... especially if I were to place my name first in projects that are exclusively off-shoots of my students' dissertations and theses. It's sad that I see this happening as a common phenomenon.
My role as supervisor is to provide specialised and expert advice to students, NOT to milk them for my own KPI and glorification. Yes, we may provide suggestions from the inception of the research and guide (mold) our supervisees till they complete their research, but it is not fair for us to place our names first especially when we present or publish off-shoot research papers, solely because our supervisees were the ones who engaged in much (60-80%?) of the data collection, analysis and writing (read: they too have to do a lot of thinking).
I know this sort of academic practice can be VERY discouraging to supervisees, and it can be very damaging to their self-esteem. Such behaviour can, in the long run, also create distrust and disdain.
If we are to create a healthy and positive research environment/workplace, where people are excited and passionate about learning and unveiling hidden knowledge, where people are very open about sharing their creative output, we need to start building trust with the people we work with - although they may be our subservient students or employees. Here are some social capital strategies we can adopt to make it fair for our students:
1. We need to give credit where credit is due as honestly as possible. The supervisor needs to seek the permission of his/her supervisees if his/her name can be included in the research paper, AND AS secondary author (unless of course, the supervisor really did all the dirty work).
2. We need to keep encouraging and pushing our supervisees to engage in seminar presentations and to present their work, so that they are able to network with other scholars, and become independent researchers themselves. Their names ought to be first.
3. We need to shed that mentality that our supervisees are OUR OWN property (pertaining to research). They are not. Autonomy and choice ought to be given to them without having them to fear repercussions. So, they should be allowed to work with other scholars and share their work with them. After all, this would enrich their output even more.
4. If our supervisees want to engage with us in completely different projects, we should not say that, "I am not paid to do this" or "this is not my responsibility as your supervisor". This sort of attitude is unhealthy.
5. When students ask us for our opinion of their research papers, we should be professional about it and not take the opportunity to 'plant ourselves in' by saying, "Hey, can you place my name as second author?" or "I won't help unless my name is included" - UNLESS of course, the research paper requires substantial amendments and refocusing. If their papers require minor amendments, or they are already good, we should just provide our expert opinion and critique, and wish them the best.