Do you want your PhD now?

This is a small excerpt from my book about getting a PhD. You can find the full version here: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07T6JKZ9X/

Book Excerpt:

Preface

I wrote this book a few years ago with the intention of never publishing it…what changed?

When I first wrote this book, I had some experience with several universities scattered around the world, and I saw similar things happening to the PhD students in those Universities. But, I thought that these occurrences were isolated – at least, that is what I wanted to believe. Fast-forward a few more years, and I went from working on one side of the world to the other, seeing the exact same things happening – half a world away, same problems (and many locations in between).

So, here it is. I hope that it is useful to you:

Most importantly, do not tell anyone about this book. While you’ll reap the benefits of this book regardless of whether or not others know that you’ve read it, you’ll reap the greatest benefits if no-one knows that you know this kind of information, or that you are even thinking about the topics discussed in this book.

This book is about how to get you your PhD. It starts by giving a description of what a PhD is, what you need to do to obtain your PhD, and who is involved in your PhD. These facts are fairly well covered by most universities. However, this book goes further and reveals details that are not disclosed to PhD students. They are not disclosed for one simple reason; the university and the advisors don’t want you to know them, as this would reduce 1) their leverage over you, 2) the amount of work that you need to do in order to complete your PhD, and 3) the timeframe of getting your PhD. This book covers the political side of your PhD, which usually dominates your PhD.

The political side of your PhD is so important that, often it doesn’t really matter what research you’ve actually done during your PhD, but rather how you’ve played the “game”. The political side cannot exist without the human interactions during the PhD, and so this book will cover topics, for example, of whom you’re dealing with, manipulation tactics that you could face, how to fight back, and how to cope.

The reasons for employing political tactics are also discussed, and hopefully you will not succumb to derisively using the ideas presented, but rather, using them judiciously.

Everything that I present in this book is based on my own experiences, or the experiences of others. I hold a PhD from a reputable university.

The purpose of this book is to present information in a practical fashion. For some, it does not matter what I say, they will convince themselves that this book is inaccurate and pessimistic, but for others, this book will hold invaluable pieces of information. For some that are very lucky, everything that I write in this book will be needless, whereas for others, the information in this book will be the very thing that keeps them going. Regardless, if you ever find yourself in an unfavorable political situation during your PhD, remember this book, and read it.

While this book is tailored towards attaining a PhD, similar logic in assessing the situation and the tactics to employ are applicable to many other events.

Chapter 1

Introduction

So, you’re doing a Ph.D., what’s the situation? The situation consists of what you need to do, who is involved, and what benefits each person involved get.

While these topics may seem fairly straight forward, they are actually complex, and can entail many different answers. The first portion of this book covers these topics, while the second portion of this book covers what to do when things go wrong; how to recognize when your PhD isn’t going to plan, what to do if your PhD is falling off the rails, how to withstand the emotion toll and more…

If you are already in the situation where your PhD has gone off the rails, you’re being taken advantage of and you want a quick fix (as much as there can be one), then skip to chapters 3 and 4, which cover negotiation and manipulation tactics. Once you have read chapters 3 and 4, read the other chapters in time, to gain a more complete understanding.

The PhD

A PhD is essentially a deal among the parties involved, whereby you do something that someone else wants, and in exchange you get your PhD. As long as all parties openly express what they want prior to the deal being formed, and all parties agree to these terms, then the deal is fair. However, the deal becomes unfair when ulterior motives enter and people don’t hold up their end of the deal. Almost always, the party who suffers is the PhD student. We’ll get into the reason for this later.

The idea of a PhD is to train a person of a certain standard to the level whereby they can effectively investigate an area of interest. To do so, first the area of interest must be identified, which could be anything from investigating the effects of stress on memory, to investigating the effects of language on thought. It doesn’t really matter what the area of interest is, as long as the work will feasibly result in tangible benefits.

For example, understanding the effects of stress on memory might be important for a hospital, as a surgeon involved in a stressful procedure may be more prone to forgetting minor details, which could cause complications later on down the track. It doesn’t really matter what the tangible benefit is as long as it is desirable (usually the desire is in terms of money…by understanding this effect, this process could become this many dollar less expensive or you could make this much money, etc. – universities are effectively businesses, they operate on money, even seemingly irrelevant research can often generate income).

Once the area of interest, or “the question”, has been formulated, the next step is to determine a methodology that will answer this question. This process is key in the training as it builds critical thinking skills, and increases the student’s ability in understanding what the limitations of methodologies are and how to create appropriate methodologies. This also involves forethought and trains your abilities to predict potential problems that will arise, and to devise solutions to these problems before they occur. During the implementation of the methodology, there could be complications due to unforeseen issues, which provides further training in problem solving.

Once the results have been obtained, processing and assessment occur, whereby the PhD student (along with the advisors) determines if the results are sufficient for answering the original question of the PhD. If not, then repetition of the previously defined

methodology must be done, or a new methodology must be formulated and carried out.

Finally, the results are then presented in a concise and comprehendible manner; usually as a dissertation, journal papers, and possibly an oral examination.

The crux of the PhD is as simple as what I’ve just written, and in the perfect world, you wouldn’t need to bother reading the rest of this book. However, the remainder of this book covers what usually happens in this world, and why few PhDs are ever that straightforward. Take for example the process I’ve defined, it is very subjective, which can easily lead to problems.

For example, some questions that arise are:

-How “big” must the question be?

-How conclusive must the finding(s) be?

-If I find a negative result, is that still good enough?

The completion of your PhD hinges on these questions. Furthermore, the answers to these questions, and other questions relating to your PhD, are determined purely by your advisors, dissertation committee, and other people in the university. In other words, the answers to these questions are determined by people who aren’t you, and if one of those people say jump, then you will probably have to jump. This massive power difference gives rise to many of the issues that could occur during the PhD process, as you are more or less at the mercy of others.

What’s more, the longer than your PhD carries on, the more ruthless those with the fate of your PhD in their hands can be; at the start of your PhD, you have invested very little effort into the project, so while you may not want to quit, if an unreasonable request comes your way, you are able to do so with relatively little regret. On the other hand, imagine that after four years, having worked like a dog, scraped by on a pitiful wage in an effort to complete your PhD, and jumped through many hoops (not to mention the four years of your life that you’ve invested), and a seemingly ridiculous request comes along - you are far more likely to accept the request than if you were within your first year.

Furthermore, the people that hold the fate of your PhD in their hands, know this.

Another disadvantage that the PhD student faces is that the PhD, the thing that they are after, is discrete; either you have it or you don’t. So, doing everything required to get a PhD and not crossing the finish line amounts to nothing. There is no such thing as an “almost-PhD”. So, what does that mean in terms of the deal that you originally made? Well, the things that the other players in the deal get may be less discrete, such as research.

Throughout the PhD, you are conducting research, so a player that wants research is getting a return on the deal continuously and they have less to lose the longer your PhD continues. You on the other hand, have more to lose as the PhD continues, and not until you’ve completed your PhD do you get that for which you bartered.

So it is clear that, a PhD is more about whom you please than what research you actually do. To that end, it is a good idea to know with whom you’re dealing.

The Players

There are many people and entities that could be involved in your PhD, and each one has their own desires and motives for your project. By understand as many of these desires and motives as possible, you will then be able to develop a course of action that will meet those that are necessary for your PhD completion. It is not necessarily unfair that each player has their own objectives, because, as mentioned previously, the PhD is a deal. However, it does become unfair when these objectives are hidden, especially from the PhD student, who is typically the most naïve of the bunch, and hence most easily taken advantage.

The Student

The most obvious player in the PhD is the PhD student. This person is probably the most transparent in terms of what they are after; typically it is the PhD. Their role is to do most of the leg-work of the PhD; identifying areas of interest, formulating hypotheses, developing and carrying out the methodologies, and assessing the results.

In addition, some universities require students to do some level of teaching or assistance to the academics. These requirements are usually stated clearly and accessibly before signing on for the PhD, so whether this is fair or not is at the student’s discretion prior to agreement.

The Advisors

Role:

Another group of players is the advisors. Straight off the bat there is deception in their role. The word advisor means “a person who gives advice” (Webster Dictionary), so it stands to reason that, while this type of person is a valuable asset in shaping your PhD, your PhD is not contingent on their advice or opinion. In many universities, the advisor is defined as exactly that; an expert that gives advice. However, in order for you to complete your PhD, in almost every university, the advisors must sign the student off. So, let me ask you this; what do you think the odds are of your advisors signing your PhD off if you haven’t done what they think is the right course of action?

Immediately, it becomes clear that on the one hand they are defined as people giving advice, but on the other hand they essentially dictate your PhD through the rules in place (action versus words). In addition to the great power that advisors have over your PhD, they also have the fall-back of relinquishing responsibility; if something goes wrong, then the PhD student bears the responsibility, as it is ultimately the student’s choice if they take their advisors’ advice – the advisors are just there to give advice, right?

What’s more, this contradiction in the role of an advisor has been specified by the university, so that tells you something about the university as well; they’ve set this situation up and want it to be like that. I am not saying that every advisor will take advantage of this situation, but I am saying that not everyone is a saint.

In some countries advisors are called supervisors, which subjectively entails a little more responsibility. Nonetheless, the consequences can very easily be placed on the student if things go wrong. After all, students are dime-a-dozen to the university, but the advisors are usually more valuable. The discrepancy between the worth that a university places on advisors compared with students can be easily seen; the advisors usually advise multiple students, bring in grant-money, head research groups, consistently represent the university for media releases, get paid far more than any student, etc. So, when push comes to shove, the more expendable you are, the more likely you are to take the fall.

Benefits:

So, we’ve covered what the possible roles of an advisor are, but what do they want out of the PhD deal? There are many things that they could get, but what they really want depends on their motives, as will be discussed in the next chapter. Some general things include research, money, power, and seeing someone improve.

Research is very attractive to an advisor as it potentially makes them more reputable, which could fuel their desire for a greater reputation. It could also make them look more attractive to the university, which could help their chances of promotion, of getting a raise, or of increasing their job security.

Money is always a top goal, as it could make them feel more powerful, make them more reputable, give them greater peace-of-mind, etc. The money could come from grants or from the university. For example, if an advisor receives a grant for a project, perhaps 90% of it may be used for the actual funding, and the last 10% might be used for less tangible things, which while frowned upon, is not unheard of.

Power could make them feel good inside, allow them to make more money, or increase their reputation, etc.

So, many of the potential benefits derived from the PhD, for an advisor, are linked together, and one often entails the other. What’s more, they get someone to do their research for them. The advantages of having you around far exceed the disadvantages.

The University

Role:

The university refers to the university itself, but also to those who are indirectly related to your PhD, for example, the Dean, or your advisors’ bosses. The university is primarily there to provide the tools required for the completion of your PhD. This could include advisors, equipment, etc. The university also, usually, resolve disputes between anyone involved in the PhD – this last point is very important, remember this point.

Benefits:

At the end of the day, while a university may harp on about increasing the knowledge of humans, or furthering technology for the good of the people, etc., they are a business. They’re there to make money, and everything else is just a means to do so. For those who are sceptical of that thought, then among other tell-tale signs, I ask this; why do the top dogs in the university get paid so well? It doesn’t really matter what the answer is to that question, because if the people at the top are after money, then that is what the university is geared towards. I am not saying that getting paid handsomely is a bad thing (especially if you’re doing your job well), but you need to understand what people are after.

So, by understanding that the university is, at its core, after money, it is relatively simple to glean what benefits a PhD student entails. Grant money is a big benefit. In addition, the student’s research could increase the university’s reputation, which leads to more grants and student enrolment, which lead to more money, etc.

Advisors and The University

Advisors are usually representatives of the university through the responsibilities that the university places on them. For example, an advisor’s role may be to check the quality of the PhD student’s research so that a high level can be maintained, which reflects well on the university. If the advisor does not fulfil the responsibilities assigned by the university, then they could be fired. As such, the university is typically represented by the advisors. Students rarely interact with anyone higher up than their advisors (but you shouldn’t be scared to do so if necessary), so the remainder of this book is primarily focused on the advisor-student relationship, which implicitly covers the university as well.

How to Identify if You Are Being Taken Advantage of