Long time lurker, first time poster.

As a preface, I am doing a manuscript based Ph.D, not a thesis.

Thus far, my Ph.D experience has been a pleasant one. While there has been a significant issue with regards to a lack of communication between my supervisor and I (it takes him weeks to respond to my emails), thus far, it has not impeded my progress - I made it through comps unscathed and am in the last leg of finalizing my dissertation.

I gave my supervisor three of my papers that I was planning to submit to journals in my field, but did not receive any feedback from him for a couple of months. I decided to go ahead and submit them, as I know the review process takes a long time and I wanted feedback from experts in my field (oddly, my supervisor has little direct knowledge of my research area). For the purposes of transparency, I let him know what I had done, and he flipped out. He said that I should have waited for feedback from my committee, and that I should be prepared to make significant revisions based on their comments.

It was not my intention to circumvent input from the committee, but I was tired of waiting months for small decisions to be made. Fortunately, two of the papers have been accepted in impact factor journals, the third is still under review.

How should I proceed? While I don't want to anger my supervisor/committee, at the end of the day, the only requirement from grad studies is that my papers be published and be related conceptually.

Any input/advice would be much appreciated.

Hi caltech28,

well done for having the papers accepted!

I know how frustrating it can be waiting for feedback, thankfully my supervisor takes up to a month. It happened once that I submitted without my supervisors seeing the final draft. They were upset, as I didn't include a fairly important section in the methodology. However, the paper got accepted with minor revisions. In the second round I incorporated everybody's comments. I sent it to all authors saying that I have an imaginary deadline from the editor to speed things up.

As your supervisor has limited knowledge in your research area, maybe he feels really insecure about your papers. Hope that now that the papers are accepted this will cheer him up. Ask them for any comments now and incorporate with the reviewers comments.

Good luck with the PhD.

1: Hello :)

2: The fact that your supervisor said that you should be prepared for significant revisions tells me he has accepted what has happened and is on the road to getting over it.

3: Sometimes a tactful yet firm and honest exchange is necessary. It usually wakes people up from their lack of efficiency when you hold them accountable. I know it may be hard especially for younger candidates to cross the student / teacher threshold, however supervisors need to be reminded they are dealing with adults and their livelihoods.

I would honestly break it down for him, explain to him why you submitted, and for future reference, exactly how many months should you wait for a reply before going it on your own. Well not that cheekily, but you get my point.

4: If all else fails, pat him gently on the shoulder and recite with a smile: "The best part about all of this is that you will get over it."

Your supervisor may not be simply "very unhappy".
First, he should feel confident that you are on the right track.
Second, he should be happy that two papers are published.
Third, his name is included as co-author. (Some students even published papers without including the supervisor; it may be acceptable depending on the subject disciplines.)

The question is whether the paper is accepted with major or minor revision, and whether there is a deadline for the revision.
Meanwhile, you could explain that you need to graduate or work soon... just some personal reasons...

If I did this, my supervisors would go crazy. I can understand that reaction. It's their names on the papers too and therefore their reputations on the line.

Once again, it comes down to better communication. If the supervisors can't communicate properly, then the students should. There really should be no reason things should get so bad that this happens.

Just my opinion; I don't have any advice except that it wasn't the best strategy to take.

TreeofLife has a good point. You need to repair damages now...
Your supervisor may not write very positive of you in letter of recommendation etc.

Yes listen to those guys. I tend to be an A hole :P

BTW, in North American culture, an unanswered email after just 1 week tends to be perceived as discourteous, especially in a professional setting (which I consider a PhD candidature to be). It appears I may have to readjust my expectations of UK supervisors before I start in a few weeks.

I think this depends on the person. I haven't noticed a difference between UK and US email response times. I normally get responses from either country in 1 - 2 days. If they don't reply and I need a response, I send another email or go to their office.

It's the same here - you get some people who are faster at replying than others. My primary supervisor responds 99% of the time the same day I sent the email.

Re. the original post. I'm sorry caltech28, but your supervisor has every right to be angry. Yes I agree he should have been quicker to reply, but his name will be on the article(s) so his reputation is at stake. Personally I wouldn't proceed with publications and wait for your supervisor to respond and then resubmit them. If someone submitted an article with my name on and I hadn't had chance to read and give feedback I would demand they take it down. Sorry.