I too get tempted to flirt with tangential topics linked to my research, however I plan to leave the "broad" stuff for my lit review as I am setting the scene for my research. Where your actual research is concerned, stick to the case study/studies you have chosen to explore leaving any correlations to other topics for your discussion and conclusion. It just takes a bit of discipline, and for sure have clearly defined deadlines as you go, because you can easily cannibalize other important sections of your PhD (time-wise) if you get carried away.

TreeofLife and incognito said it all. To expand, I would basically outline how my research contributes to the main subject and the problems its trying to address at the macro level...obviously big parts of your research would be beyond most undergrads, but would certainly feed their appetite for the subject in general.

I'd also have a look at the department profile and using that, discuss how your research adds to the intellectual / academic capacity of the department and perhaps provide opportunities to specialize in key areas of the subject not currently not taught in the department. (i.e. possibly attracting wider enrollment)

Just my 2c

LOL some of these stories are insane! Good grief. But like all 3+ year relationships, people will cheat, make the break up nasty and all other sorts of senseless drama.

@Moc, I certainly did not mean any offense however I do certainly see how it could be construed that way, across an internet post, without the benefit of knowing me personally. I do apologize.

1. I do believe as humans we know the difference between good and bad, no matter how much we try to complicate the subject with philosophical gymnastics. You know when you are hurting someone else. Thats my personal belief.

2. I start my PhD in a matter of weeks, so no bloated sense of self importance here i'm afraid. Of course life is complex. However there is parking attendant complex and active duty soldier complex. Not that one is more important that the other, but that one has more risk involved that the other. Empirically, you will have an easier time getting "the average job" than becoming a Russel Group university Professor. Thats statistics.

Remember you said and I quote "all I want is to be settled in life and be earning a decent living." What I took form that is "I would like to earn a decent living, in a timely manner, so I can get on with getting a house/family/ or whatever". I just told the truth. Research academia will not provide you with those things you listed as most important to you in that manner. Its not for everyone, and I am sorry you take offense to that.

Although I am just starting my PhD I feel inclined to encourage you to ignore your very human emotions of self doubt. In my experience success is fairly binary. Effort + Luck = Win. The more effort you put in, the less luck you need. While you have no control over luck, and when she will smile upon you, your have complete dominion over the effort you apply relative to your peers.

Apply enough effort and you will be seen, heard and read. Luck, well placed contacts, and good references are all bonuses, however they can only facilitate an opportunity. While you wait on your opportunity, I urge you to continue honing your skill and applying 120% effort, because that will be what makes the difference between whether or not you can convert an opportunity into a long and successful career.

Cheers and good luck.

P.S. Academia.edu has 371 articles on "Grid Computing." I usually browse summaries on that site as well to see whats "out there".

@Simon - I take your points, and it does sound like you have experienced some bad characters in your experiences. Now make no mistake, what I affectionately call a "Tier 1" professional is not a bully, the heads of dept, or even all senior profs.

Of course the field is plagued with "bads", but that is life. Its always the same. There are those who are successful through luck, charisma, political prowess or outright ruthless... but in the end, they never get the Nobel. Their work is their least celebrated trait. They know how to work the system and get their 80K GBP + a year and that's all.

These however are not the individuals I speak of. Those who really "get the job done" know who they are and need no further explanation from me. However, there is a lot of bellyaching on here, and at least 2-3 "I am not successful because of my supervisor from hell" threads a month.

THAT is the more dangerous kind of BS. The type of BS that allows you to think that all of your woes emanate from some malefic entity, whose life mission is to crush your research aspirations. The kind of BS that shelters you from the truth that you are the only person getting in your own way. Are there obstacles thrown at you? of course. But a lot of people need to stop crying, embrace the suck, and get off their asses and get going.

Ok, so in an effort to be somewhat more helpful, I usually tell people to consult the major industry reports in their field, if there is a large NGO or UN satellite org that oversees your field, all the better. These "annual reports" will usually have conclusions, and if you are lucky research gap sections which will point you to where they think more work in the field is needed.

Hypothetically...If I had a few amazing ideas on grid computing why should I share them with you? Why id save it for discussion within my own PhD....or at the very least earmark it for soon-to-be-written article...see my point? I know I sound like an ass but at this level of academia people are very guarded about good IP (intellectual property). Why? Because it could be career changing.

If you doubt you will continue to follow your interest in science, then you have answered your question. Just make sure what ever new direction you take it is out of interest primarily, not just monetary considerations. You will always find a way to make money from the thing you love if you are driven.

As for prior training I went from BA Theological Studies > M.Sc. International Trade Policy > PhD Environment & Politics. So you just need to have the hunger for the subject area and you will put out excellent work. It does not take long to "catch up" to a field if you are serious.

I nearly did not click on this thread, being that my area of interest in the Environment, HOWEVER I am glad that I did. I cannot contribute much other than to say your study sounds very interesting, and looking past your PhD there is a lot of interest semi-related to development with preserving these historical sites, particularly in developing countries (eg UNESCO world heritage sites).

I see you did not mention Barbados (I am from there) and we have one of the oldest Synagogues in the western hemisphere (built in 1654). Maybe its not on your list for a reason, but thought I would mention it none the less.

Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nidhe_Israel_Synagogue

I wish you all the best, and if nothing else your research sounds like one hell of a fun time to be had.

"all I want is to be settled in life and be earning a decent living." - Forget the PhD.

Despite the many souls who posses this degree, a true Doctor of Philosophy (in my little world) is not motivated by money, comfort or anything generally resembling "the average man's" life. His/Her work is greater than themselves and represents the sharp end of their field. They usually aspire to leave the world a better place. Self confidence bordering on the delusional is a prerequisite.

A true PhD candidate is like a British SAS soldier if you will. A "Teir 1" professional. They are generally HIGHLY motivated, the best at what they do, they ignore the plethora of risks involved, and never, ever.....ever need convincing to carry on with the mission.

If a simple, uncomplicated, relatively low risk, predictable life is what you are after, I beg you to forget that PhD.

Absolutely! However you have quite a bit of latitude within your field of interest, so why not be innovative about it. In 2014 can you really say that research topic selection is not a business decision? I argue that it is, and must be weighed accordingly.

More importantly don't stagnate, and keep prosecuting the fight for a better more fulfilling career. Always.

I think that the elephant in the room is that people choose research areas that are very hard to attract interest. Especially in social sciences, some of the topics I have seen are so abstract they resemble self gratification on the part of the candidate. No one says it, but I will. Sometimes people just pic a garbage topic to research.

You still have to eat to live, which costs money. If you are going to spend 3 years branding yourself, at least make some areas of your research "sexy" enough to garner the interest of industry as you will need to make money from it. I call this situaitonal awareness. Understanding patterns and the reality of the market where you live and more importantly globally.

Dont try to sell winter coats in the Bahamas.