PhD Committee

Representatives for the scientific staff 

Professor Jørgen T. Lauridsen (Chair)
Department of Economics (ECON)
E-mail: jtl@sam.sdu.dk  

Associate Professor Niels Skovmand Rasmussen
Department of Law
E-mail: nsr@sam.sdu.dk

Associate Professor Kent Wickstrøm Jensen
Department of Business and Sustainability
E-mail: kwj@sam.sdu.dk

Associate Professor Elke Weik
Department of Business & Management
E-mail: ew@sam.sdu.dk
Phone: +45 65507139 

Associate Professor Romana Careja
Department of Political Science and Public Management
E-mail: rca@sam.sdu.dk

Substitute representatives

Associate Professor Curd Benjamin Knüpfer (1st substitute)
Digital Democracy Center
E-mail: curd@sdu.dk

Professor Markus Becker (2nd substitute)
Department of Business and Management
E-mail: mab@sam.sdu.dk

Professor Giovanni Mellace (3rd substitute)
Department of Economics
E-mail: giome@sam.sdu.dk

Representatives for the PhD students

PhD student Miriam Lykke Jensen (Deputy Chair)
Department of Economics (ECON)
E-mail: miri@sam.sdu.dk

PhD student Jane Bennetzen
Department of Business & Management
E-mail: jbenn@sam.sdu.dk

PhD student Eugen Alexandrovich Chapiro
Department of Political Science and Public Management
E-mail: echa@sam.sdu.dk

PhD student Sophie Bro Mikkelsen
Department of Law
E-mail: sophmi@sam.sdu.dk

PhD student Anne Clausen
Digital Democracy Center
E-mail: aclausen@sam.sdu.dk 

Substitute representatives

PhD student Janne Roshold Tørresø (1st substitute)
Department of Law
E-mail: janlh@sam.sdu.dk

PhD student Martin Hørlyk Kristensen (2nd substitute)
Department of Economics
E-mail: mhkr@sam.sdu.dk

Secretariat for the PhD Committee

Charlotte Pilgaard Møller
PhD School Secretariat, Faculty of Business and Social Sciences
E-mail: phdsek@sam.sdu.dk

Rules of Procedure for the PhD Committee at the Faculty of Business and Social Sciences, SDU

These rules of procedures have been drawn up in accordance with the Statutes for the activities of the collegiate bodies at SDU (adopted by the Board of Directors on 9 December 2022. The rules regulate the formal framework of the PhD Committee.

Meetings of the PhD Committee

Section 1. The PhD Committee shall conduct its business in meetings, including virtual meetings. Routine matters can, however, be decided by written procedure if all the members of body agree to this. The meetings are public, but matters can addressed behind closed doors if considered necessary or desirable due to the nature or circumstances of the cases.
Subsection 2. Matters which contain information about personal matters must be addressed behind closed doors.
Subsection 3. If decided by the PhD Committee or its chair, matters of closed-door proceedings must be negotiated prior to the proceedings.
Subsection 4. Matters addressed behind closed doors should preferably be addressed at the end of the meeting.
Subsection 5. Anyone has the right to be present at the PhD Committee’s public case handing, provided the observers conduct themselves in an orderly manner. If a listener interrupts the discussions, the chair may exclude him or her or, if necessary, all listeners from the meeting.
Subsection 6. Meetings must be held in accordance with SDU’s language policy

Section 2. The PhD Committee meets twice during the semester. The meetings take place at
SDU, Odense. Location, dates and times of meetings are published on the PhD website for one
semester at a time.
Subsection 2. Extraordinary meetings shall be held whenever the chair deems it necessary. Furthermore, the chair must convene the PhD Committee when ¼ of the members submit a written
request and provide the agenda. In that case, the meeting must be held within 14 days after the
secretary/chair has received the request.
Section 3. If a member is prevented from attending a meeting of the PhD Committee, the chair
must be notified before the meeting is held. The agreed minutes of each meeting must state
which members were absent.
Convening meetings and presenting matters
Section 4. The chair shall issue a notice convening a meeting, together with the agenda, at least
five days before the meeting is held. If required by special circumstances, the meeting may be
convened at a shorter notice. The agenda must state which matters will be discussed at the
meeting.
Subsection 2. The agenda will be sent to each member of the PhD Committee. The chair must
also circulate the relevant material for the prior information of members. The open part of the
agenda is publisbed at the PhD website.
Subsection 3. The agenda shall indicate how members and other interested parties may access
any virtual meetings.
Subsection 4. The individual members of the PhD Committee and the Rector may demand that
items be included on the agenda. Agenda items and materials for the ordinary meetings must be
received by the secretary/chair at least eight days before the meeting is held.
Management of meetings and presentation of matters
Section 5. The chair, or in his/her absence the deputy chair, or alternatively another member authorized by the chair, shall chair the meetings of the PhD Committee. The chair decides on all
matters concerning the conduct of the discussions and the maintenance of order during the meeting. In addition, the chair formulates the proposals on which to vote.
Subsection 2. Members of the PhD Committee who request the floor shall address the chair, who
will give the floor to the individual in the order in which it is requested. If several people request
the floor at the same time, the chair will decide the order.
Subsection 3. During the discussion, any proposal shall be addressed to the chair. When the
chair deems it neccessary, or when requested by at least three members, it shall be decided by
vote whether a discussion is to be conducted.
Section 6. The matters are considered in the order decided by the chair, and consequently the
chair may deviate from the order of the agenda. However, when at least three members request
a vote on this, the PhD Committee will decide the order in which the matters are discussed.
Subsection 2. At the beginning of a meeting, any member of the PhD Committee may request the
floor regarding the agenda, including asking questions about transferring matters from closeddoor discussions to public discussions and vice versa.
Section 7. Routine matters that may be decided upon in writing according to Section 1 will be circulated by the chair to each of the members, stating the deadline for their reply. In their reply, any
member may request that the matter be discussed at a meeting. In that case, the chair will arrange for it to be included on the agenda at the next ordinary meeting.
Holding meetings
Section 8. At the beginning of each meeting, the chair will state whether the PhD Committee has
been convened in due time.
Subsection 2. The PhD Committee forms a quorum when at least half of the members are present.
Subsection 3. Decisions can only be made on matters that are included as independent items on
the published agenda.
Subsection 4. If important for the discussion of a matter, the chair may invite third parties to join
the meetings and make statements or participate in the discussions without the right to vote.
Section 9. At the chair’s discretion, voting shall take place by a show of hands or by roll call. If
desirable due to special considerations, voting may take place in writing on ballot papers issued
by the chair. If the chair considers the outcome of a vote to be given in advance, (s)he may
simply state his or her opinion of the outcome of the vote. If no member subsequently requests a
vote, the chair may declare the matter settled in accordance with the opinion (s)he has expressed.
Subsection 2. Decisions shall be taken by a simple majority of the members present, unless otherwise provided. In the event of a tie, the chair’s vote is decisive.
Subsection 3. Proposals which have received more than half of the votes cast are adopted. If
more than two main proposals have been made, the chair shall decide whether the vote is to be
taken by a relative majority, so that the proposal which has received the most votes is adopted, or
whether the vote is to be taken in several rounds, so the most far-reaching proposal is put to the
vote first. The latter approach is used if the proposals made are formulated as main proposals,
amendments thereto and any sub-amendments. The chair shall decide the order of votes on the
amendments, but in such a way that the vote on them is always completed before the vote on the
main proposal.
Subsection 4. If requested by at least 1/3 of the members of the PhD committee, the chair shall
allow the questions referred to in subsection 3 concerning the method of voting and the order of
voting to be decided by the PhD Committee.
Committee/working groups
Section 10. Prior to the appointment of committee/working group, the PhD Committee will by majority vote decide on the committee’s/working group’s terms of reference and size as well as on
the convening of the constituent meeting.
Subsection. 2. The committee/working group shall – unless otherwise decided by the PhD Committee – elect its own chair and submit a written report.
Subsection 3. The committee/working group shall be deemed to be dissolved when its terms of
reference are fulfilled.
Participation of members in discussions and voting
Section 11. Members of the PhD Committee are obliged to attend the meetings.
Subsection 2. If a member of the PhD Committee loses his or her eligibility, resigns duing the
term of office or is declared disqualified, cf. The general disqualification rules, or if a member for
at least two months is unable to attend the meetings due to illness, a study trip or the like, a substitute will be summoned by the PhD Committee. The PhD Committee alone decides whether the
grounds for a substitute exist.
Section 12. A member of the PhD Committee is excluded from participating in discussions and
voting on matters in which the person in question has a private interest, cf. The general disqualification rules.
Subsection 2. The member must inform the PhD Committee of circumstances that cause or may
give rise to a presumption of disqualification. If at all possible, notification of this must be given to
the chair before the meeting. The PhD Committee will then decide whether the member in question must step aside, cf. Section 11, subsection 2. A member is not precluded from voting onhis
or her competence to act.
Minutes and execution of considered matters
Section 13. The decisions of the PhD Committee shall be recorded in agreed minutes. The
minutes must contain information about which members were present at the beginnning of the
meeting and the discussion of the individual items, as well as the result of any vote stating the individual members’ voting.
Subsection 2. Any of the members as well as any third parties summoned in accordance with
Section 8, subsection 4, may demand that views which deviate from the discussions be included
in the minutes. In matters which are to be forwarded to another authority, the members may also
request that said authority be made aware of the contents of the minutes when forwarding the
matter., as they have the right to have it accompanied by a statement of reasons.
Subsection 3. The minutes shall be submitted for approval at the next meeting of the PhD Committee or by written consultation of the members and shall then be published as soon as possible
in the manner laid sown in Section 4(2).
Section 14. The chair is responsible for the handing of mattes considered by the PhD Committee. All inquiries to authorities outside the institution are forwarded by the Rector.
Authority of the chair of the PhD Committee
Section 15. The PhD Committee may authorize the chair to arrive at a decision in urgent cases
in cases covered by Section 18(4), no. 4 of the University Act and Sections 38-40 of the SDU
Statutes, if the following conditions are met:
The case must be urgent and due to its nature and time constraints, cannot be dealt with by the
PhD Committee at an ordinary meeting or at an extraordinary meeting.
• The decision must not create new practice in this area.
• The decision must not be contrary to current practice.
• The decision may not change current practice.
• The decision shall not be particularly harsh on the party.
• These must be individual cases.
• The PhD Committee shall consequently be informed of the chair’s decision.
Subsection. 2. As a rule, the authorization shall apply until the PhD Committee has to constitute
itself with a new chair. However, the authorization must at least be discussed at the first meeting
of the year and may be amended at any time by the PhD Committee.
Election of chair and deputy of the PhD Committee
Section 16. After ordinary elections to the PhD Committee, the Committee shall elect a chair and
deputy chair at the first meeting. The deputy chair is elected from among the PhD students. If the
deputy chair resigns during his or her term of office, a new election will be held for the remainder
of the term. The election of a chair and deputy chair is subject to the dean’s approval.
Subsection 2. If only one candidate has been nominated for the election of deputy chair, he or
she is considered elected without a vote. If more than one candidate has been nominated, the
candidate who has obtained more than half of the valid votes cast (including blank votes) is
elected. If no candidate has achieved this, a re-election will be held between the two candidates
with the highest number of votes. If more than two candidates have obtained the highest number
of votes, they will participate in the re-election. If one candidate has obtained the highest and several candidates the second highest number of votes, they will all participate in the re-election. In
the re-election, the candidate who has obtained the highest number of votes is elected. If more
than on candidate has obtained the highest number of votes in the re-election for the office of
deputy chair, lots will be drawn between them.
Subsection 3. The deputy chair is the substitute of the chair with the rights and obligations mentioned in the rules of procedure.
Questions concerning the understanding of the rules of procedure
Section 17. The interpretation of the provisions of the rules of procedure shall be the responsibility of the chair, and each member shall be bound to abide by the decision of the chair as to the 
understanding of the provision of the rules of procedure. If three or more members disagree with
the chair’s decision, the decision shall be put to the vote. Questions concerning the understanding of the standard rules of procedure must, however, be submitted to the Rector.
Subsection 2. The chair may leave questions which, according to the rules of procedure are to be
decided by him/her, to be decided by the PhD Committee.
/Approved by the PhD Committee, February 2023