance related to the holistic and interpersonal aspects of supervision, working with the preferences, contexts, motivators, career aspirations and support needs of the individual supervisee.

What we want to emphasize ( Figure 1 ), with the aid of John Adair’s model of Action Centred Leadership (1973) is the often-neglected team aspect of supervision. We have selected Adair’s model to help to illustrate supervision in practice as, first, it highlights actions that we can take to lead effectively, rather than taking a more theoretical ‘leadership-style’ approach. Second, this model asks us to reflect on the balance we create between the different areas of practice, the task, the individual and the team, which can be a helpful framework for how to partition your time as a developing supervisor. It can also be a clue as to where you might seek training and development, for instance, if you spot areas on the model that you feel less confident with or less inclined towards.

Action Centred Supervisory Leadership.

Here are some ways in which you might consider your role in cultivating the team aspect of supervision, as a way of reducing uncertainty and stress for everyone involved and creating a cohesive and supportive culture for PGRs, and for yourself. Think about your ‘team’ in the broadest sense, not just those you supervise or manage, but across the entire research ecosystem around you:

The supervisory team . Most doctorates are now supervised by more than one supervisor. How can your team work together as a cohesive support crew for PGRs, rather than operating as a group of people with competing priorities and interests? How do you work in tandem with those with oversight of PGR matters, such as PGR Convenors and Deans.

Role clarity . This applies to defining the supervisory team roles, to student–supervisor roles and to student–student roles, where there are shared activities. Who takes responsibility for making progress in the PhD? Who takes action? Who makes decisions? What responsibilities are shared?

Values and behaviour . Does your team know what you value, and what you won’t stand for? What are the team rules on sustainable working hours, taking holidays and self-care. How do you expect your team to solve problems, admit mistakes and recognize their blind spots and learning needs? What kinds of interpersonal behaviour are and are not acceptable? What strategies do you have for resolving disagreements?

Cultivate collaboration . Expect people to work together and actively reduce comparison and competitiveness. Think beyond a ‘research collaboration’ and find regular spaces for peer-learning, team-working and group discussion. Think lab meetings, journal clubs, practice presentations and writing groups. Add online chat channels for rapid response peer support. How can these physical and online spaces take on a confidence-building supportive tone, rather than spotlighting one person?

Fairness, openness and equity between PGRs . Within your team how are you ensuring that opportunities come to everyone equally? What does an inclusive working practice look like to you? When decisions must be made, how are you communicating them?

Make introductions . Commonly, supervisors are the broker between PGRs and key people in your discipline and global research community. But think local too. Introduce your PGRs to the full support network including administrators, developers, funding specialists, librarians and finance teams. Help PGRs to navigate the organization and proactively find support.

Like your wider practice, how you bring these ideas together will be developed and informed by your own experience so far. The key success factor in all of the earlier points is that you are able to role model good practices yourself, not just require them of others. Your PGRs will be strongly influenced, not by what you say, but by what they see you do in reality.

Having now thought about your own supervision filter and how this interacts with your approach to the Action Centred Leadership model, you may be beginning to crystallize certain expectations, of yourself as a supervisor (now and in the future) and of the PGRs you will supervise. The idea of actively and explicitly ‘setting expectations’ with PGRs has in recent years become a mainstay of many supervisor development programmes and advice books. There are several common expectation-setting activity worksheets such as the one created by Anne Lee and the one created by Hugh Cairns (it would be interesting here to note whether you perceive that these linked resources are based more on the task, individual or team). These tools are designed to be used in the first weeks of the PhD to get off to a good start. However, we suggest that expectation setting can usefully begin before the PGR arrives, indeed before they are accepted on to the PhD programme. It is common for academics to list topics or projects they will supervise on their institutional web pages, so why not add how you will supervise and communicate the principles that govern your approach. When you interview potential PhD candidates, why not look beyond their academic achievements, and talk to them about what they are looking for in a supervisor?

We would like to thank you for reading this post and for committing your valuable time and energy to considering our points and to taking an intentional approach to supervision, an important academic responsibility and a vital underpinning of a good research culture. Don’t forget that while the PGRs you support as a supervisor at any stage will be very appreciative, not everyone will be aware of the level of effort and expertise you are contributing to your groups and departments. Documenting your contribution and your commitment to upholding good supervisory practice can be done on your CV, in job and promotion applications, in your annual performance and development reviews and even through formal professional recognition channels like the UKCGE Recognised (Associate) Supervisor Award. Having knowledge and awareness of the contribution you are making to upholding the standards set out by research funders and regulatory bodies will benefit you in funding applications and can also help you feed in to university conversations about the development opportunities staff need and the formal recognition and opportunities for supervision that we would like to see afforded to all levels of supervisors, who, after all, make a life-changing contribution to the career success and well-being of those they supervise.■

Adair, J. (1973) Action-centred leadership . McGraw-Hill, London.

Denicolo, P., Duke, D., and Reeves, J. (2019) Supervising to inspire doctoral researchers . Sage, London

Guerin, C. and Green, I. (2013). ‘“They’re the bosses”: feedback in team supervision’. J. Furt. High. Educ . 39 , 320–335. doi: 10.1080/0309877x.2013.831039

Robertson, M.J. (2017). Trust: The power that binds in team supervision of doctoral students. High. Educ. Res. Devel . 36 , 1463–1475. doi: 10.1080/07294360.2017.1325853

Wisker, G. (2012) The good supervisor: supervising postgraduate and undergraduate research for doctoral theses and dissertations . 2nd ed. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke.

Web Resources

Supervising PhDs

UKCGE Good Supervisory Practice Framework .

Kay Guccione is Head of Research Culture & Researcher Development at the University of Glasgow, UK. She is a National Teaching Fellow, with research and practice specialisms in doctoral supervision, mentoring and community building for researchers. She is editor of the Supervising PhDs blog https://supervisingphds.wordpress.com/ . Email: [email protected] .

Rhoda Stefanatos is a Researcher Development Specialist at the University of Glasgow, UK. She leads the development of a wide range of opportunities, experiences and resources for research staff. She uses her rich experience as a researcher to inform her approach to empowering researchers to communicate, create and collaborate.

Get Email Alerts

Online ISSN 1740-1194
Print ISSN 0954-982X
Submit Your Work
Language-editing services
Recommend to Your Librarian
Request a free trial
Accessibility
Sign up for alerts
Sign up to our mailing list
The Biochemist Blog
Biochemical Society Membership
Publishing Life Cycle
Biochemical Society Events
About Portland Press
Portland Press Tel
+44 (0)20 3880 2795
Portland Press Company no. 02453983
Biochemical Society Tel
+44 (0)20 3880 2793
Email: [email protected]
Biochemical Society Company no. 00892796
Registered Charity no. 253894
VAT no. GB 523 2392 69
Privacy and cookies
© Copyright 2024 Portland Press

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Publications
Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

Advanced Search
Journal List
PLoS Comput Biol
v.17(9); 2021 Sep

Ten simple rules for choosing a PhD supervisor

Department of Biology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

Catherine Bannon

J. scott p. mccain, introduction.

The PhD beckons. You thought long and hard about why you want to do it, you understand the sacrifices and commitments it entails, and you have decided that it is the right thing for you. Congratulations! Undertaking a doctoral degree can be an extremely rewarding experience, greatly enhancing your personal, intellectual, and professional development. If you are still on the fence about whether or not you want to pursue a PhD, see [ 1 , 2 ] and others to help you decide.

As a PhD student in the making, you will have many important decisions to consider. Several of them will depend on your chosen discipline and research topic, the institution you want to attend, and even the country where you will undertake your degree. However, one of the earliest and most critical decisions you will need to make transcends most other decisions: choosing your PhD thesis supervisor. Your PhD supervisor will strongly influence the success and quality of your degree as well as your general well-being throughout the program. It is therefore vital to choose the right supervisor for you. A wrong choice or poor fit can be disastrous on both a personal and professional levels—something you obviously want to avoid. Unfortunately, however, most PhD students go through the process of choosing a supervisor only once and thus do not get the opportunity to learn from previous experiences. Additionally, many prospective PhD students do not have access to resources and proper guidance to rely on when making important academic decisions such as those involved in choosing a PhD supervisor.

In this short guide, we—a group of PhD students with varied backgrounds, research disciplines, and academic journeys—share our collective experiences with choosing our own PhD supervisors. We provide tips and advice to help prospective students in various disciplines, including computational biology, in their quest to find a suitable PhD supervisor. Despite procedural differences across countries, institutions, and programs, the following rules and discussions should remain helpful for guiding one’s approach to selecting their future PhD supervisor. These guidelines mostly address how to evaluate a potential PhD supervisor and do not include details on how you might find a supervisor. In brief, you can find a supervisor anywhere: seminars, a class you were taught, internet search of interesting research topics, departmental pages, etc. After reading about a group’s research and convincing yourself it seems interesting, get in touch! Make sure to craft an e-mail carefully, demonstrating you have thought about their research and what you might do in their group. After finding one or several supervisors of interest, we hope that the rules bellow will help you choose the right supervisor for you.

Rule 1: Align research interests

You need to make sure that a prospective supervisor studies, or at the very least, has an interest in what you want to study. A good starting point would be to browse their personal and research group websites (though those are often outdated), their publication profile, and their students’ theses, if possible. Keep in mind that the publication process can be slow, so recent publications may not necessarily reflect current research in that group. Pay special attention to publications where the supervisor is senior author—in life sciences, their name would typically be last. This would help you construct a mental map of where the group interests are going, in addition to where they have been.

Be proactive about pursuing your research interests, but also flexible: Your dream research topic might not currently be conducted in a particular group, but perhaps the supervisor is open to exploring new ideas and research avenues with you. Check that the group or institution of interest has the facilities and resources appropriate for your research, and/or be prepared to establish collaborations to access those resources elsewhere. Make sure you like not only the research topic, but also the “grunt work” it requires, as a topic you find interesting may not be suitable for you in terms of day-to-day work. You can look at the “Methods” sections of published papers to get a sense for what this is like—for example, if you do not like resolving cryptic error messages, programming is probably not for you, and you might want to consider a wet lab–based project. Lastly, any research can be made interesting, and interests change. Perhaps your favorite topic today is difficult to work with now, and you might cut your teeth on a different project.

Rule 2: Seek trusted sources

Discussing your plans with experienced and trustworthy people is a great way to learn more about the reputation of potential supervisors, their research group dynamics, and exciting projects in your field of interest. Your current supervisor, if you have one, could be aware of position openings that are compatible with your interests and time frame and is likely to know talented supervisors with good reputations in their fields. Professors you admire, reliable student advisors, and colleagues might also know your prospective supervisor on various professional or personal levels and could have additional insight about working with them. Listen carefully to what these trusted sources have to say, as they can provide a wealth of insider information (e.g., personality, reputation, interpersonal relationships, and supervisory styles) that might not be readily accessible to you.

Rule 3: Expectations, expectations, expectations

A considerable portion of PhD students feel that their program does not meet original expectations [ 3 ]. To avoid being part of this group, we stress the importance of aligning your expectations with the supervisor’s expectations before joining a research group or PhD program. Also, remember that one person’s dream supervisor can be another’s worst nightmare and vice versa—it is about a good fit for you. Identifying what a “good fit” looks like requires a serious self-appraisal of your goals (see Rule 1 ), working style (see Rule 5 ), and what you expect in a mentor (see Rule 4 ). One way to conduct this self-appraisal is to work in a research lab to get experiences similar to a PhD student (if this is possible).

Money!—Many people have been conditioned to avoid the subject of finances at all costs, but setting financial expectations early is crucial for maintaining your well-being inside and outside the lab. Inside the lab, funding will provide chemicals and equipment required for you to do cool research. It is also important to know if there will be sufficient funding for your potential projects to be completed. Outside the lab, you deserve to get paid a reasonable, livable stipend. What is the minimum required take-home stipend, or does that even exist at the institution you are interested in? Are there hard cutoffs for funding once your time runs out, or does the institution have support for students who take longer than anticipated? If the supervisor supplies the funding, do they end up cutting off students when funds run low, or do they have contingency plans? ( Fig 1 ).

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is pcbi.1009330.g001.jpg

Professional development opportunities—A key aspect of graduate school training is professional development. In some research groups, it is normal for PhD students to mentor undergraduate students or take a semester to work in industry to get more diverse experiences. Other research groups have clear links with government entities, which is helpful for going into policy or government-based research. These opportunities (and others) are critical for your career and next steps. What are the career development opportunities and expectations of a potential supervisor? Is a potential supervisor happy to send students to workshops to learn new skills? Are they supportive of public outreach activities? If you are looking at joining a newer group, these sorts of questions will have to be part of the larger set of conversations about expectations. Ask: “What sort of professional development opportunities are there at the institution?”

Publications—Some PhD programs have minimum requirements for finishing a thesis (i.e., you must publish a certain number of papers prior to defending), while other programs leave it up to the student and supervisor to decide on this. A simple and important topic to discuss is: How many publications are expected from your PhD and when will you publish them? If you are keen to publish in high-impact journals, does your prospective supervisor share that aim? (Although question why you are so keen to do so, see the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment ( www.sfdora.org ) to learn about the pitfalls of journal impact factor.)

Rule 4: It takes two to tango

Sooner or later, you will get to meet and interview with a prospective PhD supervisor. This should go both ways: Interview them just as much as they are interviewing you. Prepare questions and pay close attention to how they respond. For example, ask them about their “lab culture,” research interests (especially for the future/long term), and what they are looking for in a graduate student. Do you feel like you need to “put on an act” to go along with the supervisor (beyond just the standard interview mode)? Represent yourself, and not the person you think they are looking for. All of us will have some interviews go badly. Remember that discovering a poor fit during the interview has way fewer consequences than the incompatibility that could arise once you have committed to a position.

To come up with good questions for the prospective supervisor, first ask yourself questions. What are you looking for in a mentor? People differ in their optimal levels of supervision, and there is nothing wrong with wanting more or less than your peers. How much career guidance do you expect and does the potential supervisor respect your interests, particularly if your long-term goals do not include academia? What kind of student might not thrive in this research group?

Treat the PhD position like a partnership: What do you seek to get out of it? Keep in mind that a large portion of research is conducted by PhD students [ 4 ], so you are also an asset. Your supervisor will provide guidance, but the PhD is your work. Make sure you and your mentor are on the same page before committing to what is fundamentally a professional contract akin to an apprenticeship (see “ Rule 3 ”).

Rule 5: Workstyle compatibility

Sharing interests with a supervisor does not necessarily guarantee you would work well together, and just because you enjoyed a course by a certain professor does not mean they are the right PhD supervisor for you. Make sure your expectations for work and work–life approaches are compatible. Do you thrive on structure, or do you need freedom to proceed at your own pace? Do they expect you to be in the lab from 6:00 AM to midnight on a regular basis (red flag!)? Are they comfortable with you working from home when you can? Are they around the lab enough for it to work for you? Are they supportive of alternative work hours if you have other obligations (e.g., childcare, other employment, extracurriculars)? How is the group itself organized? Is there a lab manager or are the logistics shared (fairly?) between the group members? Discuss this before you commit!

Two key attributes of a research group are the supervisor’s career stage and number of people in the group. A supervisor in a later career stage may have more established research connections and protocols. An earlier career stage supervisor comes with more opportunities to shape the research direction of the lab, but less access to academic political power and less certainty in what their supervision style will be (even to themselves). Joining new research groups provides a great opportunity to learn how to build a lab if you are considering that career path but may take away time and energy from your thesis project. Similarly, be aware of pros and cons of different lab sizes. While big labs provide more opportunity for collaborations and learning from fellow lab members, their supervisors generally have less time available for each trainee. Smaller labs tend to have better access to the supervisor but may be more isolating [ 5 , 6 ]. Also note that large research groups tend to be better for developing extant research topics further, while small groups can conduct more disruptive research [ 7 ].

Rule 6: Be sure to meet current students

Meeting with current students is one of the most important steps prior to joining a lab. Current students will give you the most direct and complete sense of what working with a certain supervisor is actually like. They can also give you a valuable sense of departmental culture and nonacademic life. You could also ask to meet with other students in the department to get a broader sense of the latter. However, if current students are not happy with their current supervisor, they are unlikely to tell you directly. Try to ask specific questions: “How often do you meet with your supervisor?”, “What are the typical turnaround times for a paper draft?”, “How would you describe the lab culture?”, “How does your supervisor react to mistakes or unexpected results?”, “How does your supervisor react to interruptions to research from, e.g., personal life?”, and yes, even “What would you say is the biggest weakness of your supervisor?”

Rule 7: But also try to meet past students

While not always possible, meeting with past students can be very informative. Past students give you information on career outcomes (i.e., what are they doing now?) and can provide insight into what the lab was like when they were in it. Previous students will provide a unique perspective because they have gone through the entire process, from start to finish—and, in some cases, no longer feel obligated to speak well of their now former supervisor. It can also be helpful to look at previous students’ experiences by reading the acknowledgement section in their theses.

Rule 8: Consider the entire experience

Your PhD supervisor is only one—albeit large—piece of your PhD puzzle. It is therefore essential to consider your PhD experience as whole when deciding on a supervisor. One important aspect to contemplate is your mental health. Graduate students have disproportionately higher rates of depression and anxiety compared to the general population [ 8 ], so your mental health will be tested greatly throughout your PhD experience. We suggest taking the time to reflect on what factors would enable you to do your best work while maintaining a healthy work–life balance. Does your happiness depend on surfing regularly? Check out coastal areas. Do you despise being cold? Consider being closer to the equator. Do you have a deep-rooted phobia of koalas? Maybe avoid Australia. Consider these potentially even more important questions like: Do you want to be close to your friends and family? Will there be adequate childcare support? Are you comfortable with studying abroad? How does the potential university treat international or underrepresented students? When thinking about your next steps, keep in mind that although obtaining your PhD will come with many challenges, you will be at your most productive when you are well rested, financially stable, nourished, and enjoying your experience.

Rule 9: Trust your gut

You have made it to our most “hand-wavy” rule! As academics, we understand the desire for quantifiable data and some sort of statistic to make logical decisions. If this is more your style, consider every interaction with a prospective supervisor, from the first e-mail onwards, as a piece of data.

However, there is considerable value in trusting gut instincts. One way to trust your gut is to listen to your internal dialogue while making your decision on a PhD supervisor. For example, if your internal dialogue includes such phrases as “it will be different for me,” “I’ll just put my head down and work hard,” or “maybe their students were exaggerating,” you might want to proceed with caution. If you are saying “Wow! How are they so kind and intelligent?” or “I cannot wait to start!”, then you might have found a winner ( Fig 2 ).

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is pcbi.1009330.g002.jpg

Rule 10: Wash, rinse, repeat

The last piece of advice we give you is to do this lengthy process all over again. Comparing your options is a key step during the search for a PhD supervisor. By screening multiple different groups, you ultimately learn more about what red flags to look for, compatible work styles, your personal expectations, and group atmospheres. Repeat this entire process with another supervisor, another university, or even another country. We suggest you reject the notion that you would be “wasting someone’s time.” You deserve to take your time and inform yourself to choose a PhD supervisor wisely. The time and energy invested in a “failed” supervisor search would still be far less than what is consumed by a bad PhD experience ( Fig 3 ).

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is pcbi.1009330.g003.jpg

The more supervisors your interview and the more advice you get from peers, the more apparent these red flags will become.

Conclusions

Pursuing a PhD can be an extremely rewarding endeavor and a time of immense personal growth. The relationship you have with your PhD supervisor can make or break an entire experience, so make this choice carefully. Above, we have outlined some key points to think about while making this decision. Clarifying your own expectations is a particularly important step, as conflicts can arise when there are expectation mismatches. In outlining these topics, we hope to share pieces of advice that sometimes require “insider” knowledge and experience.

After thoroughly evaluating your options, go ahead and tackle the PhD! In our own experiences, carefully choosing a supervisor has led to relationships that morph from mentor to mentee into a collaborative partnership where we can pose new questions and construct novel approaches to answer them. Science is hard enough by itself. If you choose your supervisor well and end up developing a positive relationship with them and their group, you will be better suited for sound and enjoyable science.

Funding Statement

The authors received no specific funding for this work.

Share on twitter
Share on facebook

How to be a PhD supervisor

The relationship between phd students and their supervisors is often said to be the most intense in the academy, with huge implications for student success. yet most supervisors receive little if any training. here, six academics give their take on how to approach it .

Share on linkedin
Share on mail

The anomaly of academics receiving years of training in research but none in teaching is often remarked upon. But, equally notoriously, what that research training amounts to very much depends on the individual supervisor. After all, academics are not trained in research supervision either, and both supervisors and supervisees have their own set of expectations, needs and aptitudes.

How much and what variety of direction is appropriate? And to what end? Is the PhD still best conceived exclusively as an apprenticeship for would-be academics, even though many doctoral graduates end up – willingly or otherwise – in other walks of life? Indeed, is it realistic to expect all PhD students to be proficient in independent research at the end of the process? And what to do with those who are not? Is it the supervisor’s task to make sure they drop out early? Must supervisors always be optimistic and encouraging, offering whatever level of micromanagement is necessary to get the student through?

Here, six academics give their own takes on where the lines should be drawn in the doctoral quicksand.

‘A PhD is about becoming an independent researcher’

If a final-year PhD researcher isn’t regularly telling me that I’m wrong, I worry; something has gone badly awry. They should argue that there’s no way my latest hare-brained experimental design could ever work, that my interpretation of the data can’t possibly be correct because it doesn’t take very basic physics into account, and that the paper published months ago by Professor W. Leader’s group at Prestige University described exactly the type of measurement I suggested in our most recent meeting. Why the heck wasn’t I aware of this? Don’t I read the literature? (They get extra credit for peppering their arguments with suitably chosen expletives.)

Demonstrating that level of project “ownership” is essential because otherwise I feel that I’ve failed in my supervision, not least because my university’s criteria for awarding a PhD – in line with those of every other university out there – stipulate that the candidate must have developed “the general ability to conceptualise, design and implement a project for the generation of new knowledge, applications or understanding at the forefront of the discipline, and to adjust the project design in the light of unforeseen problems”.

They must also demonstrate “a systematic acquisition and understanding of a substantial body of knowledge which is at the forefront of an academic discipline or area of professional practice”. I’ve never been able to square the rather perverse circle of requiring a student to be at the forefront of an academic discipline; someone whose doctoral work is, by definition, at the forefront of a discipline is most definitely not a student; they’re an expert defining the direction of their particular sub-field (or, as is more usual, their sub-sub-sub-sub-field). Still, it is clear that they should at least be in a position to swear with conviction at someone who is at the forefront of the discipline.

So I’m firmly of the opinion that we should ditch the term “PhD student” and instead use the rather more accurate “PhD researcher”. I am not alone in this. Jeff Ollerton, professor of biodiversity at the University of Northampton , has been making compelling arguments against the use of the term “PhD student” for quite some time. Retiring the “student” label would help drive a culture change that not only better recognised the core contributions made by PhD candidates to the research “ecosystem” (including those many first-authored papers submitted to the research excellence framework) but could also help improve their status in the eyes of that – hopefully dying – breed of PI who see early career researchers as the hired help, rather than the peers they should be. I was very fortunate to have a PhD supervisor with whom I genuinely collaborated; ideas were debated, discussed and dissected and I was never made to feel that I should “know my place”. I’ve since learned that this is not always the norm.

Of course, not all PhD researchers are created equal; I am not so naive as to imagine that every doctoral candidate in every lab or library is capable of generating “a substantial body of knowledge at the forefront of an academic discipline”. But isn’t it then about time that we came clean about this? And wouldn’t phasing out the “PhD student” term help send a strong message to those who are considering taking on the formidable challenge of a doctoral programme?

A PhD is about becoming an independent researcher. The process is a universe away from the exam-and-coursework cycle that drives the vast majority of undergraduate degrees. There’s no curriculum and no textbook that map out a PhD from start to finish; no neatly annotated problems whose solutions are helpfully given in the back of the book. PhD researchers in effect write the textbook for the next generation of undergrads – what else do we mean when we say a doctoral thesis should be about expanding the body of knowledge in a particular field?

In physics, we’ve become rather more open with PhD applicants in recent years about their chances of ultimately securing an academic position, should that be their goal. Let’s go one step further and be entirely upfront about the level of independence and self-direction involved in a PhD.

I’ve already followed Ollerton’s example and stopped referring to doctoral candidates as students. Why not join us? I suspect that your PhD researchers will appreciate the change.

Philip Moriarty is professor of physics at the University of Nottingham .

‘Being a decent supervisor means being a decent human being’

My PhD supervisor taught me a valuable lesson about good supervision: it involves far more than teaching a doctoral student how to be a good writer and researcher. It is about believing in students’ academic potential, fostering their confidence and supporting them on whichever of life’s pathways they choose to take.

From the outset of my own PhD, I got a strong sense from my supervisor that he had faith in my abilities as an academic – he wanted me to succeed, and he never stopped telling me that he believed I could succeed. He was therefore committed to helping me develop the skills I would need when it came to navigating the postdoctoral job search. He advised me to do some tutoring early on, so that I could learn more about the art of teaching. He alerted me to job opportunities and gave some invaluable advice about performing well at interviews. He encouraged me to spend a semester at an overseas institution, which proved particularly fruitful, allowing me to develop my confidence on both personal and academic levels. Lastly, he instilled in me a passion for networking and collaboration, both of which have proved invaluable throughout my academic career.

Over the past few years, as I have taken up the mantle of PhD supervision, the lessons I learned from my supervisor have stayed with me. As well as guiding my students’ research and writing, I always take time to share some of the transferable skills that I acquired. I encourage them to participate in projects that will build their self-confidence as academics and in the wider world. I nudge them to present regularly at key conferences and have invited some to collaborate in writing projects with me. I seek opportunities for them to network with other academics in their field, or apply for a tutoring job, or gain experience and confidence in talking about their research. Following the example of my own supervisor, I want my students to know that I will do my best to nurture their abilities and support their endeavours as much as I can.

Nevertheless, good supervision is not solely focused on students’ future job prospects. Being a decent supervisor means being a decent human being, and showing students your respect and support. I always recall that, just before I began my PhD, my supervisor offered to assist me with my doctoral funding application; he knew I needed the funding and he wanted me to succeed. Despite being already overstretched with other academic commitments, he took time to look through my application with me, using his own rich experience to highlight its weaknesses and strengths. And throughout my studies, he supported me quietly as I went through the personal traumas of a family bereavement and a relationship break-up.

This basic sense of kindness is wrought from an acknowledgement that our PhD students are human beings, just like us. They look to us as role models – both academic and otherwise – and it is our responsibility to show them that we are good academics and good people. Hopefully, they will carry on this tradition if, in later years, they become supervisors themselves.

Kindness is something I place at the forefront of the relationships I share with all my students, and, honestly, it’s not that hard. Words of encouragement during moments of self-doubt, a listening ear when life’s stresses get in the way, a shared coffee or lunch when money is tight – small gestures that, as I recall myself, can go a long way in making the PhD journey that little bit easier.

Caroline Blyth is a senior lecturer in theological and religious studies at the University of Auckland .

‘Providing structure is hugely beneficial to both the student and the supervisor’

Some of life’s most important roles come with no training – you have to learn everything on the job. Being a parent is one of those, and being a PhD supervisor is another. The similarity between these undertakings probably extends even further – to me, being a PhD supervisor means having the opportunity to nurture a young researcher, and to provide them with a strong and secure foundation on which they can establish a career.

This involves figuring out how best to support and encourage them, while also establishing strong expectations and boundaries. It means being present and available to provide input and feedback, while at the same time fostering confidence, independence and a sense of responsibility for their own future. It means being a role model, and inculcating skills and values (such as academic integrity) that will serve them throughout their career, whether that is in academia or beyond. It also means supporting them through the inevitable hard times, and revelling in their successes. In other words – it’s a pretty hefty responsibility, and often a difficult and stressful one.

I have a rather unconventional supervision history – my first faculty position did not permit PhD student supervision – so the bulk of my experience comes from more informal supervisory relationships with people from a variety of backgrounds, from recent bachelor’s graduates, to postdoctoral fellows, to more senior researchers. But these experiences, together with my memories of my time as a student and my growing experience as an undergraduate, MSc and PhD supervisor, have taught me some important lessons.

Among the most significant is the importance of structure: setting clear and explicit expectations, including deadlines and milestones (such as submission of papers for peer review), backed up by regular meetings with a specific agenda, action items and student follow-up. Providing such structure can be a lot of work, but it is hugely beneficial to both the student and the supervisor.

For students who are making the transition from the undergraduate or taught MSc setting, one of the most challenging features of the research PhD is often the lack of deadlines and the feeling of achievement that comes with meeting them, as well as the benchmarking that feedback on assignments or exams provides. Easing that transition allows the student to gain a sense of achievement and awareness of areas of growth and weakness, but it also alerts the supervisor to any signs of difficulties that might stand in the way of completion, such as mental health difficulties that may need support and a potential revision of the PhD plan and timeline. It can also provide a clear basis for communicating with a student that things are not progressing as they should, and that completion may not be a realistic goal at all.

All that said, I have to acknowledge that I often find it difficult to follow my own advice. Academic time goes by at warp speed, and sometimes attempts at structure just fall by the wayside. I also think that the onus for managing the relationship should not fall on the supervisor alone: students must also take responsibility for their own progression.

Figuring out these roles and responsibilities can be one of the most challenging aspects of being a PhD supervisor, and seeking out formal training in good management skills (now offered by many universities) can be immensely beneficial. But, ultimately, the nature of the PhD structure is necessarily dictated on a case-by-case basis by both the supervisor’s and the student’s personalities and working styles. For some students, a “micromanagement” style may prove necessary, while for others, a lighter touch will be more effective. I naturally shy away from the former and find it difficult to implement.

No doubt many academics – who, by definition, were proficient at working semi-independently during their own doctorates – feel the same. But if we have admitted a student to a doctoral programme, we have to accept that it is incumbent on us to give them the help they need to succeed.

Sometimes, of course, a gap will remain between expectations and student progress. In such cases, structures for performance tracking and feedback can help supervisors to determine whether or not the completion of the PhD is within reach. Given the recessive job climate in academia, stepping off the PhD track can often be a sensible option, and should be thought of as goal adjustment, not defeat.

Clare Kelly is Ussher assistant professor of functional neuroimaging at Trinity College Dublin and adjunct assistant professor of child and adolescent psychiatry at New York University .

‘We can augment research skills with practical talents that build resilience and hone interpersonal intelligence’

PhD dropout numbers are approaching 50 per cent for many scientific disciplines in the US. That is because – speaking exclusively of scientific training – the truth is that not every doctoral student is cut out for independent research. In light of that, we should reconsider the true importance of possessing a doctorate.

After all, independent research is not the only walk of life in which the deep subject expertise and critical thinking skills acquired during doctoral study have enormous value. The years spent learning complex material, performing experiments and analysing data are immensely beneficial to anyone capable of doing these things. And sharing that information is necessary for the rest of society, too.

We need credentialed experts in every field, spread broadly, to enrich the lives of others who may not be so fortunate to have such opportunities. This is especially essential today, when misinformation is more believable than fact, and people confuse opinion with scholarship. Ideally, experts of every discipline should be embedded at all levels of the community, from teachers to church leaders, from small business owners to corporate leaders, to connect people to wisdom.

Perhaps the first step towards achieving this goal would be to remove the term “non-traditional career” from the academic advising vocabulary – even while keeping it very much inclusive of the production of PIs. We are living in a time of immense innovation, so fresh thoughts about employment trajectories should be equally novel. A student who ends up working outside academia should not be regarded by their supervisor as a failed self-cloning experiment. A PhD teaches students how to think, but we can broaden the scope of our mentoring to augment research skills with practical talents that build resilience and hone the interpersonal intelligence that is valuable in a wide range of careers.

In many US universities, students intent on entering the research phase of their doctorates have first to pass a two-day written and a one-day oral candidacy exam, so we already have sufficient preliminary evidence of their subject content mastery. When their suitability to be an independent researcher is in doubt, I try to direct my own students into jobs that may better suit their skills within academia. One example is student instruction; I offer teaching opportunities in my undergraduate courses in the form of 1–2 credit hours of independent study. This allows the doctoral students to prepare a topic, present it and create test questions, as well as to host and moderate the associated discussions on the electronic learning platform. The postgraduates are often surprised at how difficult and time-consuming this is.

For instance, pharmacology or biochemistry students with talents that may be more suited to the biomedical industry could be partnered with industry experts in their field who offer internships beyond the bench, to see how they fit in a non-academic environment. Many academic scientists have their own ties to industry, so it is not too much of a stretch to imagine that this could be arranged for the few students a year – perhaps as early as the second year of graduate school, before the research phase begins.

Some will say that PIs are not in a good position to prepare people for careers with which they themselves have no personal familiarity. But we were trained to develop young scientists and to get them to their destination. Whether that destination mirrors our own should be irrelevant.

Jennifer Schnellmann is associate professor of pharmacology at the University of Arizona .

‘Students need to bring their interests into conversation with the discipline as a whole’

I’ve always conceived higher education to be a process of negotiation between the consumption and the production of knowledge. Students who are capable consumers of knowledge – usually those who do well in examinations – do not necessarily become equally capable producers of knowledge: that is, researchers. The reverse is also true.

Production of knowledge should start early, ideally in the form of undergraduate research papers. But, of course, it comes much more strongly into focus during the doctorate. There are debates about whether the dissertation is the last work of the research trainee or the first utterance of the professional. Perhaps it is a bit of both, but the proportions typically vary according to whether the student is working in the humanities or the natural sciences.

Research in the humanities is, for the most part, done by individuals, while scientific research is more of a group activity, led by a principal investigator. What this means is that anyone who has completed a doctorate in the humanities – my field – is, by definition, capable of independent research – unless the degree has been obtained by unfair means! Advisers share their expertise in the larger subfield, but the dissertation project itself is very much the student’s own.

I’ve known advisers who recommend that their students do not publish before completing their degree; and I’ve known advisers who encourage students to publish, present and network as much as possible even before the dissertation is completed. The conflict is between an approach that sees a doctorate as a complete, disinterested immersion in scholarship versus one that conceives it as professionalisation – which includes socialisation into the institutional lives of a given discipline, as well as more material functions such as seeking jobs, grants and fellowships. Scholarship and professionalisation are related and mutually reinforcing, of course, yet they are not the same and some people are better at one than the other.

My recommendation to my advisees is that they pursue a middle course. The origin of their scholarship, I tell them, should be something that sparks their passion, but once the fire is started, they need to bring their interests into conversation with the discipline as a whole. So, yes, they should use publication to enter into the conversation, but they should guard against letting professionalisation take over the independence and integrity of their intellectual lives. Dissertations should not be shaped in response to the jobs market. But once they have their scholarly trajectory in place, they should identify how it addresses needs and gaps in the discipline as practised today.

One of the big debates in my field, literary studies, is the book versus dissertation question. Should a doctoral student concentrate on fulfilling the traditional expectations of the very small group of people who will ever pay their dissertation any attention, adorning it with copious footnotes and a lengthy literature review that even the examiners won’t read? Or should they write with the wider book audience in mind right from the beginning?

My personal recommendation is to try to write the book. “Try” is the operative word: it is not easy to write something that coheres and reads like a book, especially for the first-time writer, yet aiming to do so will still lead to a radically more readable style. And this is important in the humanities, where the product and the process are not easily separable. It is probably OK for an article describing a new drug to be written in a dull or inaccessible style. But in literature, scholarship must also bring pleasure, even to academic readers.

In any case, students will be revising their dissertations for publication soon enough. Why waste huge chunks of time during their postdoctoral fellowship or first tenure-track job doing so? Much better to cut out the flab from the very outset.

Saikat Majumdar is professor of English and creative writing at Ashoka University . He is the author, most recently, of College: Pathways of Possibility (Bloomsbury India, 2018).

‘The paltry credit offered in the US system disincentivises true mentorship’

Over the past half-decade I have directed well over a dozen graduate projects, and I believe more than ever that the effectiveness of the process should be replicated across the curriculum.

Working one-to-one with a senior scholar expert in the field is a unique boon for student persistence and engagement. To the extent that a thesis, dissertation or other extended research project effectively reduces the corporate scale and increasingly impersonal feel of higher education, it is a process worth celebrating. Because it is also labour-intensive, time-inefficient and messy, it offers an antidote to the brand of assembly-line education preferred by degree mills.

The thesis and dissertation serve as invaluable reminders that student engagement in the 21st century, regardless of level, has everything to do with helping scholars find authorship and agency. When students propose their topic, research it and ultimately defend it, they are more likely to experience the kind of ownership that produces the best, most accountable scholarship. Even removed from faculty guidance, extended independent research projects are valuable for the self-directed, iterative learning processes they cultivate.

However, the idea that a doctoral or master’s candidate could derive significant value from the dissertation or thesis even without faculty supervision raises the question of how meaningful, in practice, the role of director is. For example, graduate students often enrol in thesis or dissertation hours equivalent to a full-credit course, then re-enrol in those hours to work on their credit-bearing project for a second semester. However, if contact hours with supervising faculty members are minimal, as they often are, can we consider those credit hours well earned? The integrity of the thesis and dissertation process depends in large part on the activeness and availability of the director; if that director only meets in-person with their advisee once or twice a semester and again at the defence, have they not become mostly ceremonial figures, there to cement the illusion of academic legitimacy?

It isn’t that thesis advisers and dissertation directors are lazy, but that the paltry credit offered for their labours in the US system disincentivises true mentorship. While a graduate student may earn the equivalent of two full classes’ worth of credit for two semesters of thesis or dissertation work, the faculty member who signs on as director does well to earn a quarter of the credits they would otherwise earn teaching in the classroom.

Provosts may argue that because the thesis and the dissertation qualify as independent research, any credits awarded supervising faculty should reflect that supporting (read: secondary) role. Such logic works in cases where the graduate student is self-motivated and intellectually prepared, but it fails spectacularly in instances where the degree candidate needs significant retraining or academic acculturation.

The thesis or dissertation process works best with fully engaged supervisory faculty properly credited for their work. It is vital that director and degree candidate be realistic about what may be achieved in a given period of time. In my view, both grad students and their supervising faculty members are better served by shorter theses and dissertations, where greater focus and depth make for a truer simulacrum of life. PhD candidates will need to add chapters at a later date to merit publication by a scholarly or university press in any event, and the intervening years between the completion of the thesis or dissertation and its ultimate book publication serve to age the scholar and their scholarship. With candidates for advanced degrees getting younger, the postdoctoral years become more conducive to the maturative process that ripens the writer and refines the research.

For my money, the thesis or dissertation is best regarded not merely as pre-professorial training but as the beginning of collaborative intellectual enquiry designed to last a lifetime.

Zachary Michael Jack is associate professor of English at North Central College in Naperville, Illinois.

Register to continue

Why register?

Registration is free and only takes a moment
Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
Sign up for our newsletter

Or subscribe for unlimited access to:

Unlimited access to news, views, insights & reviews
Digital editions
Digital access to THE’s university and college rankings analysis

Already registered or a current subscriber? Login

Scholars whose language differs from English ‘struggle to publish’

Universities in countries that speak Dutch or German found to have higher research performance scores than those in Japan

Your students won’t read any more? Are you sure you’re paying attention?

Simplistic analyses belie the complex evolution of students, instruction, reading practices, college regulations and communications media, says Harvey Graff

SUGGESTED TOPICS
The Magazine
Newsletters
Managing Yourself
Managing Teams
Work-life Balance
The Big Idea
Data & Visuals
Reading Lists
Case Selections
HBR Learning
Topic Feeds
Account Settings
Email Preferences

6 Common Leadership Styles — and How to Decide Which to Use When

Rebecca Knight

Being a great leader means recognizing that different circumstances call for different approaches.

Research suggests that the most effective leaders adapt their style to different circumstances — be it a change in setting, a shift in organizational dynamics, or a turn in the business cycle. But what if you feel like you’re not equipped to take on a new and different leadership style — let alone more than one? In this article, the author outlines the six leadership styles Daniel Goleman first introduced in his 2000 HBR article, “Leadership That Gets Results,” and explains when to use each one. The good news is that personality is not destiny. Even if you’re naturally introverted or you tend to be driven by data and analysis rather than emotion, you can still learn how to adapt different leadership styles to organize, motivate, and direct your team.

Much has been written about common leadership styles and how to identify the right style for you, whether it’s transactional or transformational, bureaucratic or laissez-faire. But according to Daniel Goleman, a psychologist best known for his work on emotional intelligence, “Being a great leader means recognizing that different circumstances may call for different approaches.”

RK Rebecca Knight is a journalist who writes about all things related to the changing nature of careers and the workplace. Her essays and reported stories have been featured in The Boston Globe, Business Insider, The New York Times, BBC, and The Christian Science Monitor. She was shortlisted as a Reuters Institute Fellow at Oxford University in 2023. Earlier in her career, she spent a decade as an editor and reporter at the Financial Times in New York, London, and Boston.

Partner Center

How to manage your boss

Your job and career success are too important to leave to your boss.
Also, your boss probably isn't a great manager.
So you have to manage your boss.

Remember: You are the CEO of your career . And, as CEO, you can't leave something as important as your success in your job and career to someone else — namely, your boss.

If you want to succeed, you have to make your boss happy with your performance. And, to do that — and to be sure that your boss is actually happy and not just "being nice" — you will likely have to manage your boss .

Specifically, you are going to have to:

Understand what your boss wants you to do and how your boss will evaluate your performance

Manage your boss's expectations

Develop a communication and feedback cadence and work style that works well for both of you

Regularly check in to understand how you can continue to progress

If you have a great boss, your boss will take care of the mechanics of this — by clearly setting expectations, agreeing on reasonable deadlines, inviting your feedback and questions, and letting you know frequently how you are doing.

Unfortunately, many (most?) bosses are not great bosses .

(This is not necessarily because they don't want to be — but because being a great boss is hard.)

One area in which many (most?) bosses are not great is communication. For example, your boss might like you and want you to like them, so they might not want to upset or offend you by being super-direct about where you're falling short. Or, like you, they might be busy and stressed (bosses have bosses, too — and lots of work and complicated lives), so they might not be communicating frequently and explicitly enough. Or they might be inexperienced and not know what is and isn't reasonable to expect. Or they might not recognize that you have great strengths but are doing the wrong job — and are therefore struggling when you could be crushing it.

All of this means: You don't want to leave managing your job and career to your boss, because your boss has other priorities and might not be great at it. And if your boss is not great at it, they might blame their disappointment on… you !

So, here's how to manage your boss:

First, interview your boss until you understand clearly and in detail what they want you to do — and write it down . Create a one-page mission statement. Describe your goal in a sentence and add bullets on any specific tasks, projects, and deliverables. Give this to your boss and ask for feedback. If you are confused or unclear about anything, clarify. If it seems like too much work, say so — and then work with your boss to rank objectives and tasks by priority. (BONUS POINTS: Understand how your boss is evaluated — in other words, what his or her goals are. And think about how you can help your boss succeed).

Set regular meetings with an agenda (that you write and maintain), and solicit constructive and detailed feedback. Do this at whatever frequency makes sense, but at least once a month. Base your agenda on your mission statement. Update your boss on each major deliverable and project. Ask for feedback. Don't bask in pride if your boss just says something vague like "You're doing great." Instead, press for details. "What, specifically, am I doing great? And what can I do better?"

Manage your boss's expectations by underpromising and overdelivering. We all want to make our bosses happy by promising to deliver whatever they ask for whenever they want it. Resist the temptation to do that. Instead, be realistic — and build in buffers on quantity, quality, and time. Then deliver better and more than you said you would, faster than you said you would. This will continually leave your boss positively surprised, which is way better than disappointed.

Review and update your "mission statement" regularly with your boss — with an eye to your future. Solicit specific feedback on what and how you have done. Then, focus on what's next. Try to work on projects that will help develop your skills and experience and get you where you want to go. (As you do your job, you should be developing ideas and a plan for what you want to do next. Don't leave that to your boss!)

This may feel awkward at first, but you (and your boss) will get used to it. And if your boss isn't great at communication and organization, they will be grateful you are handling it for them.

Some or all of this might not go smoothly, by the way. Despite your efforts to understand and deliver what your boss wants, your boss may be so flaky that they just can't set and stick to realistic goals. Or they may be moody or mean. Or they may be going through something personally and taking it out on you. Or they may have any one of a range of other annoying " boss flaws ."

One common and annoying kind of boss flaw is "Idea Guy" — the boss who constantly throws ideas at you and expects you to act on them, apparently without remembering that you are already killing yourself trying to implement all the ideas they had yesterday, last month, etc.

I'm very familiar with Idea Guy, because he's me.

When I was CEO of Business Insider, I used to drive members of my team crazy with all of my ideas. I thought I was being helpful and smart and a good boss by telling them how we could be better. And because they wanted me to think they were doing a good job — and didn't yet know how to manage me — they would usually nod and say thank you and rush off to (I thought) implement my ideas.

But then, one day, one of my team members — Business Insider's former President, Julie Hansen — realized that, to maintain her sanity and save our company, she had to manage me .

So, in our weekly one-on-one meeting, after I had tossed out yet another slew of ideas, Julie said something like:

"Those sound like great ideas, Henry! I would love to implement them. But I'm already working on the last dozen mission-critical projects we agreed on. And I don't have room or time to take on anything more.

"So… How much of a priority are these new ideas? And are they ideas… or orders ? Are you telling me to stop doing the things we agreed on last week to make room to do these new things? And, if you are telling me that, which should I stop?"

Well, of course, that was a cold bucket of water in the face for me and my new ideas. But it was the right move for Julie and the company. After we went through the projects Julie was working on, I realized that none of my new ideas were better or more important than what she was already doing. I was also reminded that Julie was already working really hard to implement ideas that I had forgotten. So, I filed all my exciting new ideas away for the future.

That is managing your boss .

If you want to succeed, you will have to do it.

Entertainment & News
Career & Money
Health & Wellness
Love Quotes
Expert Advice
Radical Acceptance
search articles
find an expert
sign up for newsletter

Entertainment And News

3 Ways To Use Malicious Compliance To Stop Your Boss From Micromanaging

Two can play the micromanagement game.

By John Sundholm Written on Apr 20, 2024

woman using malicious compliance to stop her micromanaging boss

There is absolutely no workplace situation more infuriating and demoralizing than a micromanaging boss. Their constant hovering can make a job a living nightmare. But it turns out there is an easy way to stop most micromanagers — by using their rules against them.

An employment attorney suggests using malicious compliance to stop your micromanaging boss.

Now, first things first: What exactly is malicious compliance? Well, it's basically following a rule to the absolute letter so that its inherent flaws become unavoidably and punishingly disastrous.

RELATED: After Being Denied A Raise For Two Years, Top-Performing Employee Tells Boss That Because His Pay Is 'Below Average' His Work Will Be Too

For instance, I used to work at a corporate restaurant that instituted a new script for greeting tables that was embarrassingly sales-pitchy and took absolutely forever. When management wouldn't listen, we servers executed it to the letter — and our bosses were inundated with customer complaints and a horribly delayed kitchen.

That was the end of that ridiculous process dreamed up by a bunch of suits in an office park who'd never waited a table in their lives.

So, how does this apply to micromanagers? Well, there are three main ways to use malicious compliance to stop your micromanaging boss and basically hoist them by their own petard.

1. Bury them with constant interruptions to keep them abreast of every moment of your day.

As employment lawyer and TikToker Ryan Stygar explained in a recent video, malicious compliance turns a micromanager's own ridiculous requirements against them and quickly makes them their problem, not yours.

Say you have a boss who is constantly on your case about where you are and what you're doing every moment of the day. "Then make sure that you tell them every little thing you are doing all day long," Stygar said.

But literally EVERY. LITTLE. THING. Not just a reasonable amount of detail — all of it, right down to the minutiae.

"Because one of two things is gonna happen. A: the micromanager will be satisfied and hopefully get off your back," Stygar said. "Or B: and this is more likely — they will be so sick of being so involved in every task you're doing that they'll just stop micromanaging you." Success!

2. Provide so much information in your work that it is overwhelming — novel-length emails are your friend!

A man on Reddit — where there is a MaliciousCompliance subReddit for precisely this purpose — provided the perfect example of how this might work. When a micromanaging boss requested "needless changes" to processes, he used ChatGPT to "write them back the longest possible email."

But not just a verbose letter — he included umpteen attachments, archived emails, and even flowcharts of business processes and other needlessly fulsome details.

"Just give them everything on the subject," he suggested, and the more you can explain, the better. "Leave no rock unturned." By the time they get to the fifth page and the fourth pie chart-filled PDF, they'll see the error of their ways and back off because nobody actually has the time or the will for this.

RELATED: Boss Tells Employee She Has A 'Lack Of Respect For Protocol' Because She Flew First Class While Boss Sat In Coach

3. Do things exactly how they ask to the extent that your actual work cannot be completed.

I once had a boss who was such an insane micromanager he would make us show him every — and I do mean every — email we sent to a client before it went out, even if it was just a "thanks!" Truly next-level micromanagement.

One day, he decided I needed to start taking notes on every conversation we had because he (baselessly) felt he could not trust me to retain the information. So I did exactly as he asked, making every conversation take an eternity.

"Hold on, can you repeat that? I didn't get it down," I'd say. Or, "Can you elaborate on that? I just want to make sure my notes are as detailed as possible." Sometimes, I'd even pull a colleague into meetings "just so there's a third party to verify any wires I might get crossed."

Naturally, he'd become furious, and I'd just say, "I'm really sorry; I just want to make sure I have accurate notes because I know you have concerns about me retaining information!" And when all this time-devouring micromanagement totaled up to a missed client deadline? Well, that was the end of that!

As an extra bonus, I had meticulous notes AND a witness to back me up when he eventually tried to mess up my unemployment claim after firing me by saying I was terminated for lying. Oops!

Now this may all sound petty, but even top HR professionals say that often, the only way micromanagers wake up and change their ways is by being "shocked" into realizing their management style doesn't work.

The bottom line is, as Stygar put it, "a micromanaging boss is a boss who doesn't trust you, and you deserve better ." You're often better off fighting fire with fire than just letting them ruin every workday.

RELATED: Woman Forced To Go Into The Office To 'Collaborate' With Coworkers Realizes She's The Only One Not Working From Home

John Sundholm is a news and entertainment writer who covers pop culture, social justice, and human interest topics.

Terms and Conditions
Join the OMT Division

Organization and Management Theory OMT

Call for Nominations: 2024 OMT "Navigating the First Years of Your PhD" PDW

1. call for nominations: 2024 omt "navigating the first years of your phd" pdw.

2024 OMT "Navigating the First Years of Your PhD" PDW

Call for Nominations

Organizer: Forrest Briscoe, OMT Division Chair

Nomination Deadline: May 17, 2024

We are pleased to announce that the Organization and Management Theory (OMT) division will again host our PDW, "Navigating the first years of your PhD," at the Academy of Management (AOM) Annual Meeting. The event is tentatively scheduled for Saturday August 10, 2024, in-person in Chicago.

This workshop is aimed at PhD students at the early stages of their PhD. Participants explore with experienced scholars how OMT scholarship and the OMT Division can help them turn their research ideas into robust and impactful academic knowledge. They also share with other participants their experiences of being a doctoral student and begin to build their own international network.

The PDW will include a combination of the following activities:

· Interactive roundtables with experienced OMT scholars and other student participants, for discussing research interests

· A "mini OMT Meetup" for 1-on-1 interaction between students and OMT executive committee members, modeled after our popular year-round OMT Meet Ups program.

· Panel Q&A to ask questions hear about OMT research trends, careers, and opportunities in the division.

· Networking opportunities with peers and faculty participants.

OMT Executive Committee participants (more may be added):

Emily Block, OMT Rep-at-Large

Eva Boxenbaum, OMT Past Division Chair

Forrest Briscoe, OMT Division Chair

Emilio Castilla, OMT Division Chair-Elect

Shelby Gai, OMT Member Outreach Chair

Kevin Lee, OMT Communication Chair-Elect

Massimo Maoret, OMT Research Committee Chair

Shubha Patvardhan, OMT Rep-at-Large

Wendy Smith, OMT Program Chair

The PDW is designed to allow for high levels of faculty-student interaction. To maintain a high faculty/student ratio, space for this event is limited. Interested students must be nominated by their PhD supervisor or the coordinator of their PhD program and must be OMT members (or join now).

Nomination Instructions:

The student's PhD supervisor or PhD program coordinator should send an email to the organizer, Forrest Briscoe, OMT Division Chair, at [email protected] no later than May 17. The nomination email should include this information:

1. Student's name, e-mail address, department and university

2. A sentence confirming the student is (or will become) a member of the OMT division

3. A sentence confirming the student is enrolled in year 1 or 2 of the PhD program

4. Attach the student's CV, including contact information

5. Attach a 1-page bio for the student that includes their initial research interests and/or project ideas (written by the student!)

Nominators will be notified by May 30 on the outcome of their nomination. Additional information will be available via the OMT website closer to the date of the event. For questions, contact Forrest Briscoe at [email protected]

Forrest Briscoe

OMT Division Chair 2024

New Best Answer

Community tags.

Divisions and Interest Groups
Entrepreneurship
Organization and Management Theory
Organizational Behavior
Technology and Innovation Management
Annual Meeting
Connect @ AOM
Strategy

No Rest For The Wicked: How To Beat Warrick The Torn

Players will need to overcome Warrick The Torn to enter Sacrament in No Rest For The Wicked. Here is how to beat this tough opening boss.

No Rest For The Wicked has launched into early access and is already sending a message to its playerbase that this game is not for the feint of heart. Despite only being in the prologue stages, the opening boss fight is proving to be an enormous challenge for players as they come to grips with the combat and movement mechanics of the game.

Before players can begin the main storyline in the settlement of Sacrament, they must first take on the deformed and twisted boss known as Warrick The Torn. This beast is aggressive, agile, and extremely powerful, which may overwhelm many players as they start their journey in the game. For some tips on how to beat Warrick The Torn in No Rest For The Wicked , read on for some key points on preparing and battling this monster.

How No Rest For The Wicked Blends Dragon's Dogma 2 and Diablo 4

How to beat warrick the torn in no rest for the wicked.

The first major boss fight in the action RPG No Rest For The Wicked is against Warrick the Torn, who is blocking the passage for players to progress through to the city of Sacrament and begin the main storyline of the game. Warrick is a tough boss in his own right, but it is particularly tough given how early in the game he comes, as players may still be becoming accustomed to crucial game mechanics like blocking, parrying, healing, and stamina management.

While he is a tough boss to beat, he is certainly not unbeatable. Here are some ways players can level the playing field against Warrick.

Stock Up On Mushroom Soup

The first recipe players will learn in No Rest For The Wicked is Mushroom Soup, which is one that has minimal ingredients, is easy to cook, and will give players a significant health boost when the fight turns ugly for the Cerim. The area prior to the battle has quite a few locations where the mushrooms and herbs needed for the recipe can be found and there is a campfire nearby where you can cook them. Alternatively, speak to the blacksmith near the closest Whisper to Warrick and purchase meals from him as well.

Before the battle, ensure that you have Mushroom Soup assigned to your quick select wheel so you can replenish your health on the go, as you cannot pause the action midway through the fight. Warrick's attacks are quick , so ensure to distance yourself and wait for a lull in the fight before eating the soup.

Dodge Toward Warrick

Warrick's attacks can cover great distances and be very effective against players, so the best way to manage his offensive offerings is to actually dodge toward him as he attacks. This is an effective strategy for two reasons; you can avoid his devastating attacks and also be close enough to Warrick to counter-attack.

It is worth noting not to dodge directly into Warrick as players will risk being halted by his enormous body. Instead aim the dodge in his general direction but slightly off to one side. Aside from his jumping attacks, this technique will avoid the majority of Warrick's offense.

No Rest for the Wicked’s Lack of Classes May Be What Sets It Apart Most

Manage your stamina.

Stamina management is among the most challenging facets of No Rest For The Wicked for players to wrap their heads around, and the battle against Warrick the Torn is the ultimate test of this. In order to overcome this boss, you need to time your moves just right, know when to rest, and overall have the patience to telegraph his attacks and avoid damage.

Stamina management comes in many forms for this fight, so players should be mindful of the following:

Keep attacking sequences to a maximum of two strikes at a time, as you'll need some stamina to get out of Warrick's way as well.
Attacks and evasive maneuvers both use up the stamina meter, so be mindful of not overusing the techniques and exposing yourself to damage.
Your movement and stamina maintenance is affected by how much weight you're carrying. So, depending on whether you prefer a lighter or heavier build, consider how much armor and weaponry you carry into the fight.

Opt For A Lighter Weight Class

Weight classes play a significant role in how agile a player is, which is of particular importance in the battle against Warrick the Torn. This boss' movements can be sudden and attacks lightning-fast, so it is crucial that players are able to respond with some equally quick reflexes.

While heavier builds can offer greater resistance to heavy attacks, it is too early in the game to get your hands on armor and gear that will effectively protect you against Warrick. To deal with this disadvantage, it is actually better for players to have less armor and equipment, so they are assigned the Light or Normal weight class. With these weight classes, you'll spend less stamina when attacking and dodging, and you'll recover your stamina far quicker, which is arguably the most important advantage you can have in this battle.

No Rest for the Wicked

IMAGES

How to become a PhD guide
How to Select a PhD Supervisor?- A Guide for Students
Can You Change Your PhD Supervisor?
How to make the most of your PhD supervisor
How to Choose PhD Supervisor? 6 Key Things to Consider!
How to choose a Good PhD Supervisor

VIDEO

Supervise PhD students to get Tenure Fast!
when PhD supervisor find it difficult to give you different date for defense
PhD Supervisor Seeking
Make the Meeting with Your PhD Supervisor Successful [Urdu / Hindi]
How to find a PhD Supervisor|| Indian students who wish to study PhD abroad||PhD||Dr_kreative
TIPS FOR THE FIRST MEETING WITH YOUR PHD SUPERVISOR#phdlife

COMMENTS

Managing up: how to communicate effectively with your PhD adviser
Include one or two sentences summarizing the agenda and what you want to get out of the meeting. During the meeting, be proactive. Take note of the topics you should follow up on, and their ...
How to get what you need from your Ph.D. or postdoc supervisor
For Ph.D. candidates and postdocs, the relationship with your supervisor can make or break a career. The onus for a positive and nurturing relationship should fall largely on the senior member. At the same time, supervisors are often overstretched and have their own priorities, which might not perfectly match up with their trainees'.
A Guide to Changing Your PhD Supervisor in 2024
Focus on academic or research-related factors rather than personal issues. 5. Highlight Your Goals: Emphasize that your decision is driven by your academic and research goals. Highlight the importance of aligning your research interests with your supervisor to ensure a more productive collaboration. 6.
The PhD-Doctor: What (Not) to Expect From Your Supervisor
THE PHD-DOCTOR INDEX. This is the third part of a series for PhD students with hands-on advice on how to handle the hurdles and challenges of your PhD project, written by Herman Lelieveldt. The PhD-Doctor is based on excerpts from his book Promoveren--Een wegwijzer voor de beginnend wetenschapper. G ood research is the result of communication.
Tips to Maintain a Good Relationship With Your PhD Supervisor
Open communication is key to having a healthy PhD student-supervisor relationship as well as to ensuring the success of your PhD project. 3. Discuss your goals and aspirations. One of the key aspects of healthy communication in the PhD student-supervisor relationship is the ability to have a detailed discussion about your goals and aspirations.
PDF Effective supervisor-PhD interaction
Effective supervisor-PhD interaction: a two-way process. Supervision is a two-way process. Clear and frequent communication, management of expectations, and giving and receiving feedback are crucial components. Instrumental in this are the right attitude and behaviour of both supervisors and PhD candidates.
Managing Your Relationship with Your PhD Supervisor
This will first involve identifying your needs and then making a clear and direct request to your supervisor. SET EXPECTATIONS IN ADVANCE. Unfortunately, there is no guidebook on how supervisors and supervisees should interact. It is often down to the individuals involved to determine how this important relationship will function.
Ten types of PhD supervisor relationships
However, these policies need to be accommodated into already overloaded workloads and should include regular review of supervisors. Academics. PhD. professional mentoring. PhD supervisors ...
What to Expect from your PhD Supervisor
Other universities may leave more of the details to the student and supervisor themselves. In either case, the following are some of the basic expectations a PhD supervisor should fulfil: Expertise in your subject area. Regular supervisory meetings. Feedback on work in progress.
How to develop an excellent PhD Supervisor relationship
Students who are at the beginning of their PhD and need more guidance may meet their supervisors more regularly (e.g. once a month) and prepare some kind of work in advance to be discussed during the meeting (e.g. an essay or literature review). As you progress, some students may like more frequent communication, for instance on a weekly basis ...
Managing up: how to communicate effectively with your PhD adviser
CEE members Lluís Saló-Salgado, Angi Acocella, Ignacio Arzuaga García (Communication Fellow), Souha El Mousadik (Communication Fellow) & Augustine Zvinavashe published a Nature career advice article based on a September 2021 CEE Comm Lab panel event: When you start a PhD, you also begin a professional relationship with your PhD adviser. This is an exciting moment: interacting with someone ...
What Makes A Good PhD Supervisor?
4. Is a Good Mentor with a Supportive Personality. A good PhD supervisor should be supportive and willing to listen. A PhD project is an exercise in independently producing a substantial body of research work; the primary role of your supervisor should be to provide mentoring to help you achieve this.
PDF Managing your PhD (and your supervisor)
I Most Informatics PhD students will meet their supervisors more regularly. I If your supervisor relies on group meetings, but you feel there is a need for regular 1-1 meetings, please ask for that! I An interest in your Career aspirations, and guidance at appropriate times (internships, research visits when appropriate).
What makes a good PhD supervisor? Top tips for managing the student
For most of your PhD journey, your supervisor will know more about your subject area than you do (there may become a stage where you overtake them, at least within the niche of your PhD study area), so their advice is really valuable. ... but to manage the way you approach your supervisor as best you can. Life isn't perfect, and nor is every ...
How To Work Well With Your PhD Supervisor
Stick to weekly meetings. The principle attribute of students who complete their dissertation on time is that they are passionately connected to their thesis, and remain engaged with their research and their supervisor. And the best way to maintain this connection is through weekly meetings. There are several reasons for this.
A beginner's guide to supervising a PhD researcher
Biochem (Lond) (2023) 45 (5): 11-15. This beginner's guide to supervision has been created for anyone who supports postgraduate researchers (PGRs) with any aspect of their research or the completion of their degree. The supervision of PGRs is a complex and time-consuming job, with a high degree of responsibility.
How to Write an Email to a PhD Supervisor and What to Ask Them
Your first email to a potential PhD supervisor should be a formal email, in many ways like an application cover letter. 1. Include a clear subject line. Make sure your initial email doesn't have a vague subject line that could lead to it being ignored (or heading straight for the spam folder). Some examples could be:
Ten simple rules for choosing a PhD supervisor
After finding one or several supervisors of interest, we hope that the rules bellow will help you choose the right supervisor for you. Go to: Rule 1: Align research interests. You need to make sure that a prospective supervisor studies, or at the very least, has an interest in what you want to study.
How to be a PhD supervisor
How to be a PhD supervisor. The relationship between PhD students and their supervisors is often said to be the most intense in the academy, with huge implications for student success. Yet most supervisors receive little if any training. Here, six academics give their take on how to approach it. April 18, 2019.
Choosing a PhD Supervisor
The ideal PhD supervisor will be an expert in their academic field, with a wealth of publications, articles, chapters and books. They'll also have a background in organising and presenting at conference events. It's also important that their expertise is up-to-date. You should look for evidence that they're currently active in your ...
How to find a PhD supervisor
Ask your potential PhD supervisor about and align your expectations for work and a work-life balance with them. Set realistic expectations and targets; this will be even more important if health challenges are likely to affect your work pace. Your supervisor can then manage expectations and support your progress in the face of these challenges.
(PDF) How to manage your PhD Supervisor
Construction management was at work during the building of Great Pyramid of Giza (2560 B.C.) and services management to the hostels and inns in Mesopotamia (at least 2000 BC).
How to Get the Most Out of a One-on-One with Your Boss
Here are five critical behaviors for you to use in your first one-on-one with your boss. Know what you need. You can't get your needs met if you don't know what your needs are. Be curious. Go ...
6 Common Leadership Styles
Much has been written about common leadership styles and how to identify the right style for you, whether it's transactional or transformational, bureaucratic or laissez-faire. But according to ...
How to manage your boss
First, interview your boss until you understand clearly and in detail what they want you to do — and write it down. Create a one-page mission statement. Describe your goal in a sentence and add ...
3 Ways Malicious Compliance Can Stop Your Micromanaging Boss
1. Bury them with constant interruptions to keep them abreast of every moment of your day. As employment lawyer and TikToker Ryan Stygar explained in a recent video, malicious compliance turns a ...
Call for Nominations: 2024 OMT "Navigating the First Years of Your PhD
Interested students must be nominated by their PhD supervisor or the coordinator of their PhD program and must be OMT members (or join now). Nomination Instructions: The student's PhD supervisor or PhD program coordinator should send an email to the organizer, Forrest Briscoe, OMT Division Chair, at [email protected] no later than May 17. The ...
Best Online Ph.D. In Management Of 2024
Understand Your Expenses and Financing Options. Per-credit tuition rates for the 10 qualifying Ph.D. programs in our guide range from. $450 to $1,575. Over the course of a typical 60-credit Ph.D ...
How To Beat Warrick The Torn in No Rest For The Wicked
Manage Your Stamina. Stamina management is among the most challenging facets of No Rest For The Wicked for players to wrap their heads around, and the battle against Warrick the Torn is the ...

Managing up: how to communicate effectively with your PhD adviser

Access options

Competing Interests

Related Articles

Postdoctoral Position

Qiushi Chair Professor

ZJU 100 Young Professor

Head of the Thrust of Robotics and Autonomous Systems

Head of Biology, Bio-island

Quick links

A Guide to Changing Your PhD Supervisor

Introduction

Email Template to Convey Your Decision to Change Supervisor

Upcoming Events

Recent Posts

Enhancing Wellness in Higher Education

Share this:

Leave a comment Cancel reply

Ten types of PhD supervisor relationships – which is yours?

Disclosure statement

Cheap labour

The “ghost supervisor”

Collateral damage

Creepy crawlers

Captivate and con

Colleague in training

Sydney Horizon Educators (Identified)

Senior Disability Services Advisor

Deputy Social Media Producer

Associate Professor, Occupational Therapy

GRAINS RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION CHAIRPERSON

We use cookies on this site to enhance your experience

A link to reset your password has been sent to your email.

We need additional information from you. Please complete your profile first before placing your order.

How to develop an excellent PhD Supervisor relationship

Finding the right PhD supervisor

Making the most of your PhD supervisor relationship

Share with your colleagues

Finding the Right PhD Supervisor

Finding the Right Place to do your PhD

Dealing with a Difficult Supervisor in research and academia

Related webinars

Bitesize webinar: Researcher Mental Health - Module 1 - Researcher wellbeing

Bitesize Webinar: Researcher Mental Health - Module 2 - Let's talk about anxiety and depression

Bitesize Webinar: Researcher Mental Health - Module 3 - Let's talk about imposter experiences

Bitesize Webinar: Researcher Mental Health - Module 4 - Tackling the imposter experience and other insecurities

Four top tips for making the most of your PhD

How to find your best work rhythm as a PhD student

Finding and maintaining the Motivation to keep Writing during your PhD

Managing up: how to communicate effectively with your PhD adviser

Community Blog

What Makes A Good PhD Supervisor?

Introduction

The Role of a PhD Supervisor

Qualities to Look For in A Good PhD Supervisor

2. Is an Expert in their Field of Research

3. Has Enough Time to Provide Good PhD Supervision

4. Is a Good Mentor with a Supportive Personality

Browse PhDs Now

Join Thousands of Students

What makes a good PhD supervisor? Top tips for managing the student-supervisor relationship.

Interested in group workshops, cohort-courses and a free PhD learning & support community?

The team behind The PhD Proofreaders have launched The PhD People, a free learning and community platform for PhD students. Connect, share and learn with other students, and boost your skills with cohort-based workshops and courses.

How to choose a PhD supervisor

Your PhD Thesis. On one page.

What is the role of a supervisor?

What does a supervisor not do?

What you need to do to please your supervisor

Wrapping up

Hello, Doctor…

Share this:

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Search The PhD Knowledge Base

The PhD Knowledge Base Categories

Cover Image

Your supervision filter

Get Email Alerts

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Ten simple rules for choosing a PhD supervisor

Catherine Bannon