The paper examines the dynamics and complex dimensions in doctoral supervision in different disciplinary contexts in higher education institutions (HEIs), given that institutional success and reputation depends on ‘research output,’ which creates visibility and competitive advantage. However, traditional doctoral supervision, which frequently results in research output, has remained contradictory and complex due to its multi-layered, challenging, and conflicting tasks. The authors contend that while doctoral supervision necessitates a high caliber pool of trained academics and professionals, with reasonable accommodation and respect for one another, strong ethical values, cordial relationships, and professionalism, institutions continue to face unprecedented challenges in not only finding all of the attributes in a single supervisor, but also finding the best supervision model to employ. The paper concludes that, because supervisors are appointed based on their methodological, experience, and content expertise, the other essential attributes for effective supervision should be incorporated into policies. As a result, in order to resolve supervision nuances, institutions should implement flawless doctoral supervision guidelines and provide healthy supervision environments.
Key words: Co-supervision, doctoral committees, doctoral supervision, doctoral education, team supervision, dyadic supervision.
Copyright © 2023 Author(s) retain the copyright of this article.
This article is published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0