1. Understanding Roles and Power Dynamics
Supervisors and senior co‑authors hold real power over your PhD progress, publications, and career opportunities. Recognising this power imbalance does not mean being passive; it means being strategic and intentional in how you communicate.
A healthy supervision relationship combines guidance, expertise, and support with growing independence for you as a researcher.
2. Setting Expectations Early
Many conflicts later in the PhD can be traced back to unspoken or mismatched expectations. Have an explicit conversation about:
- How often you will meet (weekly, bi‑weekly, monthly).
- Preferred communication channels (email, messaging, shared docs).
- Typical feedback turnaround times (e.g., 1–2 weeks).
- Who leads which parts of the project (design, data, writing).
Summarise agreements briefly in an email so you all have a written reference you can revisit later.
3. Preparing for Productive Meetings
Treat meetings with your supervisor or co‑authors as time you want to use efficiently. Send a short agenda in advance:
- 1–2 sentences on what you have done since the last meeting.
- Key questions you need answered.
- Decisions that must be made now vs. later.
Take brief notes during the meeting and send a short summary afterwards capturing decisions, deadlines, and next steps.
4. Giving and Receiving Feedback
Feedback is central to academic collaboration, but it can feel personal. Remember that comments are usually about the work, not your worth. When you receive feedback:
- Look for patterns, not single comments.
- Ask clarifying questions if something is unclear.
- Separate quick fixes from structural changes.
When you give feedback (for example, to peers), focus on being specific, kind, and useful. Point out what works as well as what needs revision.
5. Authorship and Contribution Transparency
Authorship is a frequent source of tension in research groups. Discuss it before the project goes too far. Clarify:
- Who will be first, middle, and last author.
- What contribution is expected from each author.
- How authorship order might change if contributions change.
When possible, follow your discipline’s authorship guidelines and use contribution statements (e.g., CRediT taxonomy) for transparency.
6. Working with Multiple Supervisors or Co‑Supervisors
Multiple supervisors can be a strength, but also a source of mixed messages. Try to:
- Agree on a primary contact for day‑to‑day guidance.
- Keep joint notes or a shared document where all can track decisions.
- Highlight when you receive conflicting advice and ask for alignment.
7. Handling Difficult Situations Professionally
Sometimes relationships are challenging: delayed feedback, harsh comments, or unrealistic expectations. Start by documenting interactions and trying to resolve issues directly and respectfully.
If problems persist, look for institutional support: a graduate coordinator, ombudsperson, or trusted senior academic who can advise you on options while protecting your position.
8. Building a Broader Support Network
Your supervisor is important, but they should not be your only source of support. Build:
- A peer group of other PhD students to share experiences with.
- Mentors in your department or at conferences.
- Technical collaborators (e.g., stats, methods) outside your main group.
This network can buffer you against supervisor changes and open opportunities for independent projects.
Strong collaborations are built on clarity, respect, and shared expectations. Investing in these relationships is as important as learning new methods or writing another paper.