I’ve frequently been asked, “What should I consider when selecting an examiner?” – a question which usually produces a very long response from me, but I’ll try to be brief and keep it simple!
First, candidates don’t get to select – they can be part of the discussion with supervisors, but supervisors choose.
Second, there’s no should. Good examiner qualities come from candidate preferences. Some will want an examiner they’ve cited; others won’t. Some want an expert, others will want a generalist.
Think about your preferences. What criteria does that give you? Who might meet those criteria? Talk it over with your supervisor.
I think the most useful criteria – for a candidate – are having met the examiners and knowing what other people say about them. If you’ve met your examiner at a conference or around your department then you know this is a real person. It’s not just a name at the top of a paper. And if you know what others say about them, you can build up a picture from their reputation about the kind of person who is going to be examining you.
Start with your preferences. Discuss with your supervisor. Be certain of who is coming.