Hi, I'm having a few difficulties communicating openly with my supervisor about my ideas. This is happening I believe, as a consequence of a couple of things I have experienced in our supervision sessions.

1. His initial request that we meet every other day to discuss any findings I have (which subsequently was changed to every week after I told him that I needed more time).
2. His abruptness and speed in pointing out my 'wrongs' during any supervision sessions and in emails - which means that I often appear passive & impaired in communicating my points (as I fear of being shot down very early on).
3. His claim that some of his students are 'stupid'.
4. His very hands on approach to directing my research which then suddenly switches to a request of full blown independence.
5. His constant editing of my work very very early on which means that I often wonder if I am doing the PhD or if he is.
6. His suggestion that I change my thesis topic and asking me to quickly make up my mind over whether I want to do this.

Does anyone have any advice on how to handle such a situation? It's really worrying me and I don't know how to change the dynamic of our communication. I mean if I am more assertive surely I am likely to make more mistakes (which of course is very important in the learning process). Although he has prompted me to take on more of an active role, the fact he calls some of his students stupid means that I am very anxious (I have imposter syndrome enough!). Help anyone?

Oh you poor thing... you have a micromanager.

Some people, and it sounds like your supervisor may be one of them, just don't like delegating. They micromanage, suddenly discover they have no time, then turn around and blame you for not being independent enough. I has one of these when I was an undergrad being supervised on placement by a PhD student. Unfortunately you will probably never have a healthy working relationship with someone like this but here are some tips for damage control:

1/ Never, ever lock horns with them in public. If you disagree with something they are saying bring it up later, in private and don't mention that they said the opposite thing earlier- present it as a new idea.

2/ Don't let any meeting or discussion of your work pass without flying an idea or two of your own past them. Even if it is a bad idea it is a way of taking some ownership of your work.

3/ Unless there is something you specifically want from them do not initiate unnecessary conversations.

4/ Wherever you can get away with it (like using reagents they aren't too precious about etc) do experiments first and discuss them later. If it doesn't work what they don't know can't hurt them. If it does you've dodged the risk of their refusal.

Hey Googooboo,

I'm sorry you're having such a tough time with your sup. It seems to me that your sup is very anxious himself and perhaps a bit of a perfectionist? I'm not sure how your relationship with him is but I wonder if you could have an open chat about these difficulties? I wonder if your sup is aware of his behaviour and how impacts on you, that's all. If I were you AND I knew they'd be open to constructive feedback, I'd have an honest conversation but you'd know best if you're able to do this...

Good luck!

======= Date Modified 27 Sep 2011 11:36:24 =======
Hi Googooboo,

You are not alone. Just look around at this forum and you will find numerous issues people have with supervisors so I would say first off that this is not your fault.

For anybody else reading, if you have a good supervisor then you will have no idea what I'm going to talk about now!!

I have my own views on this matter (and how the structure of the PhD inhibits knowledge and is used a means of control) but the first thing to realise is that supervisors (yours by the sound of it) like to be in charge. They like to turn the discussion around to an area they feel comfortable with and a subject they know more about than you. Criticising you (unfairly) is a means by which they can assert control and put you in your place. It is an abuse of power.

No matter how brilliant or good your work is, just because of the dynamic involved in a student-academic relationship, the academic will always find fault in something you have done or not done.

His calling other students stupid is another indication that this guy is a bully and is attempting to assert control. Perhaps other people are stupid (I don't know!) but that is of no concern of yours and he certainly shouldn't be telling you that. In any other organisation apart from the cushioned bubble of unaccountable academia that kind of behaviour would be intolerable.

Negative supervision can be regarded (in my opinion) as a form of sociopathic behaviour involving elements of manipulation, constantly keeping you off balance (lack of communication or too much communication, last minute meetings or else no meetings, reading your work or not reading your work etc. etc), the creation of a dependant relationship from which you can only derive validation from your supervisor, isolation and the constant belittlement of your abilities in order to maintain the power balance in favour of the supervisor.

In other circumstances this behaviour is called intimidation, bullying and abuse of power.

In academia, it is known as supervision.