From my own experience as a student, I understand the uncertainty and hesitation that can arise when interacting with supervisors. Many times, I wished there had been a clearer “user interface” that would have saved me the time and energy of guessing expectations and inferring preferences. With that in mind, I offer this brief guide, a “user interface” for how to work with me most effectively.
I have, in a sense, two modes: one for work and one for life. In daily life, I am fairly relaxed, enjoy humor, and have a high tolerance for playful teasing. At work, however, I may appear stricter, especially when asking questions or challenging an idea. Please remember that this is never personal. My intention is to push the project, the problem, and our thinking toward better outcomes.
I am most comfortable with a peer-to-peer style of interaction. You do not need to call me “professor,” “teacher,” or “supervisor.” Simply calling me by my name is perfectly fine. Friendly teasing is also welcome, as long as it stays respectful.
I do not expect you to work excessively hard for its own sake. But I do want to emphasize one thing: you are not working for me; you are working for yourself. The effort you invest will become skills, knowledge, judgment, and achievements that stay with you for life.
I also care deeply about professional communication. Clear, timely, and responsible communication is an essential part of research, collaboration, and long-term career development.
In the past, doing a PhD was often like an apprenticeship, where students relied heavily on supervisors to pass down knowledge. Today, much of the necessary knowledge is publicly available online. Because of this, I believe the PhD–supervisor relationship has changed.
We will work together to identify research directions, refine questions, and discuss methodology. However, I expect you to be able to work through many technical details independently. At the same time, if you are stuck for too long, please do not hesitate to bring the problem to me. Struggling is part of research, but struggling in isolation for too long is usually inefficient.
Like any human being, I make mistakes and can misjudge things. I welcome disagreement, and I see it as an opportunity for valuable discussion, better ideas, and sometimes even new research directions.
That said, I expect disagreements to be supported by reasoning and evidence. I am not easily persuaded by vague or purely subjective statements such as “I think” or “I believe” without further explanation. A strong argument should make clear why you think something is true, what evidence supports it, and what assumptions may be involved.
Please feel free to use whatever methods or tools you find most effective for your own working style. This includes AI tools, coding assistants, note-taking systems, reference managers, or any other resources that help you think, learn, write, and work better. The important thing is not which tool you use, but whether it helps you produce reliable, thoughtful, and high-quality work.