When should one change advisors? When should one keep going? I see the continuous growth of research potential as the most important measure of success of an advisor-advisee relationship.

I do not think there is the perfect advisor for a person. I see the relationship between advisor and advisee more like a romantic relationship where success is not so much dependent on the initial conditions but on the willingness to work on the relationship. But just like in real relationships it is sometimes better to break-off and try again with someone different.

When is it a wise choice to change advisors? What are the deal-breakers? When is it better to mend and keep going?

Personally, I am a first year master student and thinking about changing my advisor. My advisor is quite hands-off so that I have more independence in my research approach which I find quite valuable and fitting. However, the ideologies, ideals, and personalities of me and my advisor are quite the opposite. These opposites caused some conflict as my blog posts (my field explained to lay-people) and similar scientific communication clashed with my advisor's personally held views. I apologized, changed some blog content to be less offending towards his views, and promised to be more careful in the future which improved the relationship. But I feel that our relationship still remains affected by what had happened and feel that I cannot express my personal views freely anymore.

Additionally, I feel that my advisor on his own is not competent enough to help me grow my research potential for long. His PhD students and post-doc are more competent in some key-areas and provided valuable advice so far, but I feel that they lack expertise in my special sub-field and due to the lacking experience of a seasoned researcher they cannot provide the holistic advice that is required for long-term success in research.

One main long-term goal of graduate studies is also to become independent enough to publish research and acquire grants without supervision and I think in my current environment I learn a lot in this direction. However, looking one year from now to the point where I have to write PhD applications an approach which is more short-term oriented (to improve my PhD applications) might be more fitting for a successful path in academia.

I would like to know what you would consider signs that it is better to change advisors? What would you consider unfavourable in the advisor-advisee relationship but not detrimental to growth in research potential? What constitutes a good advisor-advisee relationship in your opinion? How does all this depend on where someone is in graduate school at the moment (e.g. 1st year masters vs 3rd year PhD)? What would the ideal advisor-advisee relationship look like?

You can orient your answer along my issue but more general answers should be more valuable to the community.
I would like to know what you would consider signs that it is better to change advisors?``


1) Not getting along 
2) Difference in methodology and study design 
3) not willing to discuss in depth your research plans
4) treat you as a lab technician (some people like this)
 5) harrassing ( mentally, physically, sexually)
 6)changing your thesis topic frequently/ not giving you title of your thesis for long time
7) not paying much attention to you or provide you with advice that cant benefit to your progress 
8) dont provide grant for your research
9) delaying consultations and skipping lab progress hours(consultation hours)
10) Steals your work 
11) No constructive criticism  

`What would you consider unfavourable in the advisor-advisee relationship but not detrimental to growth in research potential?


wy advisor look, talk and personally behave, these things shouldnt influence research potential 

 What constitutes a good advisor-advisee relationship in your opinion?


You can become independent researcher and valuable contributor to science after finishing PhD. Your advisor method and behavior can shape you in adequate PhD holder

How does all this depend on where someone is in graduate school at the moment (e.g. 1st year masters vs 3rd year PhD)?
it is much easier to change advisors and programs in 1st year of master then in 3rd year of PhD, procedure is really hard, especially when you are until the end of studies

 What would the ideal advisor-advisee relationship look like?


I dont know, there is no unique example, everyone is different, you need to get along that is for sure, ideal situation for me is not ideal for you,
I like advisors that can be there all the time, some people and student like different style, important thing is that you can benefit from your advisor in professional sense !