For October’s theme/area of focus, I chose to focus on improving graduate student recruitment.
The current process for most of us is to share our email address and tell interested students to send us an email. Then a student sends an email (often a very long one…), maybe attaches a CV or transcript, maybe explains why they are interested in your work, and maybe provides some information about what they are looking for.
Then the back and forth starts. What program are they applying to? When do they want to start? Are they looking for a funded position? What are their research interests? What kind of supervision are they hoping for? Do they understand what your work is actually about? Do you run a physical lab? Is remote work possible? This list goes on…
None of this is especially complicated, but it creates a surprisingly messy and inconsistent system. It also depends heavily on students knowing what information matters, what a potential supervisor wants to know, and how to communicate all of that in an initial email. Researchers, meanwhile, are often trying to make sense of very different kinds of information arriving in very different formats.
At many universities, faculty profiles are like a mini-CV; you can find out about a professor’s education, research funding and publications, etc. However, these profiles are much less likely to explain how research actually happens or what it’s like to work with someone. Those things matter enormously, but they are often invisible until much later in the process.
That leaves students trying to infer a lot from a publication list, a short biography, and perhaps a few project descriptions. Researchers, meanwhile, receive inquiries from students who may not know the right kinds of questions to ask or who could have identified potential supervisors with a stronger fit if they had better information.
For all these reasons, I felt like the graduate student recruitment process was ready for some work redesign.
What if the first step was simply clearer for everyone involved? Students should be able to learn what a researcher studies, what kinds of opportunities are available, how they supervise, what they expect, and what it might actually be like to work in that research environment before they reach out. Researchers should be able to receive the same core information from interested students in a consistent format before deciding whether a conversation makes sense.
At one point, I considered building a matching tool (after all, questionnaire design and validation is part of my researcher toolkit). But the more I explored this, the less comfortable I became with the idea of reducing something as complex as a student-supervisor relationship to a score. The goal is not to automate judgment. It is to make the first step clearer and give both sides better information before they decide whether a conversation makes sense. That does not require a score, a ranking, or an algorithm deciding who belongs. It just requires a better starting point.
That thinking is what led me to build a web-based platform where researchers can build a recruitment page focused on graduate student recruitment and a standardized alignment fit check tool that prospective graduate students can complete if they are interested. I built Research Portage for myself to use but thought it might be helpful to others who want to improve or streamline their graduate student recruitment process. From a business perspective, I also saw an opportunity to solve a niche problem and make some extra money if people like the idea, because let’s face it, the cost of living is not going down anytime soon…
So without further ado, here is my first (and very amateur) ad for Research Portage. I used an AI tool to generate some clips of a fictional professor for the start and finish but it is my voice and real screen recordings otherwise.
If graduate student recruitment still lives in your inbox, Research Portage was built for you.
Take a look: researchportage.ca
