This paper explores disciplinary approaches to knowledge production and the supervision of doctoral students in the context of New Zealand's current Performance Based Research Fund (PBRF). In the last decade New Zealand has experienced significant changes to the way doctoral students are funded by central government. Funding has moved away from a "head count" model to one that rewards specific performance criteria of staff and timely completion of students. In the new regime, research outputs by way of peer reviewed publications, conference presentations, grant awards, postgraduate completions and so forth constitute the significant markers of such performance. Yet in general terms, the production of knowledge varies considerably by academic discipline. This paper uses qualitative methods to explore the potential for the PBRF to privilege some approaches to knowledge production (and models of doctoral supervision) while challenging the viability of others. (Contains 2 figures and 2 notes.)