Hi all,

I need advice guys. I was allocated an external Supervisor (A) who is not an academic- by this I mean not teaching or supervising students anywhere. No strong publication record, less than 3 papers, and these were done over 7 years ago. Supervisor seems to have connections in the department. On our initial meeting I raised issues to do with my research that I wanted to achieve. Seeing I might struggle under such supervision, I raised this with department and was allocated a now very competent person (B) as part of the team.

Now having submitted my RP to both, A's approach is akward, having had 2-3 meetings already, focus tends to be on outline, references etc. But this is just a concept note which needs guidance on strategic direction?

From B's feedback, I feel my concept note has been fully read. Commented on key methodological issues, and offered more insights into other options etc. B is an accomplished Professor, widely published, understands methodology/how study should evolve etc.

Now A came first and am sure based on contract, wants assumes lead, which I think, wrong person on good research.

I have discussed with B the possibility of taking the lead, no obvious reservations of taking the lead. So I need advice, should I discuss this with A and share my concerns and let B lead.

If I remain quiet now it might ruin my work at critical phases of the work.

Please advice me beloved and best approach!

I think you'll be fine, just get both of their input and bend your PhD to the direction you want to go as much as possible.

It doesn't really matter who leads on paper in my opinion. I had a primary supervisor (prof), but secondary (senior lecturer) was way more involved in terms of overall direction and day to day stuff. This is very common in academia.

Let A be your lead on paper, and then do what B suggests. Unless A really cares about your research direction, this won't bother them. They will be getting the credit and not having to do the work.

In ideal situation, A will let B lead, so you could ask that, but don't be surprised if they say no.

TreeofLife, you are indeed treeoflife, I feel I had a lot of anger wanting to go and fight with A but after your WISE counsel/advice, I feel, I will keep acknowledging B's contribution in presentations/discussions as more inclined to the direction of the study and should any publications come up, B will be the obvious second co-author, should A remain adamant and want to feel good on formal paper. I will keep you posted!

Thank you again

Sounds good Pursue, best of luck with it!

TreeofLife and all, just to update you...managed to present my proposal today afternoon my time and apparently A, was very bad, spiting me and even lied about something that he said it exists when it doesn't exist. A senses am now more inclined to B in direction and thus still want control of the work. During the presentation, B stood for me through it all. B has gone the extra mile making personal arrangements with regards to next steps.

I am not sure if I should continue with A as the main or I formally ask for reshuffle....thinking about the future😥

If A is going to be a serious hindrance to your PhD, then action may need to be taken. Can you change your primary to B? Check with your Grad School. If given the ok, approach B to confirm then fill in d necessary form. I would also consider getting rid of A completely if this person will be doing continuous damage to you because he is upset with the change and insult. We are all human, and some people take things very personally.

If you are getting adequate support, then it hardly seems worth the effort!

The difference between a primary and secondary supervisor typically makes more difference to the supervisors (and university metrics), so if B isn't bothered, then no need to worry!

In terms of papers, the last author is usually the senior author so should be: you, A, B. If A wants to go last, just say that B is professor so usual practice to put them last.
(This may be discipline dependent!!)