Dealing with constant supervision

[Calorific]

Hey guys,

 

I'm new to this PhD program and this advisor (who is generous in every aspect of the work) except for his management style.One thing he does that bites me constantly is the constant supervision and oversight that he puts into his supervision style.

He asks for updates (often informally) every morning and evening - start and close of business, specifically - and sometimes as often as he sees you during the day. Not that I do not like it but it puts me on the spot every so often that I am constantly working during the day to ensure I have something to say when he comes around. When you close for the day, you also have to do some extra work to make sure you have stuff to say when he comes the following morning. Granted, he does not feel awkward when you tell him you have no update; still, it's a little discomforting to know he would be coming any time to check on you in the lab. 

I have worked in the industry and as a masters research student before, delivered consistent results but I have never had to work under such close supervision - he wants to know every bit of the work that you are doing.

Is this even normal. I feel I would not be satisfied working for him this way as I do not have real control of my project direction.

Has anyone faced such close supervision before? How did you go around it?

 

 

Calorified

[TakeruK]

I have not experienced this before. I do know others who have supervisors that are like this though. I don't think it's a bad thing that you don't want constant supervision but I don't think it's inherently bad that the professor wants to manage his lab in this manner either. The problem is that your styles do not match well! Here are some things you might consider trying:

 

1. Have an honest and polite conversation with your advisor about how you feel when you are constantly checked up on.

 

2. Don't change your working habits, and just deliver the reports as requested (i.e. don't let the frequency of report affect your work). Every morning, just deliver the exact same report as you gave the previous evening. Make it clear that when you are closing for the day, you are closing and not working any more. 

 

3. Change supervisors.

 

4. Adjust your work habits to work with this style of management.

 

My friends in a similar situation as yours have done all 4 of these things. #1 doesn't seem to work well (i.e. it doesn't change anything) but it's usually a good first step. After all, the PI has the prerogative to manage his/her lab the way they want.

 

#2 works the best for the specific professor I'm thinking of. This professor wants their students to work a certain way and so they apply pressure to do so. Sometimes it works and the professor gets what they want (i.e. case #4). But other times, the students make it clear that they don't want to change and if the student is stubborn and firm, the professor relents and basically stops asking for the morning report since it provides no new information (i.e. case #2). Finally, a few students end up just working for someone else (case #3) if they don't want this type of conflict in their life.

[juilletmercredi]

Yeah, I am a big advocate for tactic #2.  Don't change your working style; just report on what you've done: "Nothing has changed since this morning, but I'll give you an update when it does."  "I haven't finished running the experiment from last night; I expect that it won't be done until Monday."  And so forth. You can read his reactions to see how he's taking it.  Most people would eventually get the hint or at least unconsciously reduce the behavior, realizing that it's not really getting anywhere.  If he's beginning to get annoyed, you can then deduce whether he's got unrealistic expectations about the speed of your work and address this with him during a one-on-one.

[reinhard]

I have not experienced this before. I do know others who have supervisors that are like this though. I don't think it's a bad thing that you don't want constant supervision but I don't think it's inherently bad that the professor wants to manage his lab in this manner either. The problem is that your styles do not match well! Here are some things you might consider trying:

 

1. Have an honest and polite conversation with your advisor about how you feel when you are constantly checked up on.

 

2. Don't change your working habits, and just deliver the reports as requested (i.e. don't let the frequency of report affect your work). Every morning, just deliver the exact same report as you gave the previous evening. Make it clear that when you are closing for the day, you are closing and not working any more. 

 

3. Change supervisors.

 

4. Adjust your work habits to work with this style of management.

 

My friends in a similar situation as yours have done all 4 of these things. #1 doesn't seem to work well (i.e. it doesn't change anything) but it's usually a good first step. After all, the PI has the prerogative to manage his/her lab the way they want.

 

#2 works the best for the specific professor I'm thinking of. This professor wants their students to work a certain way and so they apply pressure to do so. Sometimes it works and the professor gets what they want (i.e. case #4). But other times, the students make it clear that they don't want to change and if the student is stubborn and firm, the professor relents and basically stops asking for the morning report since it provides no new information (i.e. case #2). Finally, a few students end up just working for someone else (case #3) if they don't want this type of conflict in their life.

I think step 1 should be taken as discreetly and indirectly (enough to hint the problem) as possible to avoid conflict.

[TakeruK]

I think step 1 should be taken as discreetly and indirectly (enough to hint the problem) as possible to avoid conflict.

 

I agree that the way you implement any of the above solutions totally depends on the nature of each professor. Some professors are very direct and want their students to speak plainly to them. Some professors would take a lot of offense at a direct statement. "Tactic 1" above does not even have to be the first thing you try; although for some people, it might be a good idea to start with Tactic 1 and then if it doesn't work, move on to one of the other tactics, so that at least your supervisor knows why you are doing what you are doing. But if Tactic 1 will cause more trouble for you than it would help, then I'd skip it. 

[jujubea]

Open and direct communication is intuitively (to me) the most effective way to alleviate stress caused by differences/disagreements/incompatibility between two collaborating parties...

It seems like a shame that direct and open communication is so potentially "threatening" to enough people that we have to warn someone to not be open or direct in order to avoid conflict.

[TakeruK]

Open and direct communication is intuitively (to me) the most effective way to alleviate stress caused by differences/disagreements/incompatibility between two collaborating parties...

It seems like a shame that direct and open communication is so potentially "threatening" to enough people that we have to warn someone to not be open or direct in order to avoid conflict.

 

I totally agree! Unfortunately the reality is that sometimes direct and open communication can do more harm than good, especially when one party (i.e. the advisor) has so much control and influence on where we end up after our PhD.