It's around that time grad students start picking committee members for their dissertations! A brief thread here, but here's the key thing: there are lots and lots of criteria for why someone should be on your committee and substantive research area and personality are just two.

1. Your chair really is the most important person here. That seems obvious, but it's worth repeating. If you chose your chair b/c they're super fancy/famous but they're totally distant, that might be fine, but I don't recommend it.

2. I always say you need one of each of these on your committee, and some will do multiple roles:
a. substantive research area (SRA)
b. methods
c. generalizability (why should people cares outside your SRA?)
d. publishing tips
e. job market/general academia tips
f. writing mentor

3. Personal connection obviously matters. You need someone you vibe well with and who makes you feel good. But you don't need to be buddies! A committee member doesn't have to be the kind of person you'd normally want to hang out with; a dissertation chair doesn't either.

4. I'd suggest an emotions test. After a meeting, don't ask if you really love that person. Ask if you feel encouraged and excited about the project and able to work on it in ways you might not have before. For me, that's the real marker of a good connection.

5. The other thing is that, if there's one thing that's most important for your committee members, it's that they regularly give you feedback on your written work. That's much, much more important than they do work in the same area or share the same methods as you.

6. You can get methods and substantive empirical stuff elsewhere. These 3 to 5 people are not your only mentors in the world. But they are the people most institutionally invested in guiding you as a scholar. So regular engagement with your scholarship is the most important part.

7. Of course, you do need a methods person and a substantive area person, because your committee (esp. your chair) is also a signalling device at the start of your career. But that signalling is pretty empty if it's not accompanied by regular engagement with your written work.

8. Also, the job market is insane. Academia is insane. They're just weird places, and you need someone on your committee you can talk to about how it works, what it means, best practices, all of that stuff. It doesn't have to be your chair though!

9. It's also really, really, really important to have someone on your committee who can help you see if you "translate" outside of a small set of conversations. This could be someone who does your empirical area and methods but has a good sense of the broader field, but I think--

9 (cont) even better is someone who does not do your methods and empirical area (at least not exactly) but who is a good all-around scholar in your discipline, and who can let you know whether what you're doing and how you're doing it will be exciting to more than four people.

10. And remember that you can have other mentors, readers, and advisors! The network of friends and fellow-travelers who read your work will gradually be what really matters, much more than your committee (whose importance will dramatically decrease after you get your Ph.D.).

11. It's also important to know yourself and your work habits. Do you need regular meetings? Do you need to be able to be alone for months and then you're the one who initiates a request for another meeting? Either can be fine! But make sure it works *for* you not against you.

12. Also, ideally, you have committee members who can work with you as your work habits and needs change (as they often do). So you are working with the kind of person you can ask to check in on you, or ask to give you a few months to work stuff out.

this puts it well from @Prof_Casanova: https://twitter.com/Prof_Casanova/status/1328452598299586560?s=20