It has been suggested in the literature that the relationship with a doctoral supervisor is the predominant factor in student decisions to continue or withdraw from their candidatures. However, anecdotally it is not uncommon to hear heads of department, faculty deans and those in similar positions say that they know who the poorly-performing doctoral supervisors are, but often they are not sure what they, or others can do to remedy the situation. This study is based on interviews with 34 senior staff in order to understand how they identified supervisors who they generally considered less than ideal in the way they supervised doctoral candidates. This was followed by how they addressed, often, the multiple issues involved. The results provide helpful insights for staff in leadership positions as well as those whose role it is to support doctoral education, and particularly candidates and supervisors.