How can you identify your research niche?

A good starting point is to shadow or apply to be a research assistant for one of your professors at university. By doing this, you will learn the method of research and identify whether a particular of area of research interests you. Personally I was a research assistant for my company law professor before publishing my own article on contract law.

Even in assessing one's interests and skills would require a lot - as in a lot - of reading. If you do find a professor you can shadow or apply to be a research assistant, take a look at her/his publication record as well - especially the more recent ones. A way to forge that synergy with that professor is to read up on what s/he has done in the past. And this is not only in terms of the topics, but also the methods - and even styles of writing. Professors who publish regularly will exhibit those patterns, themes, and connections. Many people underestimate the value of reading up and "doing your homework" before settling in to that identified interest and skill set. Remember, a lot of research is published out there for people to consume.

Golden rule: follow your passion! If you try to adapt your dreams to fulfill the needs of others, sooner or later you will regret not spending enough time on whatever delights you, which in turn will make you less successful. So, follow your heart, the only place where you will be successful, is the place that allows you to work on your dreams, the place that makes you happy regardless of market trends.

An excellent encapsulation of the key steps involved in identifying and defining a research niche can be provided in a condensed version for quick reference as follows: self-reflection, assessing your skills and expertise, literature review, engaging with the academic and industry community, staying informed, seeking guidance, considering real-world relevance, exploring interdisciplinary opportunities, staying flexible, collaborating with others, feedback and review, and continuous refinement. In essence, the process is dynamic, involving continuous refinement and adaptation. This structured approach can help researchers navigate the complexities of identifying a research niche effectively.

It is a good idea to start with the most recent articles, as they usually have to outline and summarise the the arguments proposed by different articles and authors in the past. This will provide a very good summary of the research for you and serve as a good starting point.

This is actually where bulk of "doing your homework" will come in. For starters, look up and deep-dive into the reference lists of the target professor's research works. I also suggest mixing it up in terms of what you read. Sticking to journal articles can be a tad myopic. Mix it up with industry articles from credible magazines, newsletters, etc. and also cross-reference them against each other and with what journal articles are saying so that one can have a more balanced and comprehensive view of the topic on hand. Take a look at it this way: Industry or association articles can give you an idea of what's hot and what's not (a.k.a. the relevance), while journal articles can help you frame what you want to research on (a.k.a. the rigor).

I saw that an underrated skill that researchers should possess is the flexibility in both written and oral communications. Writing and presenting for academic audiences (e.g. journals, conferences, symposia) is very much different from doing so for and newsletters, opinion columns, and industry fora, for example. The former would almost always require to see the theoretical and methodological step-by-step scientific and logical rigor while the latter would prefer that you go straight to the point and focus on the calls to action and on the actionable points of the same research. The former would prefer hifalutin statements geared towards implications while the latter emphasizes on keeping things stupidly simple and towards recommendations.

This part is tricky, and I recommend exercising a lot of discretion here. The sad reality is that not everyone is keen in helping you build your research portfolio. Some would be douchebags and would nitpick, cherry-pick, and criticize your work merely to make you look bad, or worse even steal your ideas if you discuss it with them. It takes a lot of experience to find the near-perfect environment where people would genuinely help you. I've been lucky to receive the genuine and sincere advice from top researchers who are even top-tier journal editors, but I've also encountered yahoos who have that holier-than-thou attitude. In other words, "do your homework" as well when it comes to the networks and collaborations that you want to make.