Trine Fossland
Professor II NMBU, Department of Educational Sciences, Full Professor at UiT The Arctic University of Norway
Universities must formally recognize PhD supervision as a professional practice and invest in structured, research-informed development for supervisors, argues Trine Fossland, Professor of higher education at UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Centre for Teaching, Learning and Technology.
What if we stopped treating supervision as an inherited craft and started recognizing it as a professional practice requiring formal development? In most research-intensive institutions, excellence in supervision is assumed to follow naturally from research success. But as any experienced supervisor knows—and as many early-career academics discover too late—research excellence does not automatically translate into supervisory competence.
We often discuss the “modern doctorate” but rarely interrogate the outdated scaffolding it still rests upon. Chief among these is the persistent myth that good researchers automatically make good supervisors.
The reality? Supervising a PhD today is one of the most complex pedagogical, managerial, and ethical tasks in academia. Yet, supervision remains an inherited craft in many institutions—passed down through unspoken norms, personal anecdotes, and trial-and-error rather than critical reflection or formal professional development. The result? Too many doctoral candidates navigate high-stakes research with supervisors who have never been adequately prepared for the role or responsibilities. Worse still, institutional mechanisms to address supervisory quality are often undermined by power dynamics and selection processes driven by prestige or funding, even when supervisors have a history of complaints.
Today’s PhD students are more diverse, international, and exposed to precarious futures than ever before. They bring with them not only high ambitions but also heightened expectations of supervision, inclusion, career guidance, and psychological safety. Yet, many universities fail to offer professional development programs that require supervisors to engage in scholarly reflection and continuous improvement of their practice.
Supervision now demands competencies far beyond domain expertise. Supervisors must navigate diverse approaches to supervision to tailor their practice to the candidate’s diverse needs. Supervisors must develop key skills like managing projects, creating inclusive research environments, supporting students’ independence, and building trustful, professional relationships. Skills like giving feedback, fostering motivation, and encouraging critical thinking are no longer optional but essential. On top of this, they meet technological challenges and need to build awareness about power relations, mental health, interdisciplinarity, general competences, and an evolving career landscape, both within and beyond academia, to mention a few things included in their roles and responsibilities.
Why is the professional development of supervisors significant? Supervision is high-stakes work, and when it fails, the costs—personal, financial, and institutional—are often huge, and usually borne by the most vulnerable: doctoral candidates. The fallout is not abstract: stalled projects, broken relationships, health issues, attrition, and long-term damage to research integrity.
The solution is not to bureaucratize supervision but to professionalize it. Professional development of supervisors doesn’t mean that they should follow up on all academic or personal issues all the time, but rather that they should build professionality that includes awareness and a repertoire that makes it possible to work efficiently and tailor their supervision and use of time.
What does it take? Building structured, research-informed training that treats supervision as a practice requiring continuous development is not a one-time rite of passage or “one size fits all” session or two. It is a matter of institutional responsibility and development1.
If we care about the future of doctoral education, we must invest in supervisory development. Professional supervisors are not “naturally born” but intentionally cultivated. Institutions must build supervisory teams that complement one another and prioritize the professional growth of those shaping the next generation of researchers. Excellence in research may open the door to supervision, but excellence in supervision requires something more: a commitment to learning, reflection, and shared responsibility.
