Can two heads guide a PhD better than one? UK study explores team supervision

Universities may need to move beyond the traditional one-to-one PhD supervision model as doctoral students face increasingly complex academic and career needs, a UK research project has found.

The findings suggest that team-based supervision can provide doctoral candidates with a broader range of expertise, access to additional resources and more than one point of contact when they encounter difficulties.

The Research SuperVision Project, funded by Research England, has examined alternatives to individual supervision amid concerns that relying on a single academic can leave students vulnerable to inconsistent support and potential abuses of power.

Karen Clegg, co-director of the project and reader in doctoral education and practice at the University of York, said the traditional apprenticeship model of doctoral study had changed.

PhD candidates were no longer pursuing academic careers alone; they were also expected to develop transferable skills and gain experience relevant to a wider range of careers.
Team supervision gains ground

The UK Research Supervision Survey 2024 found that 76% of its 5,174 respondents had participated in team research supervision, compared with 71% in 2021. Among respondents, 70% said team supervision provided a better experience for doctoral candidates, up from 60% in the earlier survey.

The project found that team supervision was viewed positively by both academic and industry supervisors, as well as students. Having multiple supervisors can allow candidates to draw on different areas of expertise, particularly when their research crosses disciplinary boundaries.

Clegg said the demands placed on PhD supervisors had expanded to include specialist subject knowledge, artificial intelligence, research ethics, transferable skills and career guidance. She argued that it was increasingly difficult for one or two academics to provide all the support a doctoral candidate might need.

Conflicting feedback remains a challenge

The project also identified problems with team-based supervision. Students can receive contradictory advice from different supervisors, making it difficult to decide how to proceed with their research. Some supervisors also feel that the time and work involved in supervising doctoral candidates are not adequately recognised.

One student who took part in the research said conflicting feedback from members of their supervisory team had made academic progress difficult and required them to repeat work or make substantial changes.

Clegg said these difficulties could be addressed through better planning, communication and clearly defined responsibilities. She stressed that supervisory teams needed regular opportunities to review their arrangements and discuss how they worked together.

Industry experts could join supervisory teams

The project also recommends considering industry professionals as members of PhD supervisory teams. Their involvement could help students understand how research findings are applied outside universities and develop skills relevant to employment beyond academia.

However, bringing academic and industry supervisors together can create differences in expectations about their respective roles. Industry supervisors may want to contribute fully to research direction, while academic supervisors and students may have different understandings of their responsibilities.

The project therefore highlights the need for universities to establish clear roles and expectations before supervisory arrangements begin.

Clegg also pointed to staff reductions across parts of the UK higher education sector as a reason to consider team supervision. When a PhD candidate relies on a single supervisor, that person's departure can leave the student without their main source of academic guidance. A team-based arrangement can distribute that responsibility.

The findings suggest that team supervision is not without complications, but that universities may need to reconsider how doctoral candidates are supported as the expectations of PhD study continue to change.