Krdytkyu

I'm almost going to start my PhD. Out of curiosity, I searched for several effective researchers in several fields over the internet. Most of the common property among almost of them are

1) Working under the supervision of another effective researcher.

2) Not doing PhD in my country.

The second rule fails if and only if his/her supervisor satisfies both rules.

I considered some other factors such as time of spending, passion on the subject. Although many people I saw in my colleagues, friends, seniors etc., have these qualities are not as successful as the people who have the above two points (country, supervisor).

In this context, even I have so much aspiration, the two factors are pushing me back due to this empirical evidence.

Thus, my question is, whether the country and the standard of the supervisor affects my PhD quality and hence my career?

Note: I was neither a child prodigy nor an exceptional person but an average student. Hence please answer realistically.

The first point: working under the supervision of an effective researcher, is certainly one of the most important criteria, if not the most important criterion.

The second point, about the country where you work, is one that many people would like to discard. However, the following points need to be taken into consideration (especially since you have given the tag of "developing-countries"):

• The quality of research facilities available. This is more important for some areas of research, like experimental sciences. There is no doubt that the developed world has, on average, much better facilties.


• The quality of your co-students and general research atmosphere at the probable place of work in your country. This is actually quite important as you learn a lot from other young researchers, seniors and juniors. A good university will have a better atmosphere and such universities are most often in the developed world.


• The extent to which your research will get global visibility. Some areas of research are not "global" as they tackle local problems. However, many scientific areas are "global". In such a case, it is unfortunate, but true, that the country of origin of your research does make a difference to the visibility it gets.

Having made all these points, there are plus points about carrying out research in your own country.

• If you do well, it brings credit to the society which you are a part of and which had a big hand in making you who you are.


• Research is difficult enough without adding the burden of finding your feet in a different culture and society.

Ultimately, you will have to weigh all these factors against the quality of research positions that you have available once the application process is complete. All the best.

Unless you are much more self motivated with many more ideas than the average beginning doctoral student, you will depend on your advisor/supervisor for both research ideas and guidance. So, the "quality" (whatever that means) of your supervisor has quite a lot to do with your success initially. That, along with a supervisor who can connect you to other researchers via collaborations he/she has can be important. Collaboration and synergy are very important, especially when you get started.

I doubt that country has much to do with anything if you find a good supervisor. Most of the world is not where you are, of course. That is even true in China. Great research gets done most everywhere, though not all academics move to The US or EU which gets a lot of "press". Of course, you will find a lot of research in large universities, wherever they are.