Supervision agreements as an opportunityHow to avoid conflict in the relationship with your supervisorGuest article by Constanze Struck, Karoline Thorbecke and Lea Dohrmann from the Doctoral Council of the Hamburg Research Academy

To begin with, some general information: the supervision agreement is an established part of the German higher education system. The document is an essential component of good scientific practice and is important for you as a doctoral researcher and thus as an early career researcher. But what exactly is a supervision agreement? Essentially, it is a document that is signed by both parties and contains important information about the timeline and content of the doctoral project. This should provide clarity, certainty and guidance for both sides. A supervision agreement therefore helps to strengthen mutual trust. And that's a good thing, because your doctorate is largely determined by the relationship of trust between you and your supervisor. In order to achieve a high degree of transparency with regard to the scientific collaboration, the agreement should therefore set out all the arrangements and provisions for the doctoral project. It makes sense to define these at the very beginning of the doctoral project. However, as a doctoral project can develop and change, it is recommended to update the supervision agreement from time to time.

Supervision agreements take different forms depending on the institution and discipline, but a core element remains: They list your tasks and duties as well as those of your supervisor. For you as a doctoral researcher, these are primarily the regular reporting requirements (proof of progress, completed training, etc.) and the continuous presentation of new results. On the other hand, you are entitled to regular academic advice from your supervisor. The main task here is to ensure the quality of your doctoral thesis by providing feedback and monitoring your progress. In addition, your supervisor has a mentoring role and is there to introduce you to the scientific community.

When drawing up the supervision agreement, it is particularly important to define and specify the regular and long-term supervision meetings: What do you and your supervisor expect from them? A transparent clarification serves to lay the foundation for cooperation.

It is also important to note that the supervision agreement takes into account not only the different professional traditions, but also your individual situation (e.g. family and professional commitments). An early agreement on the regulations for the supervision relationship will help you and your supervisor to identify possible conflicts at an early stage and to take preventive measures. In addition, the agreement can also be the starting point for an individual design of your supervision relationship. Supervisors can actively plan and design their collaboration with doctoral researchers beyond the scope of these regulations.

Normally, the supervision agreement does not contain anything that is not already included in the legal regulations. For example, your department’s doctoral regulations already set out what you have to do to be awarded a doctorate. Your supervisor is obliged to supervise you well, for example, by the Higher Education Act, civil service law and/or the university's regulations for good scientific practice. The main purpose of the supervision agreement is to provide a clear and concise overview of all the mutual rights and obligations that are currently spread across various laws, regulations, etc. This raises awareness. Discussing the agreement, making individual adjustments and providing a signature helps you and your supervisor to become aware of your own responsibilities and supports you in finding a structured start to your doctoral project together. An important basis for this is to know the doctoral degree regulations. If you notice descriptions and obligations in the supervision agreement that you find surprising, confusing or unusual, address this. In addition to the supervisor, the doctoral office, the university's legal department or the AStA legal advice service can also help you. You can find a link to an example of a supervision agreement here.

If you or your supervisor fail to uphold the essential terms of the supervision agreement, this is simultaneously (see above) a breach of, for example, the doctoral degree regulations, the Higher Education Act or the university's regulations for good scientific practice. The consequences of such a violation are also stated in these regulations. In order to ensure that rights and obligations are upheld and protected, there are also severe sanctions in the event of serious legal violations. If you are a doctoral researcher, your main risk is that your doctorate will end without you being awarded the doctoral degree. If you are also employed by the university, your employment could be terminated. Supervisors could be stripped of their authority to supervise doctoral researchers or even face dismissal. But don't worry: in reality, such drastic measures are extremely rare. In general, it is always advisable to seek dialogue first. If, in individual cases, you find it too difficult to discuss the problem with your supervisor, or if you are unable to reach a constructive solution through bilateral discussions, there are various sources of conflict mediation. These include the university's ombudspersons for the protection of good scientific practice. They offer confidential advice. The same applies to the staff council or the university's legal department, the GEW, and the legal counsel of the AStA. Often, the staff of the doctoral office or the graduate centers are also trained and experienced and can give you very good advice. You can also contact the ombudsperson of the DFG. All of these resources can also provide you with supportive information if you feel it is important to hire a lawyer as well.

The supervisory relationship may be terminated and the supervision agreement rescinded if there are serious and persistent violations of duties or rights. However, there should first be communication about this and other solutions should be sought. It is also possible to terminate the supervisory relationship if you are unable to achieve the required level of academic performance over a sustained period of time. However, this requires that you have been well supervised, have received sufficient guidance and advice, and have still repeatedly failed to meet the standards set by the doctoral degree regulations. In some cases, doctoral researchers themselves may find that the doctoral project is overwhelming. If there is disagreement, you can ask a third, qualified person to evaluate your progress and your chances of success. But again, there is nothing to fear. Such a situation rarely arises in real life. If problems arise, there is still plenty of time to seek solutions through discussion and with the help of the contact points (see above). If you are making good research progress, but there is no longer a solid relationship of trust between you and your advisor for other reasons (e.g., the advisor has behaved inappropriately toward you or is not actively supervising you), the department or university has an obligation to assist you in changing your advisor. In the event of a conflict, such a change of supervisor is usually preferable to terminating the doctorate and (permanently) cancelling the supervision agreement. It offers a good opportunity to complete a doctoral project successfully in spite of everything. The universities themselves have an interest in this, which is why you can count on good support from the above-mentioned contact points (doctoral office, ombudspersons, etc.).

Ideally, a good supervision agreement will protect you from major conflicts in the supervisory relationship. However, if complications do arise, don't be afraid to get help early on. This can be done by seeking advice from the HRA or, in the case of scientific misconduct, from your university's ombuds office. Scientific misconduct includes, for example, exploitation of a dependency relationship by a supervisor in the form of unfair working conditions, or conflicts over authorship or data use. All concerns are treated in the strictest confidence by the ombudspersons, and it is also possible to seek advice anonymously by telephone. If you need advice or are in a conflict situation, do not hesitate to contact the ombuds office or ombudspersons. Ideally, before the conflict escalates. You also have the option of contacting the university's conflict counseling and prevention service in conflict situations.

Each university usually has an ombudsperson to deal with conflicts and scientific misconduct. In addition, there is a general, independent office that can provide support and advice to all researchers.

For specific concerns, we have listed the contact persons at the HRA member universities:

• Hochschule für Angewandte Wissenschaften Hamburg (HAW)
• University of Hamburg (UHH)
• Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE)
• Technische Universität Hamburg (TUHH)
• Helmut Schmidt University (HSU)
• Hochschule für Musik und Theater Hamburg (HfMT)
• Hochschule für bildende Künste Hamburg (HfbK)
• Bucerius Law School (BLS)
• HafenCity Universität Hamburg (HCU)
• Kühne Logistik

To give you a deeper insight into how to prevent conflicts during your doctorate, we interviewed Helga Nolte in March 2024. She is the head of the ombuds office at the University of Hamburg and works as a mediator, systemic coach and consultant on good scientific practice. In the interview, she explains common concerns of doctoral researchers and gives tips for drafting supervision agreements.

Doctoral Council: How long have you been working in the ombuds office and what concerns do doctoral researchers come to you with?

Helga Nolte: The ombuds office at the University of Hamburg was established in October 2013 with the aim of supporting the ombudspersons in their work, both administratively and in terms of content. I have been working there ever since. Doctoral researchers often turn to the ombuds office with the following questions or concerns:

• Who really owns my results/data etc.?
• Is my supervisor allowed to pass on my results to others without my knowledge or consent?
• Am I allowed to take copies of my results with me when I leave the institution?
• What rules apply when working with other working groups?
• Who decides on authorship?
• How is authorship defined?
• Can I use the results of my master's thesis again in my dissertation?
• Am I allowed to submit my work without the consent of my supervisor?
• How can I change supervisors?

From the doctoral researchers' point of view, a fundamental problem is the dependence on supervisors, which is often perceived as stressful and/or restrictive. This leads to a lack of willingness to seek clarification from an ombudsperson, despite serious descriptions of questionable research practices or misconduct, for fear of personal disadvantage. Inadequate or sometimes even non-existent communication is also frequently mentioned, so that knowledge gaps can lead to errors and misunderstandings. In addition, concrete cases of abuse of power are described, which, of course, have an impact on the mental health of those affected, but also on their work performance and the successful completion of their doctoral project.

Doctoral Council: How do you assess the current situation at the University of Hamburg with regard to supervision agreements?

Helga Nolte: These days, signing a supervision agreement is one of the formal requirements for enrolling in a doctoral program. However, in most cases, this is merely a formality, and the contents of the supervision agreement often no longer play a role in the course of the doctoral project.

Doctoral Council: What potential do you see in supervision agreements?

Helga Nolte: A supervision agreement can be an instrument that provides orientation throughout the doctoral process. For this purpose, mutual expectations should be discussed and examined in advance. The results can be included in the supervision agreement and reviewed regularly to see if changes or additions are necessary. In this way, conflicts can be avoided or at least prevented from escalating.

Doctoral Council: Can you give examples of where a supervision agreement could have prevented conflicts?

Helga Nolte: Clarifying mutual expectations and demands can generally help to avoid conflicts. This applies, for example, to the regularity of feedback meetings, to active participation in conferences and congresses, but also to appropriate control regulations, deadlines for the review and examination of dissertations, publications, career development, etc. In the MIN faculty, there is an “individual development plan (IDP)”, which, in my opinion, is a good example.

Doctoral Council: What (higher education policy) changes do you consider necessary to increase the effectiveness of supervision agreements?

Helga Nolte: It seems to me that the most important thing is to raise the awareness of those involved that conflicts can be avoided or minimized through preventive measures - such as supervision agreements or IDPs (individual development plans). In addition, it should be ensured that the supervisory function is not performed by one person alone. Doctoral committees or reviews by external experts could be helpful. The responsibility of the faculties (doctoral office, doctoral committee and dean's office) must be made clearer, especially in cases of conflict - it is not acceptable (and not covered by freedom of research) that, for example, an excessively long period of time that a professor needs to review a dissertation (e.g. 9-12 months) is tolerated by the doctoral office and the committee of a faculty, even though it is clear that the doctoral candidate suffers considerable disadvantages as a result.

Doctoral Council: What three specific pieces of advice can you give doctoral researchers to prevent conflict in the supervisory relationship?

Helga Nolte: As a general rule, it should be assumed that the doctoral researcher is familiar with the doctoral degree regulations and the supplementary provisions. They should also know the regulations for good scientific practice.

My three tips are

• Have a detailed discussion at the beginning of the doctoral phase to clarify requirements and expectations. Doctoral researchers should always keep the supervisor's perspective and situation in mind and realize that not all wishes can be fulfilled.
• Address any uncertainties directly; address incipient conflicts and do not wait until they have escalated to the point where objective communication is no longer possible. It is highly recommended that verbal agreements are put into writing and that notes are taken during discussions, not least to support your own memory. In serious cases of conflict, such records can be important for developing solutions or, in the admittedly most unpleasant case, for clarifying the facts by a third party, such as an ombudsperson.   
• Clarify who you can turn to in the event of a conflict, i.e., familiarize yourself early on with the institution's counseling and support services. First of all, there are ombudspersons or ombuds offices, but also conflict resolution offices, doctoral offices, psychological counseling centers, anti-discrimination offices, etc. can be important in the event of a conflict. It is very helpful to know about these services before you need them.

A supervision agreement can only support you if it is tailored to your individual needs. Before your first meeting with your supervisor, think about what is really important to you and what will help you in your work. How often do you need feedback on your progress? How should the meetings be structured? What do you expect from your supervisor in terms of career development, and how can you meet their needs without limiting yourself too much? Think about the following issues in advance and include them in your supervision agreement:

• Roles and responsibilities (doctoral researchers and supervisors)
• Frequency and organization of meetings
• Resources (equipment), funding (e.g. travel expenses for conferences)
• How to deal with conflicts
• Career development and integration into the scientific community
• Balancing work and family life

You should take enough time to define your mutual expectations and wishes in the discussion about the supervision agreement. By talking about what is needed for good collaboration, conflicts can be prevented in most cases.

We have put together some ideas and possible content for a supervision agreement to help you get started with your own reflections. This can be used as a starting point. However, please always refer to the doctoral regulations of your faculty and discuss the agreement with your supervisor.

The HRA provides a list of current doctoral degree regulations of its member institutions.