What working with me is like
How I supervise, communicate, give feedback, structure meetings, and support independence.
Purpose-built for academic recruitment
Stop piecing recruitment together from faculty pages, long enquiry emails, and repeated back-and-forth. Give prospective researchers one clear place to understand the opportunity, see how you supervise and work with others, assess fit, and express interest.
University of Somewhere
Research
Publications
Teaching
CV
Professor
Department of Systems Studies
Research interests
My research examines people, technology, policy, and complex systems. I am interested in how individuals and organizations make decisions.
Contact
Email me with your CV and research interests if you would like to discuss opportunities.
✕ Great research, limited recruitment context
✕ Vague invitation to enquire
✕ Supervision style is hard to see
✕ Repetitive email back-and-forth
Human Systems Lab
I study how people, technology, and policy interact to shape decisions, organizations, and public systems.
People · Technology · Policy · Systems
How I supervise, communicate, give feedback, structure meetings, and support independence.
People, technology, organizations, policy, and evidence-informed decision-making.
PhD, master’s, postdoc, and research staff opportunities—current and upcoming.
Fit Check
Evidence-informed core + your questions
Research alignment · supervision preferences · expectations · timing · researcher-specific questions
✓ Clear, consistent recruitment information
✓ Makes supervision and working style visible
✓ Evidence-informed Fit Check for both sides
✓ Better first conversations
Keep your faculty profile or lab website. Add the recruitment layer for what those pages rarely explain: how you supervise, how you work, and whether the fit makes sense.
The current process
Researchers are already good at explaining their research. What is often harder for prospective students and staff to find is what working with the supervisor is actually like—and both sides still need a reliable way to surface whether the fit makes sense.
Faculty profiles, lab sites, publications, and opportunity notes are scattered across different places.
Candidates try to explain background, interests, goals, timing, and fit in whatever format they invent.
Supervision, expectations, funding, timing, and working style are often clarified over several messages.
Questions vary, answers are incomplete, and important fit information can be missed when the inbox gets busy.
One link
Present the opportunity clearly
One structured process
Let candidates assess fit
Better conversations
Compare the same core information
Complement what you already have
Research Portage does not ask you to recreate your scholarly identity. Link to the places where candidates can explore your record in depth, while keeping recruitment information concise, current, and easy to compare.
Your academic presence
Keep the places that already tell your scholarly story.
Research Portage sits alongside these—it does not replace them.
The missing recruitment information
Supervisor–student and supervisor–staff fit matters on both sides. Research Portage makes the working relationship visible early, so people can make a more informed decision before either side invests heavily in the conversation.
What is active now, what roles may be available, and what someone could contribute to or learn from.
How you communicate, give feedback, structure meetings, support independence, set expectations, and lead your group.
Research alignment, working preferences, timing, expectations, and other factors that matter to both sides.
The Research Portage Fit Check
The Fit Check starts with questions grounded in factors that matter to students and supervisors—research alignment, expectations, supervision, working preferences, and timing—so every prospective candidate considers the same core issues.
Researchers can then add their own questions for a specific lab, project, role, method, schedule, or working environment.
Structured enough to be consistent. Flexible enough to reflect how you actually work. It supports human judgment; it does not replace it.
A consistent core, with room to tailor
Is the research a strong match for my interests and goals?
What is the supervisor's approach to guidance, feedback, and independence?
What expectations and ways of working matter in this group?
Do timing, availability, and the opportunity line up?
Are there researcher-specific questions I should consider before applying?
How it works
Less repetitive email. More comparable information. Better use of the first real conversation.
Add the recruitment information candidates need, link to your existing academic sites, and share one URL anywhere.
They see the opportunity, your supervision approach, expectations, and the Fit Check before deciding whether to proceed.
Every candidate provides the same core information, plus any researcher-specific questions you choose to add.
Spend your time on people who understand both the work and how you work—and who may genuinely fit.
What you get
Early access
Create one recruitment page, add your evidence-informed Fit Check, and stop rebuilding the same conversation in every inbox.
Free during early access · No credit card required