For over a century, traditional universities have held an almost unchallenged monopoly over what constitutes a “valid” PhD. They proudly insist on three, four, or even five years of enrollment, structured around long academic calendars, layered bureaucracies, and outdated models of academic supervision. And when faced with modern, accelerated alternatives—particularly online, portfolio-based PhDs completed within one year—they often respond with a dismissive wave: “That’s not a real PhD.”
But let’s ask the inconvenient question no one in the ivory tower wants to hear: Is it truly necessary to spend three years completing a PhD, or is this extended timeline more about preserving institutional prestige—and tuition revenue—than academic rigour?
Breaking Down the Myth of the 3-Year Timeline
The traditional doctoral model is built not just on academic milestones, but on long periods of institutional inactivity. Here’s the reality:
- Holidays and closures (Christmas, Easter, summer): ~181 days/year
- Delays in supervisor feedback: Commonly 3–6 weeks per submission (~70 days/year)
- Total non-productive days per year: ~251
- Actual workdays per year: ~114
Multiply that over three years, and you get 342 total working days—less than one year’s worth of real academic engagement.
This means that the research required for a PhD is not being distributed evenly over three years because of necessity. It’s being stretched out to align with administrative convenience and fee structures. You’re not getting more education—just more waiting.
The Financial Incentive to Drag Things Out
Here’s the uncomfortable truth: a PhD that takes three or more years generates more money. More semesters mean more fees. More enrollment time justifies more institutional overhead. And more time under supervision, however passive, translates to higher costs to the student.
Let’s be clear—many universities are not merely passive bystanders in this prolonged process. They are active participants in preserving it. Why? Because shortening the timeline would challenge the model that has kept them financially secure and reputationally unchallenged for generations.
Yet when an alternative model—such as a PhD by Portfolio completed in one year—proves that the same level of scholarly output can be achieved in a fraction of the time, the first response is rarely curiosity. It’s dismissal, often under the false pretense that “quality requires time.”
But in the modern era, efficiency and excellence are not opposites.
Are Online, One-Year PhDs Really Less Valid?
Let’s put this notion to rest.
A one-year PhD, such as the one offered by the Swiss School of Business Research (SSBR), demands that the candidate:
- Submit previously published, peer-reviewed or original work for academic scrutiny
- Develop a comprehensive research narrative, linking theory, evidence, and professional insight
- Defend their work before a qualified academic panel in a Viva Voce
- Adhere to European Bologna Process standards for doctoral-level research
Nothing is “easy” about it. The difference is that it’s efficient. Students work year-round, receive feedback in under 48 hours, and aren’t subject to arbitrary term dates or weeks lost to campus closures.
In other words, it’s a modern model for a modern world.
Tradition Without Innovation Is Just Inertia
The defence of the traditional three-year model is often rooted in nostalgia, not necessity. Yes, time can be a proxy for maturity and depth. But time alone does not guarantee quality. Nor does it reflect the intellectual capacity of the candidate, especially when that candidate is already a seasoned professional, published researcher, or academic contributor.
To claim that a PhD must take three years, regardless of the candidate’s background, research readiness, or output, is not only outdated—it’s intellectually dishonest.
Online institutions are not asking for shortcuts. They are asking for flexibility, fairness, and recognition of prior learning. These are not threats to academic standards—they are enhancements to access, relevance, and innovation.
Time to Redefine “Academic Excellence”
The global economy no longer tolerates sluggishness. Business leaders don’t wait six months for feedback. Scientists don’t take sabbaticals to wait for results. The world moves faster, and the academy must catch up.
We must stop confusing length with legitimacy. A three-year PhD is no more valid than a one-year PhD if both involve the same level of rigour, research integrity, and academic scrutiny. What matters is the quality of research, the originality of thought, and the contribution to the field—not the number of winters you spend enrolled.
Embracing the Future of Doctoral Education
It’s time to dismantle the illusion that a PhD must be long to be meaningful. Institutions like SSBR are showing that a PhD completed in one year, when structured properly, can not only meet traditional academic standards—it can exceed them in relevance, responsiveness, and return on investment.
For working professionals, educators, innovators, and lifelong learners, the one-year PhD is not just an alternative. It’s the future.
And to those institutions clinging to three-year timelines to preserve their status and revenue streams: your monopoly on what constitutes academic legitimacy is coming to an end.
Swiss School of Business Research
The Swiss School of Business Research (SSBR) is an innovative, fully accredited institution based in Zurich, Switzerland, offering flexible, research-driven programmes tailored for modern professionals. Its flagship PhD by Portfolio is specifically designed to recognise prior academic and professional achievements, allowing candidates to complete their doctorate within as little as one year. Unlike traditional universities bound by rigid term structures and prolonged grading cycles, SSBR operates on a rolling admission model with accelerated feedback and asynchronous learning, ensuring that each student progresses at their own pace without delays. With a global faculty, online delivery, and a commitment to academic excellence, SSBR empowers ambitious individuals to achieve their doctoral goals efficiently, without compromising their career or personal commitments.
