phd supervisor first meeting

Tips for new PhD supervisors: how to hold effective meetings

Supervisory meetings should be planned, regular and positive in tone. Here are key elements to include in thesis supervision meetings for academics new to the role

Alice Ling Jiang

• More on this topic

Created in partnership with

You may also like

Popular resources

.css-1txxx8u{overflow:hidden;max-height:81px;text-indent:0px;} Emotions and learning: what role do emotions play in how and why students learn?

To demystify ai for your students, use performance, developing a genai policy for research and innovation, five ways to make he more accessible to neurodiverse people, why your students aren’t speaking up in lectures.

Planning is key to fostering effective communication between student and supervisor during the dissertation supervision process. Positive interactions will give doctoral students confidence and a strong sense of independence. Each PhD student ’s needs differ significantly, and it is incumbent upon the supervisor to design appropriate strategies from the outset. A vast array of articles offering enlightening and inspiring approaches for communication and thesis guidance are available online.

In this context, a few well-focused points for new PhD supervisors would seem beneficial. Adequate preparation is one of the keys to a fruitful supervision meeting with PhD students.

• Co-creation: how to find the ‘super’ in supervision
• Fostering freedom in PhD students: how supervisors can shape accessible paths for doctoral research
• Research supervision: working with the individual in front of you

Key elements to an effective PhD supervisory meeting

What, however, should an effective PhD thesis meeting include? Three primary elements come to mind. First, the student needs to clearly report their research progress. Second, the supervisor provides feedback, guidance and in-depth insight into the student’s most critical areas of need. Last, the focus for the next stage of research needs to be identified in order to continue the dissertation preparation process.

These three objectives can be further supplemented by following these suggestions during supervisory meetings with your PhD students.

1. Prepare in advance for themes or topics requiring discussion

Well before the meeting, encourage the student to email a tentative agenda or proposal to you. Ahead of the meeting, you, as the supervisor, read the email and identify which focal points require discussion. The student’s email should include at least two elements: (1) a summary of main research work progress accomplished to date; and (2) the complexities or hurdles encountered during the research phase (such as refining the research topic, theoretical considerations, data compilation, analysis methodology or writing process) that require further discussion with their supervisor. Writing the pre-meeting email is the student’s opportunity to organise and structure their thoughts, a task that is highly conducive to effective communication during the meeting.

2. Encourage students to proactively articulate their thoughts

At initial stages of doctoral study, students may not have a full spectrum of ideas to present. During this period, it would be natural for the supervisor to speak more frequently than the student during supervisory meetings. However, as research work progresses, students are expected to contribute more actively. Indeed, presentation skills are considered an integral professional component of doctoral-level training. To prompt interactive conversation, ask the student to prepare five to 10 PowerPoint slides to facilitate the exchange of ideas. As students encounter difficulty during their research process, they should be encouraged to think, reason and reflect independently, and to implement potential solutions before discussion with their supervisors. Online resources are plentiful for assisting doctoral students in preparation of efficient meetings with the supervisor.

3. Student note-taking and audio recording can be used to highlight key points

Notes and recordings can enable students to encapsulate meeting content in short form and will promote students’ ability to reflect meaningfully on the supervisor’s comments, reinforcing pivotal thoughts and concepts. Audio recording, with the supervisor’s consent, can allow the meeting to proceed at a natural pace without interruptions while students catch up with their note-taking. Using the recording after the meeting, students can organise key points. Brief summaries of content are helpful in ensuring that students properly grasp and retain important ideas, themes, concepts or approaches before embarking on the next stage of developing the dissertation.

Students should also email their meeting summaries to the supervisor for retention of records. If there are errors, these summaries will assist both parties in rectifying any discrepancies or inaccuracies. These summations can be used at subsequent meetings to verify whether the issues discussed have been satisfactorily resolved or if there remain any items that require adjustment or modification.

Use positive language during supervisory meetings

All stages of doctoral research come with inherent challenges. During meetings, the supervisor should strive to use positive verbal expression and body language throughout discussions. Cognitive theorists and educational psychologists have found that positive emotions can enhance concentration, focus, memory and problem-solving skills, while also enriching critical and creative thinking . Students who are emotionally stable and confident will be more deeply committed to their research.

On the other hand, those who are stressed or lacking in confidence are less likely to engage in effective dyadic communication and may harbour more doubts as to the viability of their ideas.

In my experience, amicable greetings, smiles and sincere encouragement are central to building a good supervisory relationship. A friendly supervisor can motivate and inspire doctoral students to innovate and move forward boldly, while enthusiastically communicating with their departmental peers.

Set and define challenging goals

Although students often have an overarching plan for their progress, supervisors can set even higher standards to be achieved gradually. Indeed, calm seas never make skilled sailors . Expectations and deadlines for completion of each stage need to be specified. Students should be made aware of the nature of high-quality research and should become familiar with the proper strategies and approaches to doctoral study. The scope and number of reading lists, the structure and length of literature reviews, and staged achievement goals must be discussed early in the supervisory process. In mid-phases of research, goals should be discussed and determined by the supervisor in conjunction with the student, inclusive of number of samples to be collected, experimental equipment or modalities, funding considerations and which journals to target.   

Hold regular supervisory meetings to encourage students to think deeply and formulate solutions

Ideally, expectations should be made open and clear in regularly scheduled initial meetings, taking into account shifting realities, as necessary. Flexibility is permissible, although students should be encouraged to honour the deadlines set by the doctoral programme, ensuring their timely graduation. 

Alice Ling Jiang is a professor in marketing at the School of Business at the Macau University of Science and Technology.

If you found this interesting and want advice and insight from academics and university staff delivered direct to your inbox each week,  sign up for the THE Campus newsletter .

Emotions and learning: what role do emotions play in how and why students learn?

How hard can it be testing ai detection tools, artificial intelligence and academic integrity: striking a balance, contextual learning: linking learning to the real world, a diy guide to starting your own journal, decolonising the curriculum – how do i get started.

Register for free

and unlock a host of features on the THE site

Checklist for first meetings between supervisor and doctoral student

A useful checklist of things that might be discussed during the first few meetings between supervisory team and doctoral researcher

• View more publications in Doctoral College

Initial_meetings_checklist_for_supervisory_teams_and_doctoral_researchers(2).pdf

Doctoral College [email protected]

• What to Expect from your PhD Supervisor

Written by Mark Bennett

Your PhD supervisor will play a vital role in your doctorate, supporting you from starting out to thesis submission (and beyond).

But what does ‘PhD supervision’ actually mean in practice? What sort of support and assistance can you expect your supervisor to provide?

This guide introduces some of the obligations and expectations that underpin a healthy supervisory relationship, as well as explaining how that relationship develops along with your PhD.

On this page

What you can expect from your phd supervisor.

Your PhD supervisor will have some core responsibilities towards you and your project. These will normally include meeting to discuss your work, reading drafts and being available to respond emails and other forms of contact within a reasonable timeframe.

Some universities may formalise these commitments in a research degree handbook and you should consult this if so. Other universities may leave more of the details to the student and supervisor themselves.

In either case, the following are some of the basic expectations a PhD supervisor should fulfil:

Expertise in your subject area

Regular supervisory meetings, feedback on work in progress, advice and support, mediation and representation.

Your supervisor will be an expert in your academic field. They will have recognised experience researching it, with a publication record to match. They may even have supervised other students working on related subjects.

What your supervisor won’t be is an expert in your topic. There’s a very simple reason for this: if they were, you couldn’t research it as an original PhD.

In practice this means that you can expect your supervisor to offer competent advice, particularly in the early stages of your research. If you’re suggesting a topic or approach that has been undertaken before, they should be able to alert you to that. If you’re looking for material to consult for your literature review they will be able to make suggestions and help you get started.

Eventually though, your expertise will outstrip your supervisor’s. It’s important to be aware of this and not to rely on your supervisor to understand your project for you.

These are the nuts and bolts of a supervisory relationship. Whatever your project, you can expect your supervisor to set aside regular time for one-to-one meetings and discussion of your work.

How regular these meetings are will be up to you and your supervisor to decide (though your university may set some guidelines). You’ll also have the freedom to set up a schedule (and venue) that works for the two of you. This could be a corner of the lab, your supervisor’s office or even just a coffee shop on campus.

Once this schedule is agreed you can expect your supervisor to be available at appointed times and to have reviewed any drafts, data or other work sent to them (with sufficient notice).

Note that the ability to attend supervisory meetings is an expectation of full-time PhD students who are based ‘on campus’. If you are studying by distance learning your supervisor may arrange for a different format, such as discussing work over the phone or via video conferencing.

Your supervisor may also take responsibility for any formal record keeping associated with meetings (though that doesn’t mean you won’t have any paperwork of your own to fill out).

Unlike other degrees, a PhD doesn’t normally involve any ongoing formal assessment. There are some exceptions such as first-year upgrade exams and training modules, but, ultimately, your doctorate will be judged on the strength of a single piece of work: the thesis you submit for examination at the end.

So what happens to all the chapter drafts, data reports and other work you do along the way? Your supervisor looks at it and offers you feedback. This feedback is formative rather than summative (you won’t be given a grade) but it’s still incredibly important.

In the early stages of a PhD feedback will help ensure you’re on the right track (or get you onto it). Later on you’ll know more about your project than your supervisor, but they’ll still be able to tell you how effectively presented your results are and how persuasive your argument is.

Standards for feedback vary between disciplines, projects and universities. You may find that your supervisor regularly sees your data as part of the working arrangement in your laboratory. Or you may find that you only submit drafts of written work every few months.

Your university may set out its own feedback guidelines, but, as with so many aspects of the supervisory relationship, setting up an effective system will be down to the individuals involved. As a general rule, you can expect your supervisor to review each piece of work in progress at least once and to offer further feedback on the final dissertation draft.

Contact with your supervisor doesn’t need to be restricted to scheduled meetings. They should also be able to offer advice on a more ad hoc basis.

This won’t normally extend to immediate feedback on impromptu chapter drafts sent over at 3am on a Monday morning, but you can expect a response to questions or ideas emailed during office hours.

Remember that one of the key things a supervisor offers isn’t topic expertise (we covered that earlier) so much as research experience. You haven’t completed a PhD before. They have. That problem that seems insurmountable to you? It probably isn’t. And your supervisor will be able to help you see why.

‘Support’ can also extend beyond your PhD thesis and include additional academic opportunities. It’s not uncommon for supervisors to identify suitable conferences for their students to attend or present at. In some cases you may also have the chance to publish work alongside your supervisor or participate as a second author on one of their papers.

You should make the most of these opportunities if they arise, but it’s important not to treat them as a basic expectation. Unless otherwise established by your institution, your supervisor’s main commitment is to your PhD.

For most of your PhD, your supervisor will ‘represent’ the university to you. They’ll be your most frequent point of contact and will be responsible for ensuring you do the things your institution expects of you.

Those include the obvious (researching your PhD) but can also cover other areas such as professional development, progression monitoring and compliance with any ethical policies. You probably won’t find the associated paperwork to be the most thrilling part of your PhD, but can take heart from the fact that your supervisor will probably agree with you.

As well as representing the university to you, your supervisor will also represent you to the university. They’ll understand the peculiarities of your project, together with any specific needs or circumstances you have as a researcher (such as a disability or conditions associated with your funding ).

Your supervisor will therefore be your first point of call if problems arise with your project. It’s part of their role to provide pastoral support and you shouldn’t be afraid to approach them with problems or concerns.

Second supervisors

Some universities assign two supervisors to each PhD students. If so, the 'second' supervisor may be more responsible for your pastoral support and for the administration of your project. This allows the 'primary' supervisor to focus on your academic work.

Targets, planning and meetings

Your supervisor (or supervisors) will be involved throughout your PhD, but their function will change slightly as your doctorate progresses.

In part this will reflect your changing needs as a student. You’ll go from mapping out a project to researching, writing and eventually submitting for examination. This is all part of the normal PhD journey .

Planning your project and setting targets

Most PhDs begin with an initial meeting between the student and their supervisor. This will be your first chance to sit down together and discuss your project.

You’ll review the aims set out in your research proposal and think about how to proceed with the first stages of your doctorate. This normally means gathering scholarly material for your literature review and / or identifying initial avenues for your own research.

Your supervisor’s input will be invaluable here. You’ll probably have some idea of existing studies that relate to your topic. You may also have some idea of the sources you’d like to examine or the data you’d like to collect first.

But your supervisor will have a much more complete sense of the current state of your academic field. They’ll also know many of the other scholars currently working in it.

If there are some avenues you haven’t considered, they’ll be able to make suggestions. And if there’s new work being published, they’ll be able to make you aware of it.

What happens at a PhD supervision?

PhD Supervisions can be as varied as the supervisors (and PhD students) involved.

You may meet formally in an office, or you might simply grab a corner table in the campus coffee shop. Most meetings last from one to two hours, but this will depend on how much there is to discuss and what stage of the PhD you’re at.

A typical PhD supervision normally involves:

• Checking your current progress – Your supervisor will want to know what you’ve done since the last meeting and how you’ve been finding things. If you’ve hit upon difficulties you can discuss these and benefit from your supervisor’s advice.
• Reviewing work in progress – As you get further into your PhD you’ll begin to gather results or even produce chapter drafts. Your supervisor will normally be able to offer feedback on this and make sure you’re heading in the right direction. Their encouragement will be a big source of support, particularly as you begin to get properly stuck into your project.
• Setting future targets – Reflecting on what you’ve done will be an important part of your supervisions, but so will agreeing new short and medium term goals. There are few formal deadlines in a PhD, but setting some ‘self-imposed’ deadlines with your supervisor can help keep you on track.
• Taking care of any admin – Part of your supervisor’s job involves reporting your progress to the university. For structured PhDs this can also mean checking completion of any formal training and development activities.

Eventually, PhD supervision meetings will also focus upon more specific milestones in your doctorate.

A PhD supervisor by any other name...

You might occasionally see different terms to refer to a PhD supervisor, such as dissertation advisor, thesis advisor or doctoral supervisor. Most of the time, these will all refer to the same person (the academic who will support and advise you through your PhD).

Progression and professional development

As you enter the middle stretch of your PhD the relationship with your supervisor will shift slightly. You’ll still have regular meetings, but won’t be as dependent on them to help set targets, or reassure you that you’re heading in the right direction.

Instead your supervisor will be much more focussed on the work you’re producing – particularly as the embryonic version of your final thesis begins to take shape.

Part of this could involve supporting you as you formally ‘upgrade’ to full PhD candidacy (many universities initially register research students for an MPhil ).

Once this is done you’ll be confirmed as a junior scholar, with an original contribution to make to your field. This may therefore be the time to think about taking on additional development opportunities and earning more exposure for your work – another area in which your supervisor’s support will be important.

Reviewing drafts and checking results

By this point in your PhD the outline of your final project will probably be fairly well established. You’ll have done a lot of the research that will form the basis of your thesis. Eventually you’ll begin gathering in your findings and laying the foundations of your dissertation .

Your supervisor will help identify the point at which you’re ready to do this. From then on a big part of their role will be to help review your findings as you move towards the final stretch of your doctorate.

If you’re in the Arts and Humanities this process may involve drafting actual chapters of your dissertation and receiving feedback on them. The writing usually comes later for STEM students, but you’ll still discuss the results of experiments and / or confirm that your data is up to the required standard.

Assisting your professional development

As your project progresses so will your expertise. The primary outlet for that expertise will be your thesis.

But the second and third years of your PhD are also an important period for your professional development – particularly if you’re considering an academic career.

Now is the time to think about:

• Conference presentations
• Scholarly publications
• Teaching work

Most supervisors will be happy to support their students at this point – and will take pride in seeing them step up to the academic stage (or at least the front of the conference hall). Some universities may also make professional development a formal part of their PhD programmes – particularly when it comes to undergraduate teaching.

Submission and examination

Eventually, it will be time to gather up your results, write up your thesis and submit it as a dissertation. The way you do this can vary between projects.

If you’re in the Arts or Humanities you’ll probably have been producing chapter drafts alongside your research and your supervisor will already have provided feedback on them.

If you’re in Science or Engineering you’ll probably have been focussed on conducting experiments and gathering results, with a dedicated ‘writing up period’ at the end of your degree.

Whatever your approach, your supervisor will help you put together a final version of your thesis. They will then read through that draft and provide any feedback or advice. Once your supervisor decides that your dissertation is up to the required standard they will advise you to submit it for examination.

Most universities will allow you to submit against the advice of your supervisors, but this is almost always a bad idea. If your supervisor does not believe a thesis is ready for examination it probably isn’t. Vice versa, your supervisor won’t recommend you submit unless the thesis is likely to pass a viva.

Selecting external examiners

Having guided you up to the submission point your supervisor has one final task to perform: helping you select the external examiner (or examiners) for your viva voce.

This may seem quite minor, but it can actually be one of the most important contributions a supervisor will make to your PhD.

Some universities allow supervisors to invite and appoint external examiners themselves, but this is relatively uncommon in the UK. Instead you will normally have the chance to suggest examiners and will have the final say over who is invited to examine you.

By this point you may have a good idea of who might be a good external examiner – particularly if you’ve been active at conferences and networked within your field. But you should make sure you take advice from your supervisor at this crucial point.

Not only will they know who in your field is best placed to examine your work, they will also know who is most likely to appreciate it. All PhD examinations are objective, but academia can be home to diverse methodologies and approaches. Selecting an examiner with very different principles to your own can make the viva much more challenging for both parties and put extra pressure on your thesis defence.

In most cases a supervisor isn’t directly involved in the actual viva voce exam that concludes your PhD.

They will have reviewed your thesis and helped you select your examiners (see above). They will also meet with you on the day of the viva and provide support as you get ready for the exam. This could simply involve finding the venue and waiting with you as your examiners arrive. Or it could mean calming a few last minute nerves and helping you relax before the event.

Once the viva is over your supervisor may be invited to discuss the result with the panel before you yourself receive feedback. This may allow them to provide some perspective on any areas of concern, but such contributions are usually off the record. Your examiners will be making a decision based on your thesis defence, not your supervisor’s.

Looking for a PhD?

Head over to our course listings to search PhD opportunities all over the world.

Our postgrad newsletter shares courses, funding news, stories and advice

Mark bennett.

Mark joined FindAPhD to develop our first ever advice articles in 2013 and now serves as our Director of Audience & Editorial, making sure our websites and information are as useful as possible for people thinking about Masters and PhD study. He has a PhD in English Literature from the University of Sheffield, as well as Bachelors and Masters degrees from the University of Kent and the University of South Wales.

You may also like...

What happens during a typical PhD, and when? We've summarised the main milestones of your PhD journey to show you how to get a PhD.

The PhD thesis is the most important part of a doctoral degree. This page will introduce you to what you need to know about the PhD dissertation.

This page will give you an idea of what to expect from your routine as a PhD student, explaining how your daily life will look at you progress through a doctoral degree.

PhD fees can vary based on subject, university and location. Use our guide to find out the PhD fees in the UK and other destinations, as well as doctoral living costs.

Our guide tells you everything about the application process for studying a PhD in the USA.

This guide covers what childcare support is available for postgraduate students, how they can access it and some other handy tips.

FindAPhD. Copyright 2005-2024 All rights reserved.

Unknown    ( change )

Have you got time to answer some quick questions about PhD study?

Select your nearest city

You haven’t completed your profile yet. To get the most out of FindAPhD, finish your profile and receive these benefits:

• Monthly chance to win one of ten £10 Amazon vouchers ; winners will be notified every month.*
• The latest PhD projects delivered straight to your inbox
• Access to our £6,000 scholarship competition
• Weekly newsletter with funding opportunities, research proposal tips and much more
• Early access to our physical and virtual postgraduate study fairs

Or begin browsing FindAPhD.com

or begin browsing FindAPhD.com

*Offer only available for the duration of your active subscription, and subject to change. You MUST claim your prize within 72 hours, if not we will redraw.

Do you want hassle-free information and advice?

Create your FindAPhD account and sign up to our newsletter:

• Find out about funding opportunities and application tips
• Receive weekly advice, student stories and the latest PhD news
• Hear about our upcoming study fairs
• Save your favourite projects, track enquiries and get personalised subject updates

Create your account

Looking to list your PhD opportunities? Log in here .

Community Blog

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

10 Ways to Impress a PhD Supervisor

• By Eduardo D. S.
• August 1, 2020

So you want to find out how to impress a PhD supervisor? Maybe you’re about to contact them about a potential project, perhaps you already have a meeting scheduled with them, or maybe you’re already one of their PhD students but you want to leave a lasting impression. Whatever your reasons, learning the correct way to impress a PhD supervisor can do wonders for building a great relationship and increasing your chances of success not only in your project but also in opening doors for your future career development.

Based on my own experiences, I’m going to share 10 of the best ways to impress a supervisor – 5 for before they agree to take you on, and 5 for when you become one of their PhD students.

5 Ways to Impress a PhD Supervisor Before They Agree to Supervise You

1. communicate clearly.

PhD supervisors are busy people, they receive countless emails every day from panicked students, colleagues chasing up peer-reviews, and potential PhD candidates like yourself. When you first contact a potential supervisor, stick to sending them a brief email. Note the brief there. Specify who you are, your educational background, that you are interested in their project, why you are interested in their project, and include a copy of your resume.

You can find a good breakdown of how to structure your first email here – How to Email a Potential PhD Supervisor . Whichever approach you take, the key is to keep it concise.

2. Be Knowledgeable About Your Field

All supervisors want a research student who’s knowledgeable and well-read in their field, as they tend to produce higher-quality work and encounter fewer problems. Although no one expects you to be an expert, make sure you have at least read three of the most popular journal publications in your chosen research area.

3. Research Them

Looking up the supervisor will give you an insight into their research interests, what topics they’re currently researching, and whether they’ve made any notable contributions, be it a publication, a book or a talk at a leading conference. Your goal isn’t to flatter them, but to be able to clearly explain how your project applies to them and why you would like them to be your supervisor. For example, you might pick up on the fact that the supervisor has recently published several papers or attended a number of conferences on a particular subject. Proposing a project closely linked to this area is likely to attract their attention more than a project in a subject which they haven’t published on for several years.

4. Have a Long-Term Plan

Know what you want to research, why you want to research it, and what you want to do after having completed your research.

A PhD is an enormous commitment – it can take up to 8 years, be financially challenging and mentally exhausting. A supervisor will want to reassure themselves that you genuinely believe a PhD is for you, as having a student struggle the entire way through, or worse, drop out altogether, isn’t good for any involved. Spend some time reading up on the common challenges you can expect as a PhD student and determining what your career goals are. Being able to demonstrate an awareness for both of these will help convince the supervisor that your consideration for doing a PhD is a rational one.

5. Have a Project Plan

If you have the opportunity to discuss a project in more detail with a supervisor, keep in mind that not all first interactions will be simple introductory meetings.

Some supervisors like to jump straight in and discuss your proposed project, your methodology, how you plan to collect data, what kinds of challenges you think you may encounter, etc. Answering these questions in detail will show you’re serious about the project. You don’t necessarily need to have all the right answers here but it’s more about showing that you’ve thought about these aspects and do so from a logical standpoint. In contrast, not having well-thought-out answers will give a poor impression of your level of commitment and/or ability.

If you’ve been asked to submit a research proposal as part of your application, you can almost guarantee a large part of your meeting is going to focus on the technical aspects of the project.

5 Ways to Impress a PhD Supervisor After They Agree to Supervise You

It’s natural to want to impress your supervisor, but remember, if they’ve already agreed to supervise you, they’re already impressed with your academic background and research potential. In truth, most supervisors are never more impressed with their students than on the day they receive their doctorate, with all the years of independent research, publications, and hard word work paying off.

If you still want to take a few extra steps to impress your supervisor, here are 5 things you can do during your PhD studies that will get noticed:

6. Be Proactive

Plan your work, commit to your agreed schedule, and fulfil all your obligations. Nothing makes a supervisor happier than an active student taking full responsibility for his or her project. Being proactive assures your supervisor that your project will advance in the right direction, and when you do need support, it’s for genuine issues that warrant their time.

Being a talented researcher isn’t only about being able to conduct research, but also about being able to do so independently. Showing them that you’re capable of this won’t only keep them looking forward to their next meeting, but it will also give them a high level of confidence in your long-term potential.

7. Document, document, document

It happens occasionally – you get a little complacent, or you’re unusually tired that day – and you don’t label your samples or record your results with a high level of care. No matter the excuse, that’s poor practice and will make it harder for yourself when writing up your thesis, or for your supervisor when trying to discuss your results with them.

One of the simplest ways to impress your supervisor (or any fellow researcher for that matter) is to document everything clearly and systematically. This can range from creating a detailed spreadsheet to keeping a frequently updated LATEX file .

Regardless of how you document your work, stick to a single system and make it so detailed that anyone can pick up and continue your research without having to ask for clarification.

8. Network and Promote Your Research

For creating opportunities in the world of research, nothing is more influential than your reputation. Networking with other researchers within and outside of your university and promoting your work through conferences, events and journal publications improves not only your reputation but also that of your supervisors as a likely co-author. This will help them increase the reach of their work, secure new research grants and be considered for future collaborations.

However, it should be stressed that you mustn’t overstep your bounds – especially when it comes to unfinished work or areas of new potential research. Sharing something your supervisor hasn’t yet wanted to make public is the quickest way to go from impressing to annoying them.

9. Help Them

Supervisors are busy individuals, with a schedule full of lectures, lab sessions, department meetings, plus their own research.

You can earn the gratitude of your supervisor by helping them with some of their tasks, such as offering to host a tutorial on their behalf or setting up the lab for their next demonstration. You can also extend your help to new PhD students who join your research group by acting as a mentor and guiding them through the early challenges of doctoral studies, such as explaining how to order equipment or who to talk to for certain lab requirements.

Supervisors appreciate this type of action as it creates a friendly and collaborative environment for the research group for which they are ultimately responsible for.

10. Clean up After Yourself

You shouldn’t need to be told about this, but it’s surprising how many research students fail to clean up after themselves after having completed laboratory work. This not only goes against laboratory policy , but it gives a poor impression of your research group, which is especially important when you consider the fact you are likely sharing the facilities with staff members who are colleagues of your supervisor.

Cleaning up after yourself shows you respect your colleagues and your workplace and suggests that you have a high personal standard which is always commendable in the eyes of a supervisor. Besides, it’s not that difficult to discard your samples, wipe down your surfaces and record all perishable items that need to be refilled at the end of each day.

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

So there you have it, 10 ways to build a good working relationship with your supervisor.

In the same way that a supervisor takes you on as a student, you’re also taking them on as a supervisor, so the relationship must work both ways for it to be successful. I strongly encourage you, in your first meetings with a potential supervisor, to get a sense of whether your personalities are complementary or whether you think there’s a clash. Try to find out what kind of character your supervisor has before joining their research group (e.g. whether they’re a hands-on supervisor or whether they’re a laid back one); if you do this right, most of my tips will fall into place naturally without you having to try.

This post explains the difference between the journal paper status of In Review and Under Review.

Statistical treatment of data is essential for all researchers, regardless of whether you’re a biologist, computer scientist or psychologist, but what exactly is it?

Scientific misconduct can be described as a deviation from the accepted standards of scientific research, study and publication ethics.

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

Browse PhDs Now

If you’re about to sit your PhD viva, make sure you don’t miss out on these 5 great tips to help you prepare.

Reference management software solutions offer a powerful way for you to track and manage your academic references. Read our blog post to learn more about what they are and how to use them.

Dr Cesário has a PhD in Digital Media from the University of Porto. She’s now pursuing an academic career as a Postdoc in HCI (Human-Computer Interaction) as part of an EU project. She’s also aiming to teach in subjects including User-Centered Design and Interactive Media Design.

Alex is a PhD student at the University of Bradford researching ritual and funerary rites in later prehistoric Scotland: an analysis of faunal assemblages from the Covesea Caves.

Join Thousands of Students

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

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

Managing up: how to communicate effectively with your PhD adviser

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

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

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

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

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

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

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

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

Access options

Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals

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

24,99 € / 30 days

cancel any time

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 51 print issues and online access

185,98 € per year

only 3,65 € per issue

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

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

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

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

Competing Interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Related Articles

Why you need an agenda for meetings with your principal investigator

• Research management

What drives me to help female students to thrive at my Ugandan university

Career Q&A 15 OCT 24

Restore Internet access in war-torn Sudan

Editorial 15 OCT 24

Why this PhD candidate joined campus protests against the Israel–Hamas war

Career Q&A 14 OCT 24

Lab kit on a budget: how cash-strapped research teams are getting creative

Career Feature 14 OCT 24

Want a new job in science? Six charts to help you land it

My paper was proved wrong. After a sleepless night, here’s what I did next

Career Column 11 OCT 24

How to keep research afloat during an administrative stint

Career Feature 08 OCT 24

Faculty Positions

The Yale Stem Cell Center invites applications for faculty positions at the rank of Assistant, Associate, or full Professor. Rank and tenure will b...

New Haven, Connecticut

Yale Stem Cell Center

Tenured Associate Professor in Computational Cognition, Cognitive Neuroscience, Visual Neuroscience

The Department of Psychology in the College of Arts and Science at Vanderbilt University invites applications for a tenured associate professor pos...

Nashville, Tennessee

Vanderbilt University Department of Psychology

Postdoctoral Associate Genetics

Postdoc to develop therapeutic RNAs, focus on mRNA stability, translation, and gene therapy. RNA biology, genomics, and computational biology skills.

Yale University - Giraldez lab

Open Faculty Position in Mathematical and Information Security

We are now seeking outstanding candidates in all areas of mathematics and information security.

Dongguan, Guangdong, China

GREAT BAY INSTITUTE FOR ADVANCED STUDY： Institute of Mathematical and Information Security

PostDoc Associate

PostDoc Associate in Dr. Zhaohui Feng's lab

New Brunswick, New Jersey

Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Advising for progress: tips for PhD supervisors

In a previous post , we have seen the crucial role that having a sense of progress plays, not only in the productivity, but also in the engagement and persistence of a PhD student towards the doctorate. While this recognition (and the practices to “make progress visible” we saw) put a big emphasis on the student as the main active agent, PhD students are not the only actors in this play. Is there anything that doctoral supervisors can do to help? In this post, I go over some of the same management research on progress and our own evidence from the field, looking at what supervisors can do to support their students in perceiving continuous progress that eventually leads to a finished doctoral thesis.

The role of supervising on PhD students’ progress

One interesting aspect of Amabile and Kramer’s book 1 (based on the study of diaries of 238 employees), is that it is aimed mainly to managers , to help them understand what their role really is in a team of engaged and productive knowledge workers. While PhD supervisors are not technically the students’ “bosses” (even if some academic research teams do work like that), I think there is a thing or two that we could learn from advising our PhD students with the issue of progress in mind .

The book authors’ conclusion, contrary to widespread belief, is that the manager’s mission is not to “command and control”; it is not even to be the “team’s cheerleader”. After noting that steady progress is the most important factor in keeping the team motivated, they posit that the manager’s main role is to remove obstacles that may be stopping the team’s progress on its tracks.

Also, let us remember that the book phrases this most crucial aspect as “progress in work that matters ”. While the work should matter to the employees, to the team (in our case, to the PhD student) primarily, we as supervisors are a very important social connection in relation to the thesis (as one of the few that can -hopefully!- understand the thesis topic). And social validation is one of the most important mechanisms that our brains use to assess whether something is important 2 . Thus, an important part of supervising PhD work is to signal such work as meaningful and important (or, at least, to avoid portraying it as meaning less ). While we seldom fail at this intentionally, there are many ways in which a supervisor (or a boss) can inadvertently do so. These are what Amabile and Kramer call inhibitors and toxins (and their flip side, catalysts and nourishers ).

Inhibitors are events that hamper, or fail to support the project… and, in doing so, somehow imply that the project is not so important or meaningful (i.e., if it were important, everyone and the supervisor would be supporting it to ensure that it succeeds). Catalysts , on the other hand, are events or actions that support the development of the project. Examples of inhibitors and catalysts include:

• Providing clear goals for the work of the project (catalyst), vs. having vague goals for the work, or changing the goals repeatedly and without good reason (inhibitor). Even if, in a PhD, the students are often setting their own goals, we as supervisors can support students to formulate the goals and direction more clearly than they naturally would.
• Providing resources that are essential or helpful for the progress and completion of the project’s tasks (catalyst), vs. withdrawing critical resources from the project or its tasks (inhibitor). Two classic examples in the context of a PhD are measuring instruments or other research equipment (which maybe the supervisor can help secure for the student), and the supervisor’s own time and advice (which more insecure students may see as essential to the decision-making and progress of the research). The classic busy professor that is never available to meet and does not answer student emails… do you think s/he is going to catalyze or inhibit progress?
• Similarly, having peers or other external people help with some part of the project can also be a catalyst (e.g., bringing in a specialist from another field to help with some obscure aspects of a data analysis), while extraneous blockages can quickly inhibit progress: for instance, when bureaucratic steps and administrative staff pose hurdles to the research tasks without an apparently good reason, what does that say about the importance of the research?
• Quite simply, just stating that a work is important , or noting explicitly the impact it’s having (or may have) on others and the students themselves, is another catalyst for progress. Even mentioning in passing that we see how the students are learning a new skill successfully, can help. Conversely, saying out loud that the project’s outputs are pretty much useless, is a clear inhibitor (since nobody desires to waste their time in something that is both very hard and rather meaningless).

Aside from these actions directed at the project/work itself, there are also actions that can help or hamper progress, by targeting the person doing the work. Toxins are negative inter-personal episodes which attack the worker (in our case, the student): when somebody yells at you, doubts your capabilities to pull off some task, shames you in front of others… all those signal that you are worthless, and probably incapable of completing the project at hand (and hence, why bother?). Meanwhile, nourishers are positive inter-personal events which target the person: providing emotional support, encouragement, confidence in the person’s abilities, etc. These all signal your personal worth and ability to complete the work and, logically, can help PhD students continue putting in the effort needed to complete the thesis.

One more thing: the manager’s role is to remove obstacles that are extraneous (i.e., unnecessary) to the project. In research, some of our obstacles are intrinsic to the task, an inherent part of it: being systematic in our analyses, synthesizing multiple sources of knowledge and many other research tasks are hard , and there is no way around it. Hence, as supervisors we should do what is in our power to remove other obstacles that are not necessary, so that the hard work can be successfully done by the student. All this talking about removing obstacles is not about doing the core research work for the student (indeed, such behavior can in some cases be considered a toxin, since it signals that the student cannot do that core research task by themselves).

Finally, when looking at these different kinds of events or actions that happen throughout the daily life of a thesis project, we should beware of a well-known bias that we humans have: the negativity bias . Put simply, this bias means that negative events weigh more than positive ones, in our hearts and minds 3 . That is why I’d focus my attention more on removing unnecessary obstacles, avoiding project inhibitors or inter-personal toxins… rather than bringing in some fancy research resource (a catalyst) that is not essential, or throwing a party for the student (a nourisher).

Practices to supervise for progress

Aside from keeping in mind the general principles of removing unnecessary obstacles and signifying the doctoral work as important , is there anything else we can do as supervisors to help our doctoral students perceive progress and persist to finish the PhD? If you want to be more systematic about it, here are a few practices you can try:

• At the simplest level, you can point your students to learn about and implement some of the progress practices we saw in the previous post : making and celebrating smaller milestones, keeping a diary, self-tracking simple quantitative indicators, or working with objectives and key results (OKRs).
• Another very simple practice that I implement now in my own supervision is to just ask your PhD students about obstacles they may be facing. Sometimes the hurdles will be inherent to the task, or internal to the student (e.g., procrastination); sometimes the obstacles are unnecessary and should be removed… however, as a novice researcher, the student is not always able to distinguish between these different categories. Nowadays, in every PhD meeting I have, after the students report on their latest activity, or when we are discussing next steps, I try to ask something to the effect of: “is there anything blocking you from moving forward?”. Sometimes, nothing comes up, or something arises that is out of my influence; but, sometimes, a short email or minor effort on my side can help unblock an unnecessarily-stuck situation.
• Keep up to date on the student’s work : In Amabile and Kramer’s book 1 , they recommend managers to be systematic in being informed about what is happening in the employee’s work. To help with this, the authors devised a “daily progress checklist” , a short reflection guide in which the manager can ask herself, systematically, about the team’s progress and setbacks, catalysts and inhibitors, nourisher and toxins that the team has faced each day. Again, take this advice, coming from a study in the US creative/innovation industries, with a pinch of salt. Maybe in your supervision practice in academic research, other frequency is more appropriate (e.g., weekly, or whenever you meet your students) – many supervisors do not talk with their doctoral candidates each and every day. However, I think part of the point of the authors is for managers to increase the frequency of these information checkpoints. Hence, you can also try lightly checking in with your student a bit more frequently than you normally would. Maybe an informal chat or email will suffice, this is not about micro-managing or looking all the time over the student’s shoulder! This can also help signal that you care about the work; that it is important.
• Emphasize the learning process, not only the outcome : Another tip from the book on progress comes from the fact that some of the managers of successful teams were good at highlighting the learning process, the lessons learned from the work, especially in the face of a setback or failure. I believe this is especially important in a PhD, since a doctorate is , by nature, a learning process for the candidate. Hence, when the dreaded paper rejection comes, or an experiment fails, it is important that you, as supervisor, keep a clear head and guide the student in thinking through beyond the bad outcome or failure, to analyze the causes, what lessons have we learned from the failure, and what actions can be taken so that it does not happen next time. You can also think whether the negative results (or the lessons learnt) can be made into a contribution in itself 4 . I cannot underline this enough: failures are critical inflection points in a PhD. Make them into “teachable moments”, not breakup events!
• Have a “thesis map” . This is a tip that comes from our own field research talking with doctoral supervisors about progress. Some of the supervisors that reported being satisfied with their students’ progress, mentioned that they had some sort of (implicit or explicit) “map of the thesis”: a meta-plan of milestones along the path to a thesis in their area/discipline, so that the supervisor can have an idea of how far along the way to the thesis the student is (and how fast it is advancing, or whether there are sudden blocks in such advancement). Typical steps in this map might include: doing a synthesis of the state-of-the-art, coming up with a research direction from it, and presenting at a conference – during the first year; planning and conducting three experiments in the second year; etc. Naturally, this map or meta-plan varies a lot from discipline to discipline, and even for different kinds of thesis within a same area, so it seems that the supervisor has to devise this plan for themselves (I will probably explore this idea more in a later post). Although this kind of device has not been studied (to the best of my knowledge), it seems that having such a map explicitly in place would be very useful, both for the supervisor and for the student’s own perception of progress. It could even be used during the selection/onboarding phase of new PhD students, to make more concrete the workload, the breadth and depth of a PhD 5 .
• Finally, I’ll say it again: don’t make the students’ work seem meaningless , if you can in any way avoid it. Dismissing the student’s ideas as absurd, imposing our own ideas/direction on the student’s project without their understanding it… all may seem justified for the supervisor at some point of a thesis (but they are also indicators of students that later dropped out 6 ). Ignore this advice at your own risk!

NB: this post is based on the materials for a new series of participatory workshops for supervisors that we are running at Talinn University (Estonia) and the University of Valladolid (Spain). If you (or someone at your university) think that these ideas could be beneficial for your fellow doctoral supervisors, feel free to drop me a line , as we are thinking about how, where and when to expand this emerging program, once we validate its effectiveness.

Do you have other supervisory practices that help your students see the progress they make (or detect when they are stuck)? Does your supervisor use particular tricks to help you see how you’re progressing? If so, please let us know in the comments below!

Header photo: Advice on Keyboard, by www.gotcredit.com .

Amabile, T., & Kramer, S. (2011). The progress principle: Using small wins to ignite joy, engagement, and creativity at work . Harvard Business Press. ↩︎

To illustrate this, try to remember back to your teenage years, and the (now seemingly stupid) things that were life-or-death-important to you back then: your favorite rock band, wearing certain kind of sneakers, the approval of that “cool kid” in your class, etc. Back then, trying to detach yourself from your parents’ points of view, social validation from your peers was almost the only mechanism at your disposal to understand what mattered in life. ↩︎

In some studies trying to quantify this, they came up with the measure that negative events count as much as 3-4 times more than positive ones! ↩︎

Indeed, conferences or journals in some research areas are opening special spaces for such negative results, to fight the “publication bias” that threatens the validity of many of our findings. Shorter “negative results” papers in journals, or “failathons” in conferences, can be good venues to present such failed experiments, get a sense that the effort was not useless, and still help the advancement of your research area! ↩︎

One of the most common themes of PhD students that I’ve seen drop out (or consider dropping out) of the doctorate is the fact that they miscalculated the amount of work (and the kind of work) that a PhD entails. Many candidates enter with the idea that it is “just a longer master”, and are disappointed or disheartened when they see the amount of work needed, and the lack of very structured guidance that they are used to from their bachelors and masters degrees. ↩︎

Devos, C., Boudrenghien, G., Van der Linden, N., Azzi, A., Frenay, M., Galand, B., & Klein, O. (2017). Doctoral students’ experiences leading to completion or attrition: A matter of sense, progress and distress. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 32 (1), 61–77. ↩︎

• Productivity
• Self-tracking
• Supervision

Luis P. Prieto

Luis P. is a Ramón y Cajal research fellow at the University of Valladolid (Spain), investigating learning technologies, especially learning analytics. He is also an avid learner about doctoral education and supervision, and he's the main author at the A Happy PhD blog.

Google Scholar profile