How does your PhD advisor motivate you?

[exTSRI]

What does your PhD advisor typically do or say to motivate you to work harder, longer hours, on weekends etc.?

Because, of course, professors depend on their students and postdocs career-wise. And they tend to develop various management and motivation styles. Some flat-out demand ("my way or the highway"), others try to inspire. Some make you punch in and punch out, others don't. Some stress teamwork, others encourage internal competition. And so on. What's your prof like?

My former advisor (Dr. M. Reza Ghadiri, The Scripps Research Institute, California, chemistry/biochemistry) called himself "a cheerleader". I'm writing a memoir-like post about it, you can check it out.

[bon to the jour]

I so admire my advisor's career and accomplishments, and I trust that he asks me to do things for my own good. Like that semester I collected, scored, and entered data on my own in a 200-person study. Or that time I spent the summer reading "Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences". Or maybe that time I attempted to write an article on a topic I don't really know much about. Anyway, I digress.

Back to the point: When my advisor asks me to do something, I see it as more "eat your vegetables because they're good for you" (a la my mother) and less "grade these papers because I don't want to and and I don't know what else to do with you" (a la frightening, advisors-from-hell stories). But I suppose this type of motivation only works in scenarios where you trust your advisor is investing in your career and really wants you to stand out amongst your peers.

[exTSRI]

But I suppose this type of motivation only works in scenarios where you trust your advisor is investing in your career and really wants you to stand out amongst your peers.

I agree, and that is an interesting point. I think it begs the question: if an advisor is investing in a student's career, what kind of returns on investment are they expecting down the road for themselves? In other words, why invest in somebody else's career? (Aside from being altruistic, but then it can't even be called an investment.)

All the advisors I've had, including during course projects back in undergrad, readily expressed their desires for me to stand out, excel, "make a name for myself" and be very successful. And then went on to tell me that, in order for that to happen, I had to be working really hard, spending more time in the lab and so on. Which isn't exactly illogical, of course. But it makes you wonder. Is it really your future career (or, taking it up a level, happiness in life — unless someone has other reasons for wanting a good career) they are worried about, or is it mostly how much time and effort you put in while working for them and trying to go after that career?

[bon to the jour]

But it makes you wonder. Is it really your future career (or, taking it up a level, happiness in life — unless someone has other reasons for wanting a good career) they are worried about, or is it mostly how much time and effort you put in while working for them and trying to go after that career?

Yes, it does make you wonder --- that is an excellent point that I hadn't really thought about until now. I suppose one reason that professors want us to work hard and be stellar students is because they think it reflects upon their own career. For example, an advisor takes on a new student; if the student is successful and wins awards, grants, fellowships, has lots of thoughtful publications, ect, the advisor's peers may or may not attribute that student's success to the wisdom and success of the advisor. But if the advisor takes on a student who does poorly, with little knowledge of the field, unimpressive publications, and under-developed skill-sets, the "black sheep" of the field might call into question the advisor's own capabilities --- in the same way that we make assumptions about the parents of children who throw long, drawn-out temper-tantrums in public, or who have terrible manners.

This is all speculation, of course, but it is something to think about. And also a bit funny --- imagine professors tip-toeing around students as if we are all ticking time bombs that, if detonated, draw the scorn and mistrust of other academics to our advisor. Or like we students are hot potatoes that advisors toss around from project to project in effort to not let us fall and burn the advisor's own foot. Anywho, I digress yet again. These were just some funny images that popped into my head while I was writing.

[timuralp]

Well, if a professor doesn't yet have tenure then your success is directly tied to his/her.

Either way, I actually found that the only thing I need in grad school is help with direction, but I never felt that I needed extra motivation and I never really had any conversations about that. It's a little weird to me that grad students need the pep-talks to get through it. Maybe I'm just weird.

[bon to the jour]

Why is it that if they don't have tenure your success and his/her success depend on one another?

[rising_star]

Either way, I actually found that the only thing I need in grad school is help with direction, but I never felt that I needed extra motivation and I never really had any conversations about that. It's a little weird to me that grad students need the pep-talks to get through it. Maybe I'm just weird.

timuralp, you must be the rare graduate student that never has a crisis of faith about what it is we do. I envy that, I really do. But most people? They question what they're doing, whether it's worth slaving away for years at poverty-level wages, if that f*$^ing experiment will ever just work, etc. For those people, having an advisor that can give the occasional pep talk is extremely useful.

FWIW, my advisor will give pep talks but only when you request and usually combined with a healthy dose of ass kicking. As in, what you're doing matters, you're going to do great, everything will go well BUT you need to take your comps and write some grants.

Why is it that if they don't have tenure your success and his/her success depend on one another?

Well, if your advisor doesn't get tenure s/he will be looking for a new job, which means you're either looking for a new advisor or moving to a new university.

[bon to the jour]

Well, if your advisor doesn't get tenure s/he will be looking for a new job, which means you're either looking for a new advisor or moving to a new university.

Yes, but how is their tenure affected by your performance? Like in a "you obviously can't teach because your student is crap" sort of way, or something else?

[exTSRI]

@timuralp:

True, it's especially critical before tenure. But for professors of any ambition, the career does not end with tenure. They still want to get things done and publish impressive papers, so that they can have better funding, a higher h-index and more awards than the other guy. So, unless they can somehow manage to do everything solo, a professor's academic success is always directly tied to his/her group.

For students, it's not even always about needing a pep-talk per se. An extreme example, which isn't too extreme for the specific area of research and the level of competition:

One professor used to give out faux medals ("purple hearts") to students who would work the day, the night, and the next day. Straight. That was a synthetic organic chemistry lab, so they routinely handled a lot of toxic and flammable/explosive stuff by themselves and around each other. Not a good mix with fatigue and sleep deprivation, if you ask me. I don't know if those students really needed the "medals" and the encouragement, or if they were insane enough to otherwise regularly do that on their own initiative. But, in any case, the prof had a rule: work 36 hours straight -> get a medal.

[timuralp]

One professor used to give out faux medals ("purple hearts") to students who would work the day, the night, and the next day. Straight. That was a synthetic organic chemistry lab, so they routinely handled a lot of toxic and flammable/explosive stuff by themselves and around each other. Not a good mix with fatigue and sleep deprivation, if you ask me. I don't know if those students really needed the "medals" and the encouragement, or if they were insane enough to otherwise regularly do that on their own initiative. But, in any case, the prof had a rule: work 36 hours straight -> get a medal.

That sounds... terrible.

Yes, but how is their tenure affected by your performance? Like in a "you obviously can't teach because your student is crap" sort of way, or something else?

I don't know about your field, but at least in mine, professors do not typically conduct as much active research and the publications they get are from good work their students are doing. When they're up for tenure review that list of publications is reviewed.

timuralp, you must be the rare graduate student that never has a crisis of faith about what it is we do. I envy that, I really do. But most people? They question what they're doing, whether it's worth slaving away for years at poverty-level wages, if that f*$^ing experiment will ever just work, etc

I mean, I'm excited about the research going on. Every research project has come from discussing an idea I have with my advisor, and I guess I care about these ideas working enough. I agree that this may not be the typical case. I think if I started having doubts about what I am really doing here, I might just quit and go get a "real" job. Sorry, if I came off sounding arrogant about it.

[mudlark]

I don't know about your field, but at least in mine, professors do not typically conduct as much active research and the publications they get are from good work their students are doing. When they're up for tenure review that list of publications is reviewed.

Yeah, I think that this doesn't apply to almost all of the arts and humanities. Supervising grad students is still part of the tenure package, but supervisors and grad students only very rarely work on research together. I'm in English, and while there are some co-authored papers out there, it's usually an equal collaboration between two professors. We certainly don't have anything like the multi-authored system in the sciences. We end up with far fewer publications, because all of ours are independently produced, first-authored pieces.

My supervisor stresses independence and self-motivation. Makes sense, since I'll basically be huddled in my office, typing away alone for a few years. If I submit some work to him, he'll give very good, very harsh feedback on it within days, but he's not going to hold my hand, or chase me around and set deadlines for me. This works for me, since I have a fairly strong sense of what I want to do, and mostly want to be left to do it (while being held to high standards). I e-mail him when I need something, and otherwise have a more formal meeting every few months.

Other supervisors in my department have more frequent contact with their students. I know some who have meetings every two weeks, with structured tasks for the student to do before each meeting, and lots of constant feedback. This works really well for some of my friends.

[rising_star]

Yes, but how is their tenure affected by your performance? Like in a "you obviously can't teach because your student is crap" sort of way, or something else?

No, more of a sense that you aren't an effective advisor if your students take forever to graduate or if you've had students but never graduated any. Mentorship is part of the job, and advisors are expected to have students that get grants and publish, at least in the social sciences. If you don't, then it's not just you that looks bad, but also your advisor.

[exTSRI]

I suppose the professor-student dynamics are quite different in humanities vs. natural sciences.

In the sciences, professors are the ones who get grants, even though students often participate in writing the applications. Professors come up with ideas for new research projects, but they completely rely on students and postdocs to do all the actual work in the lab, while they themselves assume the roles of overseers and managers (and are, in fact, commonly referred to as "supervisors").

[mudlark]

I suppose the professor-student dynamics are quite different in humanities vs. natural sciences.

In the sciences, professors are the ones who get grants, even though students often participate in writing the applications. Professors come up with ideas for new research projects, but they completely rely on students and postdocs to do all the actual work in the lab, while they themselves assume the roles of overseers and managers (and are, in fact, commonly referred to as "supervisors").

Well, we call ours supervisors as well, but we just don't work directly for them in the humanities. We apply for totally separate grants for totally separate projects, but supervisors will often help review their grad students' apps and help them sort out sources of funding. Professors sometimes have grad students help them with their work as research assistants, but that's not always or even usually part of the supervisor-supervisee relationship. RAs are more likely to be random MA or PhD students who are put to work photocopying or hunting down documents for professors. It's busy work, not part of the actual production of ideas.

[iLikeTrees]

As bon to the jour alluded to, my advisor motivates me by playing a mother-like role in my academics and research. She is always very supportive and hand-off giving me "privileges" like being able to more or less do what I want, when I want. It's a really positive relationship and the outside motivation (on top of my own self-motivation) comes from not wanting to disappoint her. Whenever she has to step in and say something to correct a situation, I (and my lab) feel very guilty that we let her down and really should've done better.

That being said, my advisor has realistic (but high) expectations for our work, provides critical, constructive feedback, and doesn't burden us with "busy work" that she simply doesn't want to do herself so we all try to reciprocate. She is also very much a mentor and encourages us to find a life-work balance and not spend all of our time in the lab/books etc and that goes a long way towards a relationship of mutual respect. While the positive atmosphere and support really helps me thrive because I'm highly self-driven, I feel like this maybe wouldn't provide as much pushing as some people might need/want.

and for what it's worth (since somebody mentioned it), I'm in the natural sciences, if that colors your interpretation of what I've said.