Adviser Turf Wars - fighting for apprentices?

Pursuing a PhD is like going through an apprenticeship for many of us doctoral students. You are taken under your adviser's wings and his or her interests become yours (ideally). I was fortunate enough to know what I wanted to work on during my studies and selected my adviser based on this interest. Getting accepted into GW and getting my first choice adviser has made life so much easier than it could have been - I know this because I have seen the alternative and, trust me, it isn't pretty.

Doctoral students become virtual apprentices of their advisers and are expected to "drink the kool-aid" In my opinion, it isn't hard to understand why. Firstly, faculty members don't get paid to mentor their "advisees". They have to read their miserable attempts at research papers, answer their random questions, and explain to them why they can't work outside the University even though their stipend barely pays for rent and food (forget diapers!) - all for free. Their "quid pro quo" is the opportunity to turn their students into disciples.

When you get your PhD and go out into academia, you become known not as the "XYZ-trained economist" but as "Dr. XYZ's former student"- this is where the opportunity lies! If their mentorship task is done well, faculty members can spawn academic carbon copies of themselves who will quote their research, spread their theories, and increase their academic "footprints." In the course of 25 years, one professor can can turn 5 doctoral students into into over 100 professors around the world towing the same academic line (assuming each of those 5 mentor 5 students, who also mentor 5 students each)!

Having research interests that truly jive with the research interests of your adviser means never having to pretend that you want to work on a project for him or her. It means that you don't risk finding out that someone else's work is more interesting or is in some way a better match for you. Having the right adviser is more important than attending the right program in many ways. Although I would agree with my Mom's advice to buy the worst home in the best neighborhood instead of the best home in an "up and coming" neighborhood, I would say that it would be better to have the best advisor in an "up and coming" program than to have the worst adviser in a top program. If you are blessed with both, more grease to your elbows!

If you are thinking about applying to a PhD program, my advice is to try and find out who will be available to work with you before making your selection. If your adviser is not doing things that interest you there will likely be rough times ahead - if he or she also doesn't get along with others in the department and prevents you from working with other faculty members in the department, you're in even worse shape. And this is where the fighting I mentioned above comes into play. One of the worst things that a faculty member can do is try and convert their colleagues disciples to their own philosophical camp - I've seen it tried and it is not pretty!

Choose your adviser wisely - you will always be known as "Dr. XYZ's student/prodigy/apprentice" and, trust me, you want to carry that badge with pride!