How to gauge the prestige of an individual researcher when selecting a PhD advisor Is there a process one could follow when assessing the prestige of a specific supervisor when evaluating PhD programs? I ask because in the academic world, the professor almost trumps the school. I am not sure if that statement holds for industry. How can one assess if the PI's reputation is large enough to offset the fact that conferring institution is not in the top 5 or ten schools for that discipline. I am aiming for of an entrepreneur/industry trajectory and in an ideal world this would not matter. I want to believe that as long as you stellar work experience, the sky is the limit. I just have in the back of my mind in a hypothetical situation where you are trying to pitch and idea for VC funding having that pedigree may be helpful.
In my opinion, the prestige of a potential supervisor in the industry (vs strictly academic) can be (rapidly) assessed by first checking his academic curriculum vitae for:


The committees he is part of. As an academic working with the industry, he should be involved with one or several government / industries related committees with a focus on state of the art application of the knowledge in that industry (procedures to do x,y,z) common best practices (for that field), budgeting and assigning funds, defining road-maps for the next 5, 10 years etc. I know some academics working closely with the transport industry (or government related agencies) - and in addition to the usual academic implication, they are also working actively with those instances, often have a student doing a project with those instances as well.
His publications : he should write or be co-author on papers/books that are recognized in his field. Often large efforts with large groups of academics. His methods/work should be found or referred in some textbooks. He should have international collaborations. Patents ?
Editor : is he on any editorial boards for relevant journals ?


If he is an early career academic, is he that person who is always everywhere, always organizing something, always at conferences and meeting with half a dozen presentation - this could give a hint that this person is dynamic and his career may be promising.

This information should be easy to find. If it is hard to find, this may be a flag. I would personally have a good confidence joining a researcher with at some degree meet those characteristics, even if he is not a tenure at a top university.