PhD Supervisor Outreach

Use this skill to run PhD supervisor search and outreach as a disciplined pipeline rather than a loose list of names.

Core workflow

1. Build the lead pool

Split leads before ranking them:

• self-found: leads discovered through your own search
• intermediary-provided: leads provided by consultants, agencies, or third parties
• formal postings: funded roles with explicit deadlines

Do not mix these pools when deciding outreach order. Treat formal funded postings as the first priority.

Read references/search-patterns.md when the user wants help finding more supervisors.

2. Rank supervisors before drafting emails

Rank each PI on four axes:

• research fit
• funding likelihood
• lab activity and recency
• strategic value for the candidate

Prefer active groups with a clear research program over impressive but vague names.

Read references/selection-and-ranking.md when you need a fit rubric or ranking method.

3. De-duplicate by school

Do not contact multiple supervisors at the same university at the same time unless the user explicitly asks for that strategy.

Default rule:

• contact one PI per school first
• wait 7-10 days, or until a clear rejection / no-fit reply
• only then move to the second PI at the same school

This applies even more strongly within the same department, institute, or center.

Read references/outreach-sequencing.md when the user wants a send order or a same-school deconfliction pass.

4. Position the candidate correctly

Default framing for research PhD outreach:

• emphasize independent project ownership
• show the ability to carry a project from data to interpretation
• select only the 2-3 experiences that are most relevant to the PI
• avoid dumping the entire CV into the email

Do not frame the candidate as someone who only assisted on projects if their record supports more than that.

Read references/candidate-positioning.md when you need language for research ownership and project independence.

5. Draft one-off emails, not name-swapped templates

Every outreach email must be individualized.

Minimum standard for each email:

• mention 2-3 PI-specific research points
• connect 2-3 candidate experiences that actually match those points
• include one sentence that demonstrates independent PhD-level project ability
• ask about fit, funding, and cycle timing without making the email only about money

Never mass-send the same body with only the PI name changed.

Read references/email-customization.md when drafting or revising outreach emails.

Default operating rules

• Prioritize funded roles with deadlines ahead of speculative outreach.
• Keep self-found leads separate from intermediary-provided leads.
• Do not treat all strong universities as equally useful; fit and activity matter more.
• Prefer concise first-contact emails, typically 150-220 words, unless the user asks for a longer version.
• When the user is broad-net searching, accept medium-fit labs if they are active, well-funded, and directionally compatible.
• When multiple PIs at one institution are plausible, explicitly recommend a first-contact order.

What to avoid

• contacting several PIs at the same school at once by default
• asking for scholarship details before establishing research fit
• writing generic emails full of broad words like AI, genomics, or biology without specifics
• listing every past project instead of selecting the most relevant ones
• overusing one stock sentence across many emails

Reference map

Load only the reference file needed for the task:

• searching for more PIs: references/search-patterns.md
• scoring and ranking leads: references/selection-and-ranking.md
• deciding outreach order and same-school sequencing: references/outreach-sequencing.md
• framing the candidate's strengths: references/candidate-positioning.md
• writing PI-specific inquiry emails: references/email-customization.md