One of the most startling little pieces of truth I ever heard coming into grad school was
You can divorce your husband, you can’t divorce your PhD advisor.
The shock factor of this statement is why it stuck with me all these years. It isn’t necessarily true, but I think it serves as a reminder of how important this decision is. It is possible to switch research groups or further your career without your PhD advisor, but it also isn’t easy. This decision is as much about you as it is about the advisor and the research.
Is there any truth to this statement at all? Well, in my opinion, a bit. The advisor you end up working for has a vested interest in your success. Because of this, they write a letter for nearly everything you apply for. They collaborate with you. They invite you to workshops. They introduce you to their buddies, who, hopefully, give you that position you’ve been vying for. They do a lot. Your success is a reflection of them. These aren’t necessarily good or bad things, but they are worth keeping in mind when you are making one of the biggest decisions of your career. Because it is a balance of so many factors, it becomes one of the most beautiful, nervewracking moments of soul searching in your life.
Before we get started, all of this advice is not necessarily relevant based on the university/program you choose. I am focusing on three universally relevant aspects: the advisor, the outcomes, and the coworkers. I realize some grad students join the group before they have a chance to observe the gears in motion, but this can help during the recruitment/interview season as well.
Zeroing in on the right research group…
My family always asks me when I’m going to get a real job. Grad school is a real job and you will be spending the next 4+ years in this group. So can you be happy in this job for an extended period of time? If the answer is no, find a different group. I have watched too many friends and colleagues initially pick the wrong group for them and either (1) drop-out or (2) switch to another group that is a great fit later in grad school. At my institution, switching is not extremely difficult, but it can extend your timeline for graduation. It is also easier to switch if you have your own funding (NSF, NDSEG, etc). My advice: pick the best group for you at the beginning so you don’t add unnecessary stress to your life.
The principal investigator (PI)/advisor (the most important)
This is key. As I mentioned before, you are a huge investment for them as they are for you. They are also your boss, not your friend. They can be friendly, but this shouldn’t be the reason you choose to join a group. Personally, I like an advisor who respects me enough to tell me, “Hey, this isn’t working because you are doing x wrong.” For some, a little harsh, but I’d rather them tell me than let me fumble around in the dark because they’re too “nice.” I’m not advocating working for an outright jerk, but your advisor isn’t your new drinking buddy (that’s where mentors are better suited).
Managing Style
Managing style is really important to keep in mind. This is a really good time to sit back and reflect on your needs. Do you need constant deadlines? Do you hate being micromanaged? Do you need 8 hours of sleep or only 4? Are you ok with short timeframes of working constantly, but prefer to work more reasonable hours regularly? Everyone is different, there is no one type of managing style that works for everybody. Know yourself and don’t try to conform to society’s idea of the “ideal grad student.”
Once you understand what you need, figure out the PI’s expectations. Do they expect you to work 80 hours a week and are you ok with that (for 4+ years)? Are weekends non-existent or considered one day or two? How many vacation days do you get? Do they micromanage or just let you work? Do they foster a collaborative environment or do they pit grad students and postdocs against each other? If some of these questions are difficult to ask the PI, meet with the current grad students to figure out some of this information. Take them out for a beer and ask them how they feel about working in the group. You can also ask grad students that are not in the group; gossip travels fast, especially when it involves PIs that tend to mistreat/abuse their grad students.
Coadvising
Something I hear far too frequently is: I want to be co-advised by Professor X and Professor Y. Pick one. Unless it is absolutely necessary to have two advisors, do not put yourself through this. It can work, but it is highly unlikely from what I’ve seen. Work for the advisor you mesh with the best. You can always work toward a mentor-mentee relationship with other faculty you are interested in.
Let me give an extreme example of why this type of advising rarely works. Prof X is an established, tenured professor who is well-known in their field, whereas Prof Y is a new, tenure-track hire. Prof Y wants to be heard and uses the project you are working on as their platform to Prof X. Prof X thinks that Prof Y is wrong. Prof X tells you to do x, y, and z; Prof Y tells you to do a, b, and c. If you don’t do a, b, c, x, y, and z, you become caught in the crossfire and the two may direct their anger and frustration at you. This is an extreme case, but the take-home is: you will be pulled in two directions because there is going to be a disagreement between the two advisors at some point in your career. The frequency of these disagreements can adversely affect you and your mental state.
Funding Situation
Now for the biggest question of all: do they have funding? You are going to have to have this conversation at some point with the PI. You can get an idea from the group members, but it is an unavoidable question. There are several ways to ask this:
- Do you have the funding to hire me?
- Are there any funded projects I could start working on?
- How many students are you looking to hire and for which projects?
- I’m really interested in project x.
That last one is a little weird, but it is exactly how I found out that my advisor was not hiring for the project I really wanted to work on. She was running out of funding for that project and was actively writing proposals. Funding is never guaranteed, so her openness let me expand my interests to other areas of her group. For me, the project wasn’t necessarily what I cared about, it was her advising style that drew me to her and she happened to work on cool stuff that I was interested in.
If you don’t have this conversation, you are going to shoot yourself in the foot. Let me reiterate: this decision is about you. If the PI is not interested in hiring you (or able to), they aren’t going to. And don’t make assumptions. You need to know if they are going to hire you. If they aren’t, you should use your energy rotating in other groups. Your time is valuable and wasting it on someone who isn’t going to hire you is just free labor for them.
The outcomes (the so-so important)
How many publications (and where) are you expected to produce before your defense? Before the intermediate steps (candidacy exams, qualifying exams, proposals, etc.)? My advisor (chemistry) requires 1 before a Master’s defense and about 4 before the PhD defense. But this number of publications includes writing reviews and feature articles. On top of that, depending on the track, she may increase or decrease her expectations. Industry track requires fewer than research-intensive academia, which differs from teaching-intensive institutions. It is entirely dependent on the PI’s views, but you can have this conversation in the initial stages of your PhD.
Where do grad students in the group end up? Academia, industry, science policy, etc.? Most importantly, where do you want to end up? The truth of the matter is that most academics want to produce more academics. Some came from industry themselves and already have a great network for that path. The contacts PIs have will help place you later in your career. This is not to say you can’t go to industry from a lab that produces academics, but you will do a lot more legwork facilitating that transition yourself.
Of the three, this wasn’t really important to me, but it is something to keep in mind when you are looking at groups.
The coworkers (the pretty important)
Most likely, you are going to see your coworkers far more frequently than your advisor. Do you like them? Can you see yourself collaborating with them on projects? I love my research group. Why? Because we are more than happy to help each other out. We have our own projects, but we attend subgroup meetings that give us the opportunity to reach out for help from others in similar projects. I have people I am good friends with and no sworn enemies. Part of this is because the grad students and postdocs at least have some say in the hiring process. I highly recommend the book I’m reading right now called “The No Asshole Rule: Building a Civilized Workplace and Surviving One That Isn’t” by Robert I. Sutton. We stick to this rule pretty firmly because we don’t want to be miserable working side-by-side with someone who doesn’t respect others.
The best way to get to know your potential coworkers: take rotations seriously. If your department requires rotations, fantastic! If your department doesn’t, talk to the professor and figure out a way to spend time in the group. This is especially important if it is a super popular research group. If the other grad students (and postdocs) like you and enjoy working with you, they are far more likely to advocate and support hiring you over the other candidates. Spending time in the group will also give you a better idea of the expectations of the advisor.
Have fun and good luck!
It’s a crazy time. But it’s worth it. I love grad school. I have been through more trials than I like to admit, but it has given me the perspective I wouldn’t otherwise have. I mesh with my advisor. She is not perfect. No one is. But, she meets the “cannot live without” needs on my list. She has been there through every setback and my biggest advocate when I need her the most.