phd supervisor doesn't care

How to Cope with a Problematic PhD Supervisor

Completing a Ph.D. is a significant academic achievement that requires dedication, hard work, and the guidance of a supportive supervisor.

Are you facing challenges with your PhD supervisor?

Do you often feel ignored or belittled by them?

If you answered ‘yes’ to any of these questions, it’s clear that your PhD journey isn’t going as smoothly as you hoped.

However, there are strategies you can employ to cope with a problematic PhD supervisor and improve your relationship with them.

In this article, we will discuss different types of Problematic supervisors and provide strategies for dealing with each type, allowing you to navigate your PhD journey more effortlessly.

It may seem unfair, but difficult supervisors often get away with their behavior due to their past achievements and reputation as academic researchers.

Making a formal complaint against your supervisor may only complicate matters further. Instead, focus on developing strategies that can help reduce your PhD woes and bring you and your supervisor on the same page.

Table of Contents

Types of Problematic PhD Supervisors

To begin, it’s important to identify the type of supervisor you’re dealing with. According to the book “Coping with Difficult People,” there are seven categories into which difficult people can be divided.

• Hostile aggressive
• Silent & unresponsive
• Super-agreeable
• Know-it-all expert

Additionally, two more types have been identified in the book “The Smart Way to Your Ph.D.: 200 Secrets From 100 Graduates.”

• Micro-manager

Let’s explore each type and discuss strategies to handle them effectively.

1. Complainer

Any supervisor of this type will constantly have something to complain. It would not be incorrect to suggest that this type of supervisor is born with the ability to see faults in a student’s work.

To cope with a supervisor that constantly complains, you can do the following:

• Listen – You should actively listen to the complaints voiced by the supervisor in order to deal with them appropriately later on.
• Acknowledge – You must then acknowledge your supervisor’s comments in a suitable manner. To acknowledge, you could use phrases like “I understand what you’re driving at,” “I understand where you’re coming from,” or “I see why you’re concerned with xyz section of my research paper.”
• Intervene – If you think that your supervisor’s complaint is illogical, step in and explain why you disagree with that particular point. It could be beneficial to use phrases like “With your permission, I would like to contradict your point here” or “With all due respect, I beg to differ on this point.”
• Avoid accusation – Your supervisor should not perceive your words as an accusation when you express your thoughts to them. Instead, you should provide facts to support your claims on any topic that has been troubling your supervisor. Keep the conversation from turning into an accusation-reaccusation sequence. The sentence above could be expanded in the way that follows: “With all due respect, I beg to differ on this point and the following are the reasons: X, Y, & Z.”
• Get to problem-solving – In addition to providing your supervisor with facts and figures, you need to give solutions to the problems that he or she has brought up during the meeting. ”I understand why you’re concerned about the xyz section of my research paper,” for example. Respectfully, I beg to differ on this point, and X, Y, & Z are my reasons. Do you still think it to be an issue? If so, what changes do you suggest I make to this section to ensure that this particular chapter meets your expectations? It should be noted that complaining supervisors don’t always complain about a specific research issue in an effort to find a solution. They would rather do this to gain admiration and appreciation for their ability for finding faults. So, appreciate them in order to satisfy their unspoken desire for recognition.

2. Hostile-Aggressive

This particular group of supervisors or advisers tends to be confrontational, unfriendly, impolite, rude, and aggressive by nature. Such a supervisor will simply reject all of your ideas and drafts, leaving you disappointed in nearly every meeting.

To cope with this type of supervisor, employ the following strategies:

• Bide your time : Wait for the person to get calm before speaking to them so that your voice may be heard and understood.
• Be assertive – Once the supervisor’s drilling speech has lost momentum in the meeting, you should respond to the supervisor’s concerns about your PhD with assertiveness, supporting your claims with logic and reliable sources of information.
• Maintain eye contact: Look the supervisor in the eyes while you speak. This will demonstrate your confidence and optimism, which will enable you to take control of the situation and direct the conversation towards finding a solution.

3. Silent & Unresponsive

Though rare in academia, some supervisors may fail to return calls or emails and might skip addressing your questions during meetings.

To cope with such supervisors:

• Open-ended questions : Asking open-ended questions is the best way to get as much information as you can. For instance, Professor, what do you think of the solutions I have suggested for problems brought up during the previous meeting?
• Pausing helps : When you believe your question or doubt has not been well addressed, try pausing for a few moments to allow the professor to break the ice and address the question or doubt with a suitable explanation.
• Sum-up the conversation : Reiterate the points covered before the meeting finishes and ask the meeting’s supervisor to confirm your understanding. This would ensure that the supervisor properly identified and filled in any gaps in your understanding and that you had a clear set of goals to meet before the next meeting began.
• Follow up regularly: If your supervisor has asked you to work on one specific aspect of your PhD thesis, you must agree to a deadline and set a meeting time to discuss the progress of the work. The secret to success when dealing with this kind of supervisor is constant follow-up.
• Use your own judgement: If the supervisor doesn’t address any concerns you have with the PhD thesis, you may need to use your own judgement and email the supervisor to let them know the plan of action you intend to take.

4. Indecisive

Have you ever had a PhD supervisor advise you to start working on a certain research topic and then later propose that you change to a different one because the initial topic is no longer looking particularly promising? If so, you would describe that kind of supervisor as being indecisive.

Indecisive supervisors feel uncomfortable making solid decisions because they are worried that their decisions would be improper and ineffective.

You could employ the following strategies when dealing with a indecisive supervisor:

• Assertiveness is what works best with this type of supervisor. You can explain why a certain research project is worthwhile after your supervisor has rejected the study plan by being assertive. This would assist in restoring your supervisor’s trust in both you and the research you are conducting.
• Before meeting with an unclear supervisor for assistance, you must take responsibility of the PhD Thesis and conduct extensive study on your own. You won’t be able to convince your supervisor of your choices regarding your PhD Thesis until you are knowledgeable about the field of research.

5. Super-Agreeable

A supervisor in this category would always appreciate your work and would rarely bring up any facts that would anger or displease you as a student. If such a supervisor makes a promise, it should not be trusted blindly because the majority of the time, empty promises are made by this kind of PhD supervisors.

In short, you cannot rely on this type of supervisor for much assistance with your PhD thesis. You might employ the following strategies when dealing with this kind of supervisor:

• Speak out : Don’t wait for your supervisor to point out flaws in your work. Instead, discuss all of the problems you faced while drafting various sections of your PhD thesis with the supervisor and ask for solutions. Ask the supervisor if they are completely satisfied with the PhD thesis work that has been completed so far to prevent making significant changes in the later stages of the research work.
• Look out for unrealistic commitments — A super-agreeable supervisor is skilled at creating false promises, as was already indicated. You must therefore look out for these false commitments and figure out how to get around them. For instance, if your supervisor has promised to give you a letter of recommendation in response to your request for one, you cannot rely on that promise because it is possible that the supervisor may cause unnecessary delay in the delivery. In this situation, you must create an outline for the requested letter and give it to the supervisor, asking that they issue the recommendation letter as soon as possible. By taking this step, the letter will be delivered more quickly and reach you.
• Actively listen for humour- This kind of friendly supervisor will often use humour to draw attention to the research paper’s flaws. Therefore, it is your responsibility to always your ears open and pay attention to such humorous remarks in order to enhance the content of your PhD thesis.

6. Negativist

A negative PhD supervisor will continually highlight the negative aspects of your completed work in order to lower your morale. Your academic efforts will never be appreciated by this kind of supervisor.

To deal with a negative supervisor, you can employ the following strategies:

Avoid being influenced by the supervisor’s negative behavior. Instead, you can try to use the negative attitude of the supervisor as motivation to work harder and produce better results. Instead of focusing on the supervisor’s demoralizing behavior, try to focus on the issues you are trying to solve. Do not engage in arguments that, you know, will greatly increase the level of tension between you and the supervisor. If your negative supervisor is not willing to support you in any way, ask peers and other professors for assistance.

7. Know-it-All Expert

This type of supervisor, as the name suggests, is very knowledgeable in the field and would not be satisfied with any work that was not well-researched.

Supervisors in this category have extensive knowledge in their research area and expect well-researched work.

The following strategies can help you deal with a supervisor who is an know-it-all expert supervisor.

• No matter how talented you are as a researcher, you should always be polite when speaking with this type of supervisor. It’s possible that you won’t get the best support if you try to wow people with your knowledge of a certain field of research.
• Before meeting with this type of supervisor, you should equip yourself with the necessary knowledge. You could evaluate the issues you are facing and ask the supervisor for help solving them with a little preparation before the meeting.
• At the end of every in-person meeting, always thank your supervisor for offering valuable comments and guiding you in the right direction.

8. Micro-manager

A micro-managing supervisor is one that closely examines every aspect of your PhD work and keeps track of each deadline set up to review the current project and determine the best course of action. You can even receive a call from this kind of supervisor at odd hours to talk about the ongoing research project.

If your supervisor micromanages, you can do the following:

• You should take notes during each meeting with your PhD supervisor and agree on a due date for the revised  draft. This ensures that you are not interrupted before the agreed-upon deadline ends and that you complete the agreed-upon revision on time.
• The supervisor should be politely informed of your working hours so that they know when to contact you for an update (if necessary).

9. Super-Busy

A supervisor like this would have very little time to devote to your PhD research. Students who have been allocated a super-busy PhD Supervisor must remain self-motivated in order to effectively complete their PhD Thesis.

Here are some suggestions to help you deal with a supervisor who is super busy:

• Please conduct independent research to find solutions to the problems you are having with your PhD thesis if you can’t schedule a meeting with your supervisor.
• After that, send the supervisor an email outlining the steps you’ll take to address any research-related issues.
• If the supervisor detects any fault with the course of action you have chosen, you might receive some constructive feedback that will help you continue in the right direction.
• Seek alternative support: If your supervisor is consistently unavailable, consider seeking support from other faculty members or researchers in your field. They can provide guidance, feedback, and support for your research when your supervisor is too busy.
• Be organized: Plan and prepare for your meetings in advance. Make a list of specific questions or concerns you want to discuss and prioritize them to ensure you make the most of the limited time you have with your supervisor.
• Be concise: When communicating with a busy supervisor, keep your messages or conversations concise and to the point. Clearly articulate your main ideas or questions without excessive detail or unnecessary information.
• Respect their time: Be mindful of your supervisor’s schedule and commitments. If they have limited availability, try to schedule meetings well in advance and be punctual. Be respectful of their time during meetings by staying focused and not going off on tangents.
• Proactively seek feedback: Instead of waiting for your supervisor to provide feedback, take the initiative to seek feedback from other knowledgeable individuals in your research area. This will help you progress in your work and minimize the impact of your supervisor’s busy schedule.
• Be self-reliant: Take ownership of your research project and become more self-reliant. Conduct thorough literature reviews, engage in independent problem-solving, and seek resources and information outside of your supervisor’s immediate guidance.
• Establish clear expectations : Have open and honest conversations with your supervisor to establish clear expectations regarding communication, deadlines, and milestones. Clarify what support you need from them and discuss how you can work together effectively despite their busy schedule.
• Network with peers: Build connections with other PhD students or researchers in your field. Sharing experiences, challenges, and resources with peers can provide valuable support and guidance throughout your PhD journey.

Remember, every Ph.D. journey comes with its unique challenges.

By adopting a proactive approach, seeking support, and staying focused on your goals, you can overcome obstacles and successfully complete your doctoral studies.

Your research and contribution to your field are valuable, and you have the resilience to thrive, even in the face of a problematic supervisor.

Related Posts

How to become a postdoctoral researcher, top 10 fellowships to support phd studies in usa, how long does it take for phd in usa | structure, 20 tips for completing your phd in 36 months, resources for phd literature review, top 10 highest paying phd degrees in 2023, phd and postdoctoral positions at university of liege in belgium, how to complete your phd in 3 years, phd students seeking industry jobs: transitioning from academia to the corporate world, what are the pros and cons of being an older student in a phd program.

Comments are closed.

Want to Get your Dissertation Accepted?

Discover how we've helped doctoral students complete their dissertations and advance their academic careers!

Join 200+ Graduated Students

Get Your Dissertation Accepted On Your Next Submission

Get customized coaching for:.

• Crafting your proposal,
• Collecting and analyzing your data, or
• Preparing your defense.

Trapped in dissertation revisions?

What to do if your phd advisor is ignoring you, published by steve tippins on june 27, 2019 june 27, 2019.

Last Updated on: 3rd June 2022, 04:35 am

“My PhD Advisor is ignoring me!” I hear this type of statement surprisingly often from students and clients. While sometimes it’s just a case of nerves on the part of the student, there are times when someone’s PhD advisor really is ignoring them.

In this post I will try to explain why your advisor might be ignoring you and possible actions that you can take.

What to Do if Your PhD Advisor Is Ignoring You

• Understand university policy
• Write your Chair
• Set up a phone call
• Ask for a new committee member

Jump to the Action Steps here.

Why is my Phd Advisor Ignoring Me?

Why do advisors ignore their students? Some simply feel that doctoral work should be an independent process–and that’s not necessarily a bad thing. Others may be underpaid and overloaded with work. In rare cases some may actually be negligent. Either way, you’ll want to do something about it. But first let’s explore the possible reasons why your PhD advisor might be ignoring you.

Nervous tension

Is your PhD advisor actually ignoring you? It does happen, but if you’ve been living off of coffee and instant noodles and staring at your computer screen 23 hours a day for the past week, it may be worth evaluating if your perception is accurate.

The dissertation writing process can be enormously stressful. Sometimes, a student working late will discover a critical problem with their paper and email their advisor about it at 10 pm. 

They’ll wake up at 6:30 am to start work again and check their email, but there’s no response. They have breakfast and check again at 7:15. By 8 am, they’ve checked their email four times, each with increasing anxiety about the lack of response. 

Meanwhile, the professor is maintaining a healthy work-life balance by not checking his or her email outside of working hours. Depending on how many students a professor is advising and how many other responsibilities they have, they may not even get back to you within 24 hours. 

It’s a good idea to check in with your advisor when you start working together about what sort of response times you can expect, and how they prefer to communicate.

Perhaps email works best for them, or maybe they prefer to schedule a phone call. Maybe Wednesday afternoons are a particularly good time to be in touch. The more you can communicate with them about what works best, the better relationship you will have.

A culture of less support

Many doctoral students go through what I call the  “go wander in the woods and see what you find” model. See my post on this topic. Basically you are left on your own to find what you need to complete your study. While this can be overwhelming, it’s also incredibly rewarding to know that you did it almost all by yourself. 

Becoming a scholar capable of independent thought and research is part of the purpose of the dissertation requirement, so you may receive less support than you’re used to simply as a natural part of the process. Professors may expect you to be capable of handling many aspects of the process on your own.

However, you shouldn’t be left totally in the dark. You have a PhD advisor for a reason–because you need support designing your study, settling on your methodology, and refining your research questions. There is a difference between hand-holding and providing critical support, and a good advisor will understand this and be available for your needs, within reason.

Lower salaries

An additional factor to consider is how institutions pay advisors. At many schools, faculty are part time/adjuncts. This is very cost efficient for the school as minimal benefits are paid and tenure is not part of the equation. 

Under this scenario your advisor may be getting paid something in the neighborhood of $100 a month to work with you. This number may seem very low based upon your tuition dollars but it is very close to actual figures at several institutions (this could explain some of the turnover that you see among faculty).

With numbers like these, faculty may ration their availability to match compensation levels. I have never heard this stated overtly but in an economically rational world it would be easy to see this happen. Regardless of whether it is benign neglect or rational economic behavior, the end result is you waiting for responses.

What You Can Do if Your PhD Advisor is Ignoring You

If you find yourself in a situation where you are feeling neglected or that your submissions seem to have fallen into an abyss, there are some things that you can do. Don’t escalate to the last option immediately; there could be a legitimate reason for a delay and you don’t want to burn any bridges unnecessarily. 

Here are the steps you can take if your PhD advisor is ignoring you.

1. Understand university policy and gently hold people to it

Before you start contacting people, I suggest that you look into your school’s policy regarding document review times. Most schools have a policy that work must be returned within a certain time period. 

If you find that you are still within the allotted time then you will have to be patient and work on other things (for example, you can never spend enough time reviewing the literature). If, however, you find that your Chair/committee has exceeded the allotted time then move on to the next step.

2. Write your Chair 

Sometimes people forget or situations beyond their control arise. Respectfully reach out to your Chair and ask about the status of your most recent submission. This may get things moving and get you where you want to be.

3. Set up a phone call

If an email does not get the desired results, set up a call with your Chair. A phone call can allow you to express your concerns in a respectful way and let your Chair. Sometimes this is all that’s needed to get things back on track. 

4. Complain

If you still feel your PhD advisor is ignoring you, then it is time to bring your concerns to the attention of your academic advisor and perhaps the program director (or whatever title your school uses). 

Schools do not like to have students complain and when they do they usually take action. Your Chair does not like to hear from his/her boss that there have been complaints. This can clear things up quickly.  However, I urge you to exhaust all the other options first.

5. Ask for a new committee member

After all options have been exercised the last thing to try is to ask for a new Chair. Be aware that schools are reluctant to do this and even if they do, it can cause a delay as a new Chair is brought up to speed.

There are times when things move more slowly than expected. Some seem to be systemic and other times people need to be prodded to help things move forward. This is your degree, so it is up to you to both stay on top of things and remember to start with kindness. It really is true that catch more flies with honey. Good luck!

PS. If you’re looking for additional support, I also coach students who are in the process of writing their dissertations. Or, if you’re in need of an editor for your dissertation , we’ve got you covered.

Steve Tippins

Steve Tippins, PhD, has thrived in academia for over thirty years. He continues to love teaching in addition to coaching recent PhD graduates as well as students writing their dissertations. Learn more about his dissertation coaching and career coaching services. Book a Free Consultation with Steve Tippins

Related Posts

Dissertation

What makes a good research question.

Creating a good research question is vital to successfully completing your dissertation. Here are some tips that will help you formulate a good research question.  What Makes a Good Research Question? These are the three Read more…

Dissertation Structure

When it comes to writing a dissertation, one of the most fraught questions asked by graduate students is about dissertation structure. A dissertation is the lengthiest writing project that many graduate students ever undertake, and Read more…

Choosing a Dissertation Chair

Choosing your dissertation chair is one of the most important decisions that you’ll make in graduate school. Your dissertation chair will in many ways shape your experience as you undergo the most rigorous intellectual challenge Read more…

Make This Your Last Round of Dissertation Revision.

Learn How to Get Your Dissertation Accepted .

Discover the 5-Step Process in this Free Webinar .

Almost there!

Please verify your email address by clicking the link in the email message we just sent to your address.

If you don't see the message within the next five minutes, be sure to check your spam folder :).

Hack Your Dissertation

5-Day Mini Course: How to Finish Faster With Less Stress

Interested in more helpful tips about improving your dissertation experience? Join our 5-day mini course by email!

• Assistant Professor / Lecturer
• PhD Candidate
• Senior Researcher / Group Leader
• Researcher / Analyst
• Research Assistant / Technician
• Administration
• Executive / Senior Industry Position
• Mid-Level Industry Position
• Junior Industry Position
• Graduate / Traineeship
• Practitioner / Consultant
• Summer Schools
• Online Courses
• Professional Training
• Supplementary Courses
• All Courses
• PhD Programs
• Master's Programs
• MBA Programs
• Bachelor's Programs
• All Programs
• Remote/Hybrid Jobs
• Online Programs
• Online/Hybrid Conferences
• Fellowships
• Postgraduate Scholarships
• Undergraduate Scholarships
• Prizes & Contests
• Financial Aid
• Research/Project Funding
• Other Funding
• All Scholarships
• Conferences
• Exhibitions / Fairs
• All Conferences
• Economics Terms A-Z
• Career Advice
• Study Advice
• Work Abroad
• Study Abroad
• Campus Reviews
• Recruiter Advice
• University / College
• Graduate / Business School
• Research Institute
• Bank / Central Bank
• Private Company / Industry
• Consulting / Legal Firm
• Association / NGO
• All EconDirectory
• 📖 INOMICS Handbook

All Categories

All disciplines.

• Scholarships
• All Economics Terms A-Z
• EconDirectory
• All 📖 INOMICS Handbook

Types Of Difficult PhD Supervisors And How To Successfully Deal With Them

Read a summary or generate practice questions using the INOMICS AI tool

Supervision is a difficult task, and there is often conflict between supervisors and their PhD students. Even if you find a supervisor with whom you have excellent rapport, there can still be problems. Here are some of the types of difficult supervisor which you might encounter, and tips on how to manage them.

Micromanagers

A micromanager is one who is overly controlling and wishes to make input on all of your decisions, however small. For example, they may want to check every single slide or piece of writing which you produce, multiple times. Or they may try to dictate the way in which you divide up your time and how you prioritise. Micromanagers can be difficult to deal with, as different students and supervisors have different ideas about how much management a supervisor should perform. For some PhD students, having a lot of guidance and having their work checked regularly can be reassuring, while for others, it feels patronising. So if you find you supervisor to be too involved, remember that this is an issue of preference and not necessarily an indication that your supervisor thinks that you are not competent.

To deal with a micromanager, you'll need to take a dual approach: firstly, demonstrating that you can perform tasks competently without their guidance. If you show that you can prepare a presentation well, for example, without their influence, then they will feel less need to manage you in the future. The other approach is to talk with them and try to discover their underlying concerns. Do they feel like they need to micromanage because they are concerned about your ability to organize your time? Do they worry that your research will go over budget? Or are they trying to be supportive by giving you lots of feedback on your writing? Identify the underlying concern which is leading to the micromanaging behaviour, and try to demonstrate that their worries are not founded.

Suggested Opportunities

• Postdoc Job
• Posted 8 hours ago

Wissenschaftliche Mitarbeiterin / Wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter (m/w/d) (PostDoc) im HWWI

• (Partially Remote)
• Posted 1 day ago

Industrie-/Handelsökonom/in (m/w/d)

• Posted 2 days ago

Postdoc position in Agricultural / Environmental and Resource Economics

Absentee supervisors are those who are not present during your PhD, either physically (i.e. they are away travelling a lot) or metaphorically (they are so busy that you never see them). This is a common problem with senior professors and those who supervise lots of PhD students. Without advice and guidance from a supervisor, performing your PhD research is much harder.

To deal with an absentee supervisor, you can first try laying out an agreement with them about regular meetings. If you can arrange a meeting with them once a week or once every two weeks at a set time, you'll know that you at least have the chance to get their input on any issues. Often professors can be bad at replying to emails, so a face-to-face meeting is the best way to get their attention. If you can't get regular meetings with them, you can turn to your second supervisor or other senior researchers who you trust, and ask for input from them instead. However, if it is truly not possible to see your supervisor regularly, you should consider moving to a different supervisor who can give you and your research the time and attention which you deserve.

Overly Critical

It is part of the supervisor's job to offer criticism of your work, but some supervisors take this too far. Supervisors who yell at their students, who belittle them, or who make unpleasant personal comments are not unheard of. Dealing with such a supervisor can leave students stressed, depressed, and insecure about their own abilities . Doing a PhD can certainly be an emotional experience, but if students are regularly leaving the office in tears after speaking with their supervisor, then something is very wrong.

To deal with such a supervisor, you will need to assess how severe the situation is. If you supervisor is generally well meaning but rather harsh with their feedback, you can try talking to them about your overall progress in your PhD. Some supervisors, especially if they are new to management, forget that it's important to give positive feedback as well as pointing out errors. They may in fact be very satisfied with your work, but they only mention the negative points that they see. In this case, by talking to them about your overall progress you can get a more positive picture of your work.

In severe cases, however, this may not help. If a supervisor is abusive towards you and they are having an overall negative effect on your life and your work, then you need to protect yourself by leaving their group and finding a new supervisor. Remember that a supervisor should support you and assist you, not make you feel like a failure. You can always get another supervisor, but your mental health is of the highest priority.

Also Interesting

• INOMICS Salary Report

Is an Economics PhD Worth It? The PhD Pay Premium

Economics students may often wonder if doing a PhD is the right move for them. After all, you can still get a good job in economics with just a Master’s degree. We’ve covered different angles of this topic before with helpful advice about what degree you’ll need as an economist, asking whether you should do a PhD, and even asking what kinds of economists are paid the most. Thanks to INOMICS Salary Report 2023 data, we can look more closely at the pay benefit for an economics PhD in today’s job market. This will help you decide if doing an economics PhD will be worth it for your own career.

• All You Need to Know

What makes a successful economist?

“The master-economist must possess a rare combination of gifts. He must reach a high standard in several different directions and must combine talents not often found together. He must be mathematician, historian, statesman, philosopher…He must study the present in the light of the past for the purposes of the future. No part of man's nature or his institutions must lie entirely outside his regard. He must be purposeful and disinterested in a simultaneous mood; as aloof and incorruptible as an artist, yet sometimes as near the earth as a politician.”

• Furthering your Economics Career

Professional Trainings as a Means of Increasing Your Employability

Economics is a massive field with many sub-disciplines, and it’s impossible to master the whole lot of it from just one Master’s degree or even a PhD.

Related Items

Young Economist Prize - Best paper submitted on topics of relevance to Central Banks

Summer School 2024 – Paris School of Economics

Publish A Summary of Your Economics Research on INOMICS

Featured announcements, the 7th international conference on economics and social sciences …, the economics of poverty and inequality: global challenges in the…, tenure-track assistant professor in economics (rtt), call for expression of interest for positions at the institute of…, prüfer*innen für die bankenaufsicht, upcoming deadlines.

• Apr 14, 2024 Professor in Empirical Economics and Data Science
• Apr 15, 2024 Career Integration Fellowships for western Economics PhDs teaching in CEE/fSU
• Apr 15, 2024 Doctoral Positions at the Graduate School of the Social and Behavioural Sciences (GSBS), University of Konstanz
• Apr 15, 2024 Postdoc position with a focus on Labor Economics
• Apr 15, 2024 Postdoctoral Researcher in Entrepreneurship and Innovation (f/m/x, 100%)

INOMICS AI Tools

The INOMICS AI can generate an article summary or practice questions related to the content of this article. Try it now!

An error occured

Please try again later.

3 Practical questions, generated by our AI model

For more questions on economics study topics, with practice quizzes and detailed answer explanations, check out the INOMICS Study Guides.

Login to your account

Email Address

Forgot your password? Click here.

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, dealing with a difficult supervisor in research and academia.

• Charlesworth Author Services
• 05 April, 2022

Research and academic environments are workplaces too. However, people sometimes forget this and behave unprofessionally. To many ECRs, their supervisor can appear difficult or unprofessional to deal with. This article discusses how you can deal with these situations.

How your supervisor is beneficial

As an ECR, you are at a stage of your career where mentorship and guidance are key for your career progression and development as a researcher. Your supervisor usually is that mentor, and in most cases, this relationship is a fruitful, mutually fulfilling experience. Supervisors, being senior researchers themselves, would have had experiences from which you can learn . So, working with them and their experiences with the appropriate respect and a willingness to learn is the foundation of a good mentorship experience .

When your supervisor can be detrimental

However, in rare instances, your supervisor may have attributes and working practices that result in a trickier relationship. The world is not a perfect place, after all. In these cases, you’ll have to manage the situation as best as you can , by addressing any problems that arise as soon as possible and, where needed, reaching out for additional support from your department or institution. 

Difficult supervisory scenarios

A difficult supervisor relationship can take a number of forms.

• It can be as simple as not getting along and the marred relationship having a negative effect on you. 
• Perhaps you feel that your supervisor is treating you unfairly compared to others or you might feel that they are pushing you harder than you can take.
• It may be a more extreme situation where the relationship is abusive . To be clear, this case is extremely rare .

Any of these situations requires attention, as they can have a detrimental effect on your wellbeing , even if there is no ill intent from either side.

Dealing with challenging scenarios

While there can be several causes of a strained relationship with your supervisor, let’s look at a few common ones.

a. Setting high expectations for yourself

It is possible that your relationship is based on a certain ideal or expectation you have created for yourself. It is very easy to slip into a frame of mind where all you are thinking about is pleasing your supervisor . In these cases, every mistake can start to feel catastrophic or you might feel inclined to oversell results or make too many promises.

Try to avoid this, as you’ll be setting the bar too high for yourself and your supervisor will be holding you to the standard you have set. Be realistic about the expectations you agree on between yourself and your supervisor, and manage to set your targets in such a way that you don’t find yourself realising how unrealistic they are in the future. Remember that you do not need to overreach and deliver 110% in every instance. It is enough to do your best and give 100%. (Read about a related phenomenon here: Imposter Syndrome in academia )

b. Having mental health challenges

If you have a mental health issue and it is affecting your work, it is best to be upfront and open about it as early as possible, so that your supervisor can adapt accordingly. Our understanding and appreciation around mental health has exponentially increased in recent years , and it’s very possible that your supervisor is not adequately informed or trained in dealing with this. If you feel that no understanding can be reached, you can always reach out to your HR department for advice and mediation. 

c. Being treated unfairly without reason

If your situation does not include any of the above scenarios, and you feel that you are being unfairly treated for illegitimate reasons, consider reaching out for further help and support. Most universities have a reporting system in place involving HR, which you should take advantage of.

Interpersonal relationships are a maze that can feel impossible to navigate. In the vast majority of cases, animosity that arises in working relationships can be traced back to simple misunderstandings or differences of opinion . The main takeaway here is that the best way to deal with this is through open and honest discussion , and failing that, through proper, official channels .

Read next/third (final) in series:  Developing a Healthy, Productive Working Relationship with your Supervisor/Principal Investigator

Read previous/first in series:  Finding the Right PhD Supervisor

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

Related articles.

Finding the Right PhD Supervisor

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

How to develop an excellent PhD Supervisor relationship

Charlesworth Author Services 24/04/2020 00:00:00

Developing a Healthy, Productive Working Relationship with your Supervisor/Principal Investigator

Charlesworth Author Services 20/05/2022 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

Managing your Mental Health as a PhD Student

Charlesworth Author Services 05/08/2021 00:00:00

Engaging with your academic Community for improved Mental Health

Charlesworth Author Services 27/04/2021 00:00:00

A clinical psychologist explains: Imposter Syndrome in academia

Charlesworth Author Services 17/03/2021 00:00:00

• International edition
• Australia edition
• Europe edition

When the relationship with your PhD supervisor turns toxic

Postgrads rely on their supervisors for help and support. But what happens when the relationship turns sour?

E mma Baker* felt like a failure when she quit her PhD after 18 months and started again from scratch. But the previously high-achieving student, who has a first-class bachelor’s degree in science, says she felt she had no choice when the relationship with her supervisor became toxic.

“My experiments weren’t working, which is fairly common,” she says. But, rather than sort it out with a bit of guidance, she was left to “bumble through” while her supervisor never showed up to the lab. After reaching breaking point, she pleaded with him for help, and it didn’t go well.

“He told me my experiments fail because I’m bad,” she says. Already overwhelmed, the comment knocked her confidence. After unsuccessful attempts to fix it with the help of an advisor, Baker left the “toxic lab environment” and restarted her PhD with a new supervisor. “There was this haunting feeling of ‘you’re a bad scientist’ over my head the whole time,” she says. She left science soon after graduating.

Supervision can make or break your postgraduate experience. The latest postgraduate experience survey , carried out by the Higher Education Academy, found that support from academic staff made the biggest difference to how students felt about their studies.

Many supervisor relationships break down, like Baker’s, be it due to conflicting working styles, micromanaging, or even bullying. So what does a toxic relationship look like? And what can you do about it?

A lack of support as a postgraduate can have a big impact on your life. Lucy Stewart got stuck with a supervisor who was disinterested in her work. He didn’t check in with her for months at a time, she says, leaving her isolated and stressed. “I developed an anxiety disorder,” she says. “I felt a lot worse about myself.”

In contrast, Hannah Richards felt bullied and micromanaged by her overbearing supervisor. “We have very different working styles and expectations,” she says. “She plans meticulously early on, but I prefer to pull things together at the last minute. And she isn’t flexible,” Richards says. “She forced me into this little box. I developed depression and didn’t finish my thesis in time.”

Most of the problems come down to poor communication, says Ian Fairweather, a researcher development manager at the University of Manchester. “So start a conversation early to set out expectations.”

But even relationships that start well can become tense. “There will be ups and downs, so know what’s normal,” says Darcey Gillie, from the careers service at the University of Sheffield. Don’t choose “the nuclear option” straight away; they may not be aware of the problem.

It helps to turn to other students for support, says Adam Dunn, an associate professor at the Australian Institute of Health Innovation. “Halfway through my PhD my dad was in jail, my girlfriend left me and started dating the guy in the lab next door. I felt isolated, stopped eating, and lost a lot of weight,” he says. “I assume my supervisor had no idea.” Because of his experience, he tries to be better with his students.

“Students tend to believe that everyone else gets on fine with their supervisor and it’s only them who doesn’t,” says Fairweather. “But most people have a disagreement at some point.”

If all else fails, you may be able to switch supervisors. Universities have different approaches to how and when you can do this. “Explain to your postgraduate coordinator why you think it’s not working,” Fairweather adds. “They’ll know how to go about it.”

If you have a co-supervisor, they may be able to swap roles with your main supervisor. Talk to someone impartial and confidential, like a careers adviser, to think through any implications for funding, scheduling and the relationships involved, says Gillie. Good supervision is a partnership and a mentorship. “Like a marriage”, she adds, it needs “honest communication, trust, understanding, shared goals, and the ability to compromise”.

If you’ve done all you can to fix a bad supervisory relationship, know you’re not alone and don’t blame yourself, says Baker. She eventually completed her PhD with the help of her new supervisor.

* Some names have been changed.

• Studying postgrad
• Guardian Students
• Higher education
• Postgraduates
• Universities

Comments (…)

Most viewed.

• Feb 28, 2020

How to Maintain a Good Relationship with Your PhD Supervisor

Doing a PhD is an exciting thing. If you’re straight out of education, it’s the probably the first time you’re completely on your own, doing YOUR own research. Well, you’re not completely alone, you ought to have a supervisor supporting you through this minefield!

As helpful as a supervisor can be, navigating your relation to your supervisor can be a minefield on its own. Essentially, it’s a difficult relationship where it often isn’t clear what the exact guidelines are. You know how to relate to a teacher, you know as a teacher how to relate to a student. But PhDs are very different. You’re not really a student, but also not a colleague. And that can get confusing for some. So let’s see.

Before the PhD Now most people tend to do a lot of research before the PhD already. You don’t tend to just end up with someone random from the research group or department you’ve applied to (at least, I wouldn’t recommend this).

Now when doing the research, don’t just look at their work ethics, their topics of publication, previous working positions and academic trajectory. It’s important you try figuring out more about them as a person . The best way to do this is of course to meet them, if that’s physically impossible, try to arrange a skype meeting with them. Face-to-face contact can give you a pretty decent sense of what someone is like.

Another way of finding out more about what they are like as a PhD supervisor is to reach out to their current PhD students. It may sound really awkward, but if you just nicely ask what they think of their supervisors as you will be supervised by them soon and have no clue what you’re in for, they are very likely give you an honest reply to that question. I know I would, because I have.

If it then turns out they have a supervision style that really doesn’t fit you, you might want to reconsider your position and look for someone else, or a second supervisor to balance you out.

If you want some more tips on how to pick the supervisor that might be the right fit for you, please read this article on “How to pick your PhD Supervisor.”

Individual Differences Let’s say all the previous information didn’t apply to you. You knew your PhD supervisor beforehand, or their PhD students have all given you a thumbs up. Yet, when you are meeting them face-to-face when it comes to actually working on research, things don’t seem to go so smoothly. What’s going on?

It is possible that your supervisor has been supervising PhDs for years, if not decades by now, and has their own style of doing it that works best for them. Especially if they are supervising quite a few students at the same time, this is likely. But it’s not working for you. You can always indicate this to them. You can sit down with them at the beginning (or end, whatever you prefer) of a meeting and indicate what you need. Some people need their supervisor to stop looking over their shoulder for every little thing they do. Some PhDs need their supervisor to be more involved, other just need them to sign off on things. Every PhD is different, every PhD student is different and every PhD student-supervisor relationship is different. So, just indicate what you need or would like from them, and see where that takes you.

The best policy is honesty. If you don’t tell them things aren’t working, how are they supposed to know? They are researchers, not mind-readers.

It is also possible that your attitudes to work just don’t match. They are very relaxed about it all (having done it before), and you are ripping your hair out to relieve your own anxiety. That’s obviously not ideal, but given that this is a very personal trait, ingrained in the person as they are, there might not be too much you can change there. If you are naturally anxious it is probably a good idea to learn how to relax more and see things in a different perspective. But, you can hardly ask your supervisor to be more stressed for you. If their “relaxedness” really does bother you, you can indicate this to them. You might perceive it as a disregard for your own worries, or a lack of care for your research or you as a person. Again, be honest. But don’t expect them to change an attitude which is very much part of their personality. They are only people after all.

Cultural Differences It is also possible that you and your supervisor are from very different cultures. The most notable cultural differences in PhD supervision are those relating to hierarchy. Some cultures enforce a very steep hierarchy, others do not.

I myself am Dutch (very flat hierarchy) and my supervisors are Italian (flat to medium) and British (flat to semi-flat). This in itself does not pose any issues. But I do know PhD students who come from very hierarchical cultures, who take their supervisors word as gospel, do everything they say and beat themselves up if this doesn’t work or doesn’t lead to good results. This is not what a PhD is supposed to be. The PhD research is yours and your supervisor(s) support you through it. They should not take over, nor sideline you, nor should you expect them to or want this from them. The other way round is true as well: your supervisor shouldn’t expect you to blindly follow all of their suggestions and do the research as they say it should be done. Hierarchical or not, this is your project!

Of course, it doesn’t have to be this extreme. Most cultural differences are ones you can easily get used to, and can do some research on to better understand them. Again, if it’s causing a rift between you and your supervisor the best thing to do is to talk about it, and go from there.

It is of course also possible that there are other cultural differences going on. Another notable cultural difference is how men relate to women, and vice versa. If you ever feel like your supervisor is disadvantaging you because of your gender (whichever gender that may be), you do need to talk about that. They might be doing it unconsciously. If you have raised this problem and nothing seems to change, or things seem to have worsened, you might want to take advice from subsections 3 and 4, as seen below.

Lightyears Apart It is possible that after trying your best with each other for some time (a year or so) it has become apparent that you are not a good fit. Either the individual or the cultural differences are adding up to the extent that it has just become too much, and too unproductive. Don’t be embarrassed or frustrated, it really does happen more often than you think. The reason why it happens a lot more than you think, is because you can choose two options from the moment you realize this, and most people choose the former:

You can suffer in silence. It’s not working, clearly. But you don’t know what to do, don’t want to speak up, or have already spoken up and nothing has changed. Not taking action now but just going with it is less hassle now, but is likely to effect your mental state and your ability to deal with work throughout the rest of the PhD. I do understand why people make this decision, but I wouldn’t recommend it. Especially not if it’s still relatively early in the PhD.

You can take action. It’s not working and you’ve had enough. If you’ve had all the conversations you could possibly have had with your supervisor to be a better fit for each other, than that’s that. Your final conversation will be admitting that to each other, and having them help you pick and transfer to a different supervisor. If you have had conversations about your “inability to work together” already, this won’t come as a surprise to anyone, and it won’t be nearly as awkward as you think. Your initial supervisor won’t be offended, because it’s really not that personal! It will be a hassle initially and you will have to get re-acquainted with a new supervisor and their style of supervision. But then again, the risk is worth it. The unknown is often better than the known which is awful.

You wouldn’t stay friends with someone you didn’t actually get along with either, would you?

Clear Exceptions There are always exceptions to the rule. In this case those exceptions focus on any type of very inappropriate behaviour. Things that should immediately spring to mind are racism, sexism and abuse of power.

The best thing to do if these scenarios are occurring or have occurred is to immediately talk to someone, preferably someone in charge.

If you’re not too sure about what’s going on and whether it qualifies as any of the above, talk to your friends and fellow PhD students. If they too don’t think what’s going is appropriate, talk to someone in charge.

Even if you’re not too sure, but feel incredibly uncomfortable, I would still recommend you step to HR, the head of your research group or the head of your department, whoever you feel most comfortable with. They will be able to advise you on which course of action will be best to take. That decision is ultimately up to you.

There is no excuse for this type of behaviour. It is not condoned and should not be. There is also no coming back from this. After this has occurred and you still want to continue your research project, under no circumstances should you go back, or made to go back to your original supervisor. Immediate transfer advised.

After the PhD I haven’t managed to reach this stage yet, but others around me have. It is possible that after the PhD, you and your supervisor might become colleagues. Which is a funny thing to think of. You might collaborate and continue to be collaborators for a long time. Who knows?

It’s also not that odd to be friends, or on friendly terms with your supervisors after the PhD either. You did commit several years to each other. But, this is often quite heavily dependent on age, personality type, but also gender (just keep it in mind). The more similar you are to your supervisor, the more likely this is to happen, unless of course, you come from a hierarchical background.

It is also possible that after the PhD you never see nor speak to your supervisors again. They were a useful guide to you then, but you’re done with that phase of your life and wish to move on. Maybe the distance wasn’t instigated by you, but by them. They feel they have done their job and that’s it.

In all fairness, you can effectively guess after having been with your supervisor for several years which outcome is most likely. You ought to somewhat know them by then, and they ought to know you a bit as well!

All in all, supervisors are people. PhD students are people. And when people get together and have to work together, sometimes friction (not the inappropriate kind) arises. It happens.

The most important part is that you are honest with each other, that you communicate clearly and have the right expectations of each other. And if you feel that you don’t have the right expectations from each other, talk and adjust. It’s a relationship like any other.

Recent Posts

The ONE thing you need to do during your PhD

How My PhD DID Prepare Me For Working Outside of Academia

Why I wouldn’t recommend doing a PhD Straight out of University

Behavioural Science

The Biased Investor: Market Downturn Edition

• Oct 4, 2023

A Glossary for Behavioural Science Jobs

• Sep 13, 2023

Behavioural Risk – What Is It, And How Can It Help Us?

• Aug 9, 2023

Personal Finance

Can you Snowball and Avalanche your Savings?

• Oct 25, 2023

Mental Accounting – but for Investing

• Oct 11, 2023

Interview with Stefano DellaVigna

Interview with Connor Joyce

Interview with Michelle Handy

• Sep 20, 2023

• Jun 7, 2023

• May 24, 2023

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 ).

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 ).

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 ).

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.

Managing your Mental Health during your PhD pp 135–154 Cite as

Perhaps It’s Not You It’s Them: PhD Student-Supervisor Relationships

• Zoë J. Ayres 2  
• First Online: 15 September 2022

8475 Accesses

This chapter explores the PhD Student-Supervisor relationship, outlining the role of a PhD Supervisor, discussing relationship management, and how to recognise signs of bullying and harassment if they occur.

(Trigger Warnings: bullying, harassment, sexual harassment)

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution .

Buying options

• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Depending on your country of study a PhD Supervisor may be called the Principal Investigator (PI) or you PhD Supervisor, or PhD Advisor. For the purpose of this chapter I will use “Supervisor”, to mean the academic in charge of your PhD research.

I count myself lucky every single day that I fell into the 76% category.

If you did not get this memo before starting your PhD, please do not worry. It is common for first-generation students to not get this information ahead of time.

Survivor bias is defined as the logical error of concentrating on the people or things that made it past some selection process and overlooking those that did not, typically because of their lack of visibility.

The sunk cost fallacy reasoning states that further investments or commitments are justified because the resources already invested will be lost otherwise . In the case of PhD study it can be that if we just “stick it out” and try to manage the abuse we are being subject to we will get our PhD. In reality, leaving and starting a PhD elsewhere may be beneficial.

van Rooij E, Fokkens-Bruinsma M, Jansen E (2021) Factors that influence PhD candidates’ success: the importance of PhD project characteristics. Stud Contin Educ 43(1):48–67

Article   Google Scholar  

Woolston C (2019) PhDs: the tortuous truth. Nature 575(7782):403–407

Pyke KD (2018) Institutional betrayal: inequity, discrimination, bullying, and retaliation in academia. Sociol Perspect 61(1):5–13

Vilkinas T (1998) Management of the PhD process: the challenging role of the supervisor. In: Quality in postgraduate research. University of Adelaide, Adelaide

Google Scholar  

Rose GL (2003) Enhancement of mentor selection using the ideal mentor scale. Res High Educ 44(4):473–494

Vilkinas T, Cartan G (2006) The integrated competing values framework: its spatial configuration. J Manage Dev 25(6):505–521

Guccione K, Hutchinson S (2021) Coaching and mentoring for academic development. Emerald Group, Bingley

Book   Google Scholar  

Hund AK, Churchill AC, Faist AM, Havrilla CA, Stowell SML, McCreery HF, Ng J, Pinzone CA, Scordato ESC (2018) Transforming mentorship in STEM by training scientists to be better leaders. Ecol Evol 8(20):9962–9974

Amundsen C, McAlpine L (2009) ‘Learning supervision’: trial by fire. Innov Educ Teach Int 46(3):331–342

Schimanski LA, Alperin JP (2018) The evaluation of scholarship in academic promotion and tenure processes: past, present, and future. F1000Research 71605

Bagilhole B (1993) How to keep a good woman down: an investigation of the role of institutional factors in the process of discrimination against women academics. Br J Sociol Educ 14(3):261–274

Aiston SJ, Jung J (2015) Women academics and research productivity: an international comparison. Gend Educ 27(3):205–220

Giacalone RA, Knouse SB, Montagliani A (1997) Motivation for and prevention of honest responding in exit interviews and surveys. J Psychol 131(4):438–448

Hall W, Liva S (2022) Falling through the cracks: graduate students’ experiences of mentoring absence. Can J Scholarsh Teach Learn 13(1):1–15

UK Research Councils Statement of Expectations for Postgraduate Training. https://www.ukri.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/UKRI-120721-StatementOfExpectationsPostGradTraining.pdf . Accessed 21 Jun 2022

Chamberlain S (2016) Ten types of PhD supervisor relationships - which is yours? https://theconversation.com/ten-types-of-phd-supervisor-relationships-which-is-yours-52967 . Accessed 21 Jun 2022

Clay M (2012) Sink or swim: drowning the next generation of research leaders? Aust Q 83(4):26–31

Bégin C, Géarard L (2013) The role of supervisors in light of the experience of doctoral students. Policy Futures Educ 11(3):267–276

Hemprich-Bennett D, Rabaiotti D, Kennedy E (2021) Beware survivorship bias in advice on science careers. Nature 598(7880):373–374

Parker-Jenkins M (2018) Mind the gap: developing the roles, expectations and boundaries in the doctoral supervisor–supervisee relationship. Stud High Educ 43(1):57–71

Moran H, Karlin L, Lauchlan E, Rappaport SJ, Bleasdale B, Wild L, Dorr J (2020) Understanding research culture: what researchers think about the culture they work in. Wellcome Trust, London, UK

Lee D (1998) Sexual harassment in PhD supervision. Gend Educ 10(3):299–312

Misawa M (2015) Cuts and bruises caused by arrows, sticks, and stones in academia: theorizing three types of racist and homophobic bullying in adult and higher education. Adult Learn 26(1):6–13

Cohen A, Baruch Y (2021) Abuse and exploitation of doctoral students: a conceptual model for traversing a long and winding road to academia. J Bus Ethics:1–18

Moss SE, Mahmoudi M (2021) STEM the bullying: an empirical investigation of abusive supervision in academic science. EClinicalMedicine 40101121

Gewin V (2021) How to blow the whistle on an academic bully. Nature 593(7858):299–301

Saló-Salgado L, Acocella A, Arzuaga García I, El Mousadik S, and Zvinavashe A (2021) Managing up: how to communicate effectively with your PhD adviser. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-03703-z . Accessed 15 Feb 2022

The Wellbeing Thesis (2022) Managing your supervisor. https://thewellbeingthesis.org.uk/using-the-resources-available/managing-your-supervisor/ . Accessed 20 Feb 2022

Eley A, Jennings R (2005) Effective postgraduate supervision: improving the student/supervisor relationship. McGraw-Hill Education (UK), London, UK

Hockey J (1996) A contractual solution to problems in the supervision of PhD degrees in the UK. Stud High Educ 21(3):359–371

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Zoë J. Ayres

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter.

Ayres, Z.J. (2022). Perhaps It’s Not You It’s Them: PhD Student-Supervisor Relationships. In: Managing your Mental Health during your PhD. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-14194-2_9

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-14194-2_9

Published : 15 September 2022

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-031-14193-5

Online ISBN : 978-3-031-14194-2

eBook Packages : Biomedical and Life Sciences Biomedical and Life Sciences (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• Previous Article
• Next Article

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

Sign In or Create an Account

What To Do If Your Graduate Supervisor Is Not Supporting You

The relationship you have with your supervisor during the course of your PhD is a critical one. Like all other personal or professional relationships it can range from being harmonious to disastrous. Choosing a supervisor you think will work well with you in the first place is important, however it can be difficult to foresee any potential issues in the future.

Throughout your PhD you should expect adequate facilities and equipment, as well as emotional and intellectual support from your supervisor. Likewise, your supervisor can expect certain things from you such as academic competence, organizational skills, regular progress reporting and a level of independence and the capability to work under limited direction.

But what can you do when you feel like this is falling apart and your supervisor is not supporting you?

Maintain a relationship with your advisor

First off, make sure you try and develop a good relationship with your supervisor. Establish a clear idea of mutual expectations from each other.

Maintain good communication with your supervisor through regular meetings and work together to develop a structured yet flexible plan for your thesis. Make sure you are forthright about what you can handle, both experimentally and time-wise.  Be resourceful so you are not bugging your supervisor with every detail, but let him/her know if you are stumped or if you need more guidance.

Determine your supervisor’s style

If you feel like your supervisor isn’t supporting you, make sure it isn’t just a matter of not understanding your supervisor’s management style.  Some supervisors like to micro-manage and be made aware of every nuance in an experiment.  If you don’t give them enough information they may get frustrated.  Other supervisors are laid-back which might lead you to believe they are disinterested, when actually they are waiting for you to come to them.

Figure out your supervisor’s style and how to interact with them.  His/her management style may not be compatible with how you like to work – but you will be together for a number of years – so figure out how to make it work for both of you.

Determine the extent of your problem

Many students, if not all, will feel at some stage that they are not getting the support they need. What you need to determine is the impact and import of the situation.  Always take a step back and reflect on the situation from both viewpoints. If you think it is a temporary situation that will resolve itself with time, perhaps you just need to wait it out.  But if it is negatively affecting your progress or it is so bad that you don’t want to go to work anymore, then you might have to get other people involved.

Your supervisor has lost interest in your project (temporarily)

Sometimes it can feel like your supervisor is no longer interested in what you are doing.  Someone else in the lab might be obtaining exciting results and he/she is focused on that.  Or perhaps your supervisor is having trouble maintaining funding for your project.

It can be difficult drudging on day after day feeling like no one is interested in what you are doing.  You need to find yourself another cheerleader.  Perhaps a senior lab member has shown some interest in your project and you can turn to them.  Alternatively, talk to other people at your level about your work – sometimes just describing what you are doing to your peers can help bolster your enthusiasm.  If your work is still progressing, you can then rely on these people to keep your spirits up until your supervisor comes around.

Your project has forayed into an area in which your supervisor has no expertise

This is not an unusual problem in scientific research as research is increasingly multidisciplinary. While your supervisor may have provided you with a specific project outline in the beginning this will most likely evolve and even your supervisor may find themselves out of their depth. Show initiative and identify researchers that can be approached for advice. Try and work closely with your supervisor in this regard as he/she may wish to approach a potential collaborator or advisor initially.

Your relationship with your supervisor has degraded and it is affecting your project

If it has come to a point in your project where you and your supervisor are completely disagreeing on every aspect of your project, you may need to seek external help. Some students have a co-supervisor who can be a great mediator and source of advice.  Most graduate programs establish a committee that is responsible for checking in with graduate students on a yearly basis.  Don’t be afraid to approach these people for advice. Alternatively you can also approach the person responsible for post-graduate studies within your institute.

You think your supervisor is preventing you from graduating and treating you like a technician

I’ve heard this complaint from several grad students. Firstly, try and establish exactly what you think you need to do to complete your project. If you truly feel you are doing above and beyond, then seek advice. This is when it is time to go to your committee. Your committee can take an unbiased look at the work you have accomplished and help determine a goal for graduating.  With their advice in hand you can then negotiate a reasonable stopping point with your supervisor. Remember, many institutions have a limit on the length of a PhD  – this can work in your favor.

Keep in mind, earning your PhD should not be an easy task, but you should expect to have the proper support throughout.  Don’t be afraid to ask for the help you need.

Have you had negative experiences with your supervisor?

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

Forgot your password?

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive mail with link to set new password.

Back to login

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

Recent Posts

• 04 Reasons for Outsourcing Academic Conference Management
• How to Put Research Grants on Your CV ?
• How to Request for Journal Publishing Charge (APC) Discount or Waiver?
• Do Review Papers Count for the Award of a PhD Degree?
• Vinay Kabadi, University of Melbourne, Interview on Award-Winning Research
• All Blog Posts
• Research Career
• Research Conference
• Research Internship
• Research Journal
• Research Tools
• Uncategorized
• Research Conferences
• Research Journals
• Research Grants
• Internships
• Research Internships
• Email Templates
• Conferences
• Blog Partners
• Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2024 Research Voyage

Design by ThemesDNA.com

10 signs of a bad PhD supervisor

A PhD supervisor is arguably the most important person in a PhD student’s journey. Therefore, a good match between PhD supervisor and PhD student is crucial. The following ten signs help prospective PhD students to expose bad PhD supervisors or at least a bad match between the supervisor and themselves.

Why finding a good PhD supervisor is so important

#1 a bad phd supervisor only asks what you have to offer, not the other way around, #2 a bad phd supervisor does not show interest in your personal story and situation, #3 a bad phd supervisor gives you the impression that a phd should be a painful experience, #4 a bad phd supervisor tells you that it is normal to work overtime, #5 a bad phd supervisor is not genuinely excited about your research topic, #6 a bad phd supervisor has a personality that simply does not click with yours, #7 a bad phd supervisor is not active in any academic networks in your field, #8 a bad phd supervisor operates in a tense and competitive environment, #9 a bad phd supervisor makes you singlehandedly responsible for financing your phd, #10 a bad phd supervisor wants you to avoid all types of side projects and activities.

Academic research has repeatedly highlighted the importance of the right PhD supervisor for PhD students. And not only the quantity and quality of supervision matter.

Studies have shown that PhD students fare much better when they get along with their supervisor on a personal and academic level. The latter means that PhD students work on a topic that is closely linked to the supervisor’s research.

If you don’t have a good PhD supervisor, not all is lost. You can still make it, but it is fair to say that your PhD experience will be much less enjoyable.

Having a PhD supervisor who is not only competent in terms of research content but who is also genuinely interested in your well-being and academic success, makes a PhD journey much more enjoyable.

Therefore, it is extremely important to be able to spot a bad PhD supervisor.

The first sign of a bad PhD supervisor can often already be detected during the interview stage of an application: Bad PhD supervisors are only interested to find out what you have to offer to them.

They don’t explain what they, and their department or lab, can offer to you. This attitude is based on arrogance: A bad PhD supervisor believes that only you are under scrutiny, and not the other way around.

Bad PhD supervisors also don’t give you any space to ask questions about the support they would provide to you. Instead, they simply assume that anyone would be happy to work with them, regardless of what they have to offer.

Everyone has a personal story related to his or her research interests. Why are you interested in your research topic? Where does your motivation to do a PhD come from? A bad PhD supervisor does not ask about your motivation.

Additionally, a bad PhD supervisor shows no interest at all in your personal situation. For instance, whether you are an international student. Or whether you have family or care responsibilities.

Bad PhD supervisors are only interested in your academic ability and outputs. They don’t care about you as a person with a life outside of academia.

A bad PhD supervisor talks about a PhD journey as something that is not, and should not, be enjoyable. Instead, struggling emotionally and financially is presented as a normal and accepted part of a PhD process.

A bad PhD supervisor stresses that everyone who does a PhD suffers and that you should expect to suffer too. As if this is part of the deal.

Additionally, a bad PhD supervisor warns you indirectly that complaints about workload etcetera will not be accepted.

A bad PhD supervisor does not emphasise the need for work-life balance. On the contrary, a bad PhD supervisor tells you that you are expected to work during evenings, weekends and holidays.

A bad PhD supervisor gives you the impression that unless you give up everything (your social life, hobbies, sleep and health), you are not fully committed to your PhD. And hence not worthy of receiving a doctorate.

A bad PhD supervisor may be interested in taking you on as a PhD student, but for the wrong reasons. For instance, having PhD students is an important factor for academic promotions.

Bad PhD supervisors want you as a PhD student because it will look good on their CV. However, when they talk about your research, they don’t express any enthusiasm about your topic.

You can spot bad PhD supervisors for your research if you see that their research is not connected to yours. Furthermore, when they talk about your research idea, they seem disinterested and detached, instead of passionate.

Sometimes, a PhD supervisor may seem like a perfect match for you on paper . But when you meet in person, you just have this gut feeling that the two of you don’t click.

When you click with someone, you get along well. You feel comfortable asking questions, and the conversation simply flows.

If you meet a potential supervisor and you constantly feel awkward, you feel like you have to read between the lines, the way they speak stresses you out, and the conversation does not flow, this person is probably a bad fit for you.

Some PhD supervisors have outstanding publication records. And while the academic reputation of a supervisor in terms of publications can be an advantage for you as a PhD student, publications are not everything in academia.

Instead, PhD supervisors play – and should play – an important role in connecting you to others in the field. They should link you to networks and help you to gain access to inner research circles.

However, bad PhD supervisors don’t care about connecting you in the field. They only care about the research right in front of them and don’t care about future opportunities for you.

A bad PhD supervisor creates an atmosphere of competition instead of collaboration. If you have the chance to visit a department or lab in person, you can test whether the atmosphere feels tense and competitive, or convivial.

Do people chat with each other? Are people smiling and looking like they are enjoying their work? Or does everyone seem completely stressed out, and hardly acknowledge you and everyone else around?

If possible, also try to talk to current PhD students and postdocs of a potential supervisor. While being aware that the supervision style may not suit them, but could suit you, negative impressions from several people can indicate the potential PhD supervisor.

A bad PhD supervisor is not interested in how you finance your PhD. Instead, a bad PhD supervisor puts the burden of financing your PhD entirely on your shoulders.

This means that bad PhD supervisors don’t brainstorm with you about financing options. They also don’t share any experiences of securing funding for previous PhD students.

A bad PhD supervisor is also not willing to work on grant proposals with you, to secure future funding for you.

PhD supervisors are certainly right if they don’t want you to lose focus on your PhD. Bad PhD supervisors, however, are negative about any activities that are not 100% related to your PhD from the get-go.

A bad PhD supervisor does not understand the importance of creating an all-around academic profile , for PhD students to be competitive in (academic and non-academic) labour markets after graduation. This includes, for example, teaching experiences, collaborative work, learning to write a grant application, or being active in academic networks.

Bad PhD supervisors view these activities purely as distractions. They don’t understand or don’t care about, the importance of some side-projects and activities which can improve your future (academic) success.

Get new content delivered directly to your inbox!

Subscribe and receive Master Academia's quarterly newsletter.

How to introduce yourself in a conference presentation (in six simple steps)

Asking for a recommendation letter from a phd supervisor, related articles.

Character traits of ‘bad’ PhD students

All you need to know about career objectives on PhD resumes

Top 30 motivational quotes for graduate students

The best ‘Finally, I am graduated’ quotes (real quotes)