Hi there,

Just wanted to write for the first time on here. I have just had 11 months of hell with my supervisors and it all blew up this last few weeks. I am presently waiting for new ones but I don't know what to expect or if indeed I will ever be able to repair the damage that has been done to my confidence or my research. Right now I am so confused I don't know whether I am coming or going with it.

I was allocated three supervisors and forced to go to group supervisions all the time where they were all supposed to be equal even though one was supposed to be my main supervisor - he said it was just a term. I was then left to figure it out what was expected of me. I kept bringing stuff I had done, to be hung drawn and quartered each time by one supervisor while the others just sat in silence. Everything I did was met with negativity or neutrality. I am a mature student in my mid thirties and I was a senior manager in business before and at every meeting I have been told that I am not a manager - practically drilled into my head by one supervisor who recently told me that all managers in my profession were ******. I would be spending 3 weeks preparing for the next meeting - for the battle each time. Afterwards whatever I brought I could have just binned there and then. After each meeting I would go into a depression for weeks unable to do any work. I told them that I wanted to change but I was told that I had to put up with it. Now 11 mths later I finally reached the end of the line. The dept are trying to find me replacement supervisors (2 this time not three) and one as a lead instead of equals. I am having to pick up the pieces and to realise that all these months that I have absolutely nothing to show for their supervision except bad nerves and a heap of bad memories. There was nothing constructive. I also have a pile of work that was neither here nor there. Not having done a phd before I wasn't sure if what I was experiencing was normal. My experience has really put me off big time and I am considering my new supervisors to be a trial.

I'm really sorry to read about your experiences. I can only say that I relate to the group supervision aspect. I've two supervisors and they give me joint supervision and copy each other into EVERY email. On a positive note this means there's no conflict between my supervisors as they sing from the same hymn sheet but I'm beginning to realise they'll back each other up on everything should there ever be any difficulties and this is causing me some concern.

In relation to the other aspects of your post, it reminds me of my previous employers. I feel I was constantly undermined, still feel as though I was bullied and it has wrecked my nerves and years later I still dwell on what happened very regularly. I do feel for you and would say try not to let this eat you up (but from experience I can say this is easier said than done). Try to view this new supervision as a fresh start, think about all the positive things you've achieved in life, whether they be related and unrelated to the PhD. What I would say is I would never ever let myself be treated in such an ill mannered way again as NOTHING is worth it. See this as a fresh chance, do what you can from your end to make it work, give your new supervisors a fair chance and review things a bit further down the line.

I hope all goes well.

The main thing is that you have changed the situation and are moving forward without the supervisors from hell. I can relate in part to what you have been through in that my main supervisor was on sabbatical for the first year of my Phd and my replacement was useless. Although at the time I didn't realise because, as you point out, having never done a PhD before how are we to know sometimes how things are done. My panels have also been really negative and I, like you, just went into a depression after each one. The latest was really bad as my main supervisor returned in my second year and has been fantastic but every positive thing she had said about my work was met with negativity by the other panel members. I was really thinking about giving up but I was guided by her and now one of the negative members (who was actually my first year supervisor) is being replaced. I'm already into my third year but I think this will make a big difference. I also felt that most of my first year and some of the second year was a total waste of time, doing things for the panel which I didn't want to, which took up loads of time, and then were criticised. It was only about half way through my second year that I worked out what I want to do and have been doing it with the encouragement of my supervisor.
You have the advantage of going into your second year now hopefully with much better supervision and you can move forward. You may think that everything you have done so far is not of any use but I think you will find that even if you have worked out what you don't need and don't want to do, that is still part of doing a PhD. And I'm sure there will be parts of what you have done which you can expand on, so don't see the 11 months so far as being a waste of time.
You have been unlucky with your supervisors but you are now lucky that you can have a fresh start and think on it positively with the view that these new people are going to be the right ones to help and encourage you to get that PhD. Good luck.

Several thoughts spring to mind. First - it is pretty normal for the first year not to really produce anything usable. Even if you think it has, a year down the line you tend to look at what you wrote and cringe. That at least is what I and most of my friends found. So the pile of work you have, is not that unusual.

Second - you're not sure if you really want to continue. There's a book by Philips and Pugh called something like 'how to get a Phd' and there's a chapter in it that looks at how people get and don't get PhDs. You've probably already read it but it might be worth rereading as there were a few case studies about people in the business studies field, who found that they could achieve what they wanted better outside the framework of a PhD than within it. It might be worth thinking dispassionately about what you want out of this and whether the PhD is the best way to get there. If you really are not enjoying it and it is making you so depressed, is it worth it? Unfortunately, being an academic means basically spending most of your life being told your best isn't good enough (rejections from journal submissions and grant proposals, teaching evaluations, people tearing your conference papers to shreds and ever-rising demands from university managers) - I think unless you really enjoy what you're doing, the constant barrage of criticism is not worth it.

Third - however I phrase this, it's probably going to irritate you but here goes. How much of this do you think is down to you having a painful adjustment from being a successful professional (presumably if you were senior then that means you were used to having pretty favourable appraisals) to being a student again? I think it's hard enough going as I did from always being one of the best BA/MA students, to being told my work wasn't good enough and needed complete redrafting at PhD level. It takes a while to get used to the level they expect. But I think it would be much harder in your situation - particularly if your PhD is related to your old job, when it would be hard to have work on something you think you're expert on being criticised. A friend had a similar nightmare 1st year and he said it was only when he realised that they were critiquing his written work and his understandings of key literature, not his professional competence in his former job, that he was able to take it less personally. His ended up a great thesis and he now is friends with the supervisor he hated, and says the criticism actually had to be done otherwise he wouldn't have passed.

You don't say if you are part of full time, which makes a bit of a difference, as if you are part time you have longer to get things right, but all is not lost. As has been said the first year can have a large settling in aspect, and may not be as productive as you might have wished/ expected, but nothing is wasted, every bit of work you have done will have helped if only indirectly, and the day you read something and they are talking about the work of someone you have already read... then you know all the background stuff is worthwhile. I had a change of supervisors which has been a positive thing, one new person, one sidestep, one more or less out of the picture (phew to that bit). If you are in a bit of limbo at the moment, it might be worthwhile looking through the stuff you have done,look at what you were asked to do, and see if YOU think it fitted the bill, then decide where you think it fits into your work, get yourself some more files, file all the stuff away, get some kind of index system going so you know what you have stashed away and then write a short piece explaining what you have done, where it fits and where you think you need to go next, then, when you get your new team, you can e-mail this info to them so that they will be up to speed. your next year will probably be much more productive.

Take it easy. I have been there and I know how it felt like. Frankly, I was not bothered with any of their remarks because I know well where I stand, however, what you went through is just a part and parcel of researcher’s life. It makes you better. Easier said than to practice and believe it, I know. Imagine researching as a half full glass of …. If the supervisor sees the half full part, he/she will give you good comments. If he/she ends up only staring at half empty portion of the glass, then hard luck mate, lousy comments you shall get. “It all lies in the perspective of the viewer’’. Don’t worry it’s just a phase of researching that you are passing thru. It won’t lasts forever. Be humble and have a lot of patient and spend more time reading ‘good’ articles in your domain. Hopefully and I am sure you will be better off start with new lot of supervisors. Happy researching, Cheers.;-)