Experts Matter. Find Yours.

Reclaiming 'Spend': A Retirement Rebellion

June is Pride Month—a celebration of identity, resilience, and the powerful act of reclaiming. Over the years, LGBTQ+ communities have reclaimed words that once marginalized them. “Queer” used to be a slur. Now, it’s a proud badge of honor. Similarly, the Black community has transformed language once used to oppress into expressions of cultural pride and connection. So, here's a thought: What if retirees approached the word “spend” similarly? Yes, you read that right. The psychological Tug-of-War This isn't just about numbers; it’s about narratives. Most retirees have spent their entire adult lives in accumulation mode: save, earn, invest, delay gratification, rinse, and repeat. But retirement flips that formula on its head, and most people weren’t provided with a “mental user guide” for the transition. Now, instead of saving, they’re expected to spend? Without a paycheck? It triggers everything from guilt to fear to a low-grade existential crisis. The Challenge of Saving for an Extended Period Let’s get serious for a moment. The data tells a troubling story: - Canadians over 65 collectively hold $1.5 trillion in home equity (CMHC, 2023) - The average retiree spends just $33,000 per year, despite often having far more resources (StatsCan, 2022) - Nearly 70% of retirees express anxiety about running out of money—despite having significant savings (FCAC, 2022) We’re talking about seniors who could afford dinner out, a trip to Tuscany, or finally buying that electric bike—and instead, they’re clipping coupons and debating the cost of almond milk. Why?  Because spending still feels wrong. I Know a Thing or Two About Reclaiming Words As a proud member of the LGBTQ2+ community and a woman who has worked in the traditionally male-dominated world of finance, I’ve had a front-row seat to the power of language, both its ability to uplift and its tendency to wound. There were many boardrooms where I was not only the only woman but also the only gay person, and often the oldest person in the room. I didn’t just have a seat at the table; I had to earn, protect, and sometimes fight to keep it. I’ve learned that words can be weapons, but they can also be amour—if you know how to use them. Reflect on Your Boundaries Take a moment. Have you ever felt prejudged, marginalized, or dismissed? Perhaps it was due to your gender, sexuality, accent, skin colour, culture, or age. It leaves a mark. One way to preserve your dignity is by building a mental toolkit in advance. Prepare a few lines, questions, or quiet comebacks you can use when someone crosses the line—whether they intend to or not. Here are five strategies that helped me stand tall—even at five feet nothing: 1. Humour – A clever remark can defuse tension or highlight bias without confrontation. 2. Wit – A precisely timed comeback can silence a room more effectively than an argument. 3. Over-preparation – Know your stuff inside and out. Knowledge is power. 4. Grace under fire – Not everything deserves your energy. Rise above it when it matters. 5. Vulnerability – A simple “Ouch” or “Did you mean to hurt me?” can be quietly disarming—and deeply human. Let’s Talk About Microaggressions The term microaggression may sound small, but its effects are significant. These are the subtle, often unintentional slights: backhanded compliments, dismissive glances, and “jokes” that aren’t funny. They quietly chip away at your sense of belonging. Dr. Robin DiAngelo’s book White Fragility is a brilliant read on this topic. She explains how early socialization creates bias— “Good guys wear white hats. Bad guys wear black hats.” These unconscious associations become ingrained from an early age. Some people still say, “I’m not racist—I have a Black friend,” or “I’m not homophobic—my cousin is gay.” The truth? Knowing someone from a marginalized group doesn’t exempt you from unconscious bias. It might explain the behaviour, but it doesn’t excuse it. And no, there is no such thing as reverse discrimination. Discrimination operates within systems of power and history. When someone points out a biased comment or unconscious microaggression, they’re not discriminating against you—they’re holding up a mirror. That sting you feel? It’s not oppression. It’s shame—and it’s warranted. It signals that your intentions clashed with your impact. And that’s not a failure; it’s an invitation to grow. Calling it “reverse discrimination” is just a way to dodge discomfort. But real progress comes when we sit with that discomfort and ask: Why did this land the way it did? What am I missing? Because the truth is, being uncomfortable doesn’t mean you’re being attacked. It often means you’re being invited into a deeper understanding—and that’s something worth showing up for. Let’s Reclaim 'Spend' What if we flipped the script? What if spending in retirement was viewed as a badge of honour? Spending on your grandkids’ education, your bucket list adventures or even a high-end patio chair should not come with any shame. You’ve earned this. You’ve planned for this. It’s time to reclaim it. Let’s make “spend” the new “thrive.” Let’s make super-saver syndrome a thing of the past. Let the Parade Begin Imagine it: a Seniors’ Spend Parade. Golden confetti. Wheelchairs with spoilers. Luxury walkers with cupholders and chrome rims. T-shirts that say: - “Proud Spender. Zero Shame.” - “I’m not broke—I’m retired and woke.” - “My equity funds my gelato tour.” Dreams Aren’t Just for the Young What’s the point of spending decades building wealth if you never enjoy it? Reclaiming “spend” isn’t about being reckless—it’s about being intentional. So go ahead—book the trip. Upgrade the sofa. Take the wine tour. You’re not being irresponsible; you’re living the life you’ve earned. And if anyone questions it? Smile and say: “I’m reclaiming the word spend. Care to join the parade?” Sue Don’t Retire…Rewire! 8 Guilt-Free Ways to Spend in Retirement A checklist to help you spend proudly, wisely, and joyfully: ☐ Book the Trip – Travel isn’t a luxury; it’s a memory maker. ☐ Upgrade for Comfort – That recliner? That mattress? Worth every penny. ☐ Gift a Down Payment – Help your kids become homeowners. ☐ Fund a Grandchild’s Dream – Tuition, ballet, a first car—you’re building a legacy. ☐ Outsource the Chores – Pay for help so you can reclaim your time. ☐ Invest in Wellness – Healthy food, massage therapy, yoga. Health is wealth. ☐ Pursue a Passion – From pottery to piloting drones, go for it. ☐ Celebrate Milestones – Anniversaries, birthdays… or Tuesdays. Celebrate always! Want More? If this speaks to you, visit www.retirewithequity.ca and explore more: - From Saver to Spender: Navigating the Retirement Mindset - Money vs. Memories in Retirement - Fear Of Running Out (FORO) Each piece explores the emotional and psychological aspects of retirement—the parts no one talks about at your pension seminar.

5 Reasons "Expertise Marketing" Programs Fail.

As a company dedicated to “Expertise Marketing” we work with some of the largest organizations from higher education and healthcare, to top global corporate brands. What these organizations have in common are smart, educated professionals…and a lot of them. The types of individuals that would be valuable ambassadors, true thought leaders, helping you deliver on your organization’s reputational and revenue goals. Instinctively marketing and communications teams recognize the intrinsic value of this human capital and have created a variety of “Thought Leadership” and “Expert Marketing and Directory” initiatives. The overriding objective is how to best connect their experts to audiences that matter. Seeking opportunities ranging from acting as media sources to event speakers to providing a valuable entry-point for research and business collaboration, even lead generation. To execute on this goal, one of the most effective approaches, and starting points for any expertise marketing program starts with better profiling their experts and related insights on their website. Building out and leveraging this expert content is at the core of most expertise marketing efforts. Despite the promises these web initiatives offer, most programs don’t deliver organizations the results they were hoping for. Success most often has nothing to do with how smart your people are. Some of the largest organizations with deep rosters of expertise fail where smaller organizations consistently punch above their weight. When creating an expertise presence on your website there are important areas to consider. The following represents the top 5 reasons many expertise marketing programs fail and how to maximize your success.  Reason #1 You’re missing critical team members There is no “going it alone” when starting a program like this.  Having the following individuals onboard at the start is crucial. Don't worry, these aren't all full-time resources by any means.  As your program progresses, these individuals may come in and out in terms of importance, but having access to them over the lifetime of your program will positively impact your success. At the core, you need access to the following individuals. Program Champion - Having a senior leader as a champion is pretty much table stakes for any successful company-wide initiative such as this.  Someone who can articulate to others, both up and down in the organization as to how this initiative fits into the broader long-term goals of the organization is imperative. Failure to establish this individual upfront puts your program's future at the whim of shifting priorities and budget cuts. Marketing/Communications - You need someone with ongoing responsibility for maintaining and promoting your roster of experts and their content.  This ensures your most relevant experts are showcased at the right time to meet the changing demands of your audiences and the news cycle. Digital/Web - You need someone with the keys to the website/CMS. Ensure you have connections to people who control not only your small area of the website such as a newsroom or department level webpages but also those that have access to the layouts and navigation of the broader website.  The latter is important as it helps prevent your expert content from combing isolated and disconnected from the rest of your website. IT - The level of involvement of IT is highly dependent on how you’re looking to implement your expert content on your website. By leveraging a variety of content implementation tools from simple "cut and paste" embeds to WordPress plugins you can severely limit the necessity to involve IT. However, depending on your budget and goals, IT can leverage a platform's API, accessing advanced layouts and functionality, including integrating with other systems your organization may already be using. Engaged Experts -  Last but not least, having your experts on board is critical. By properly communicating upfront and ongoing with your experts around the goals of the program, you're helping ensure your content best represents the talents that lie within. We realize it is often difficult and sometimes cost-prohibitive to assemble such a team. It is important if you don’t have access to all these members in-house that you access them through an external partner's professional services offerings. This could include assisting with building out content such as profiles and posts or providing technical assistance in integrating this content into your website. Reason #2 You’re relying too much on IT for implementation or updating. To be successful long term, it is important that key owners of the expertise marketing program feel empowered to take control of their expert content. From creation to ongoing management, those with marketing communications roles and others closest to their organization’s expertise need the flexibility to update content in real-time to remain relevant and up-to-date. Being able to quickly log into an external platform that syncs content with your website is key.  It eliminates the need for special access to your CMS or the possible requirement for IT to be in control of your updates. It also allows for a mix of individual expert and administrator access providing the highest level of flexibility. Often left out in IT-focused builds is how you will effectively handle inquiries.  Simply showing emails and phone numbers is a recipe for missed opportunities (and SPAM) as these experts are some of the most time-constrained individuals in your organization.  Ensuring you have access to a customizable workflow feature is essential in ensuring your organization doesn't miss potential time-sensitive inquiries. When working with IT to implement an Expertise Marketing Program on your website, you will often be presented with a “we’ll build it for you option” vs using a purpose-built platform. Understanding the tradeoffs of this approach is critical. One of the greatest benefits of using a SaaS platform, besides costs, is that you constantly have the most up-to-date software, with the latest features and functionality to best showcase your expertise. To learn more, download the “True Costs of DIY” to better understand the tradeoffs and functional requirements needed for success. Reason #3 Your expert content is siloed, one-dimensional, and rarely updated. This is by far one of the biggest reasons programs fail.  Well, it's actually a number of reasons, but it all relates back to how your content will be perceived and ultimately drive connections with interested audiences.  By addressing the following you'll present not only better but more easily discoverable expert content that drives inquiries. You have boring, not engaging profiles for your experts - Before people feel comfortable reaching out they need a good sense of the person. Profiles that lack media assets such as video, publications and even podcasts are one-dimensional. Furthermore, showcasing past media and event appearances provides an enhanced level of credibility. Focused solely on a directory & profiles - Your expertise is more than just showcased through a profile found in a directory. Adding long-form posts where experts can share their insights and even expert focussed Q&A (download report on "The Power of Q&A") provides audiences additional ways to connect with your experts. Ensuring all these additional assets connect back to your profiles provides more insight into the person behind the expertise. No main website navigation - Despite adding menu navigation on a specific web page, such as a newsroom or About Us page, most organizations neglect to add navigation to their main website’s menu structure. You can never assume visitors will know where this content resides. We recommend multiple links in both headers and footers to your expert content. Names such as “Find Experts”, “Media Sources” or “Research Experts” are some of the most common, accessible from overall menu items like “About Us”, “News” or “Research”. Expert content stuck to one small area of your website - If you restrict your expert content to just one area, you’re just making discovery that much harder and limiting exposing the breadth of expertise you have in-house. Highlight your experts and expertise on your homepage or in key sections of your website. Refine your experts and their insights found in posts or Q&A by tagging them based on specific topics and showcasing just those experts in various areas of your website. Using a dedicated SaaS platform means that when you update content it updates everywhere, making changes quick and easy. Expert content never gets updated - This is a big issue for organizations that build in-house or through their CMS. Visitors can quickly understand that the content isn’t fresh and it reflects poorly on the individual and the organization as a whole. The key to ensuring content is maintained is to provide multiple access capabilities where admins (internal or external) and the experts can maintain the content. Failure to respond in a timely manner to inquiries - Displaying content that exposes phone numbers and emails of your experts is not the best approach...both from a privacy and timely communications standpoint. Without an advanced inquiry workflow that alerts multiple members of your team, you risk missing out on time-sensitive requests such as those from journalists.  Reason #4 You haven’t considered everything needed to win the SEO game. Building out content on the web without having a plan for how external and internal search engines will interact with your pages is a big mistake. Organic search can play a big role in discovery leading to valuable opportunities. Before you consider your new expert content pages ready, ensure you've taken into account the following. Proper Meta Data - Do your expert profile pages have dynamically created titles, descriptions and keywords that automatically adjust to changes in areas such as an individual's expertise? Schema Data - Do you have proper schema tags that indicate to Google and other search engines the type of content displayed as well as the credibility of both the individual and organization behind it. Sitemaps - Have you ensured all your pages have been added to your sitemap. Is it automatically updated when new experts or pieces of expert content are added? Google Search Console - Are you pushing pages directly to Google by requesting important new content is updated in the search index. For more info on better SEO read my Spotlight "Why Expertise Ranks Higher". Reason #5 You’re not doing enough to actively promote your expertise… a “they’ll just find us” approach usually fails. It's like owning a Porsche and leaving it in the garage…pretty to look at but you’re not realizing its full potential. Simply putting your expert content on a web page is only the start. Successful organizations actively distribute these assets, sharing links to profiles and other content elements like news posts or Q&A in a variety of ways. Social Media Channels - They start by promoting these assets on their social media channels, from their Twitter feeds to Facebook and LinkedIn posts. Media Distribution Software - Whether it is systems like Cision or Meltwater, including links to expert profiles and related content when reaching out to journalists adds a layer of depth to your pitches. Press Releases - Every time you reference your organization's expertise, include links to additional content and individual experts for more insights and pathways to connect with real people. It sounds like a lot, but with a bit of planning and some ongoing maintenance, a properly constructed expertise marketing program can deliver incredible results for many years. To be successful it's more than just firing up a few new web pages. However, with the advent of specialized platforms specifically designed for these programs, and a bit of guidance, it is easier than ever to create an expert content footprint on your website and deliver valuable connections for your organization.  

Hidden in plain sight: UD researcher exposes gaps in college application process

In a groundbreaking study in the American Educational Research Journal, University of Delaware Associate Professor Dominique Baker and others has unveiled significant disparities in how students report extracurricular activities on college applications, highlighting inequities in the admissions process.​ Analyzing over 6 million Common App submissions using natural language processing, the researchers discovered that white, Asian, wealthier, and private-school students tend to list more activities, leadership roles, and unique accomplishments compared to their peers from underrepresented racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic backgrounds. However, when underrepresented minority students did report leadership roles, they did so at rates comparable to their white and Asian American counterparts.​ “All students do not have the ability to sign up for eight, 10 or 15 extracurricular activities,” Baker noted, emphasizing that many students must work to support their families, limiting their participation in extracurriculars.​ To address these disparities, the researchers recommend reducing the number of activities students can list on applications—suggesting a cap of four or five—to encourage a focus on the quality and intensity of involvement rather than quantity. This approach aims to level the playing field, ensuring that students with limited opportunities can still showcase their potential effectively.​ Baker and her colleagues draw attention to Lafayette College, which has recently reduced the number of extracurricular activities it reviews from 10 to six. While data on the impact of such changes is still forthcoming, the move aligns with the researchers’ recommendations and signals a shift toward more fair admissions practices.​ Other institutions are beginning to take note. If you wish to delve deeper into this research and explore its implications for college admissions, Baker is available for interviews and has been in a number of national outlets like The Wall Street Journal, ABC News, and Inside Higher Ed. Her insights could provide valuable perspectives on creating a more fair admissions landscape.

Why Your Experts Might Not Show Up in Google AI Overviews — And How to Fix It

The way we find expert information online is changing fast. With the rise of Google’s AI-generated overviews (formerly called Search Generative Experience), the top spot on the search page no longer goes to the highest-ranking blue link. Instead, AI now summarizes answers using a blend of machine learning, structured data, and trust signals—pulling directly from a variety of select sources across the web. If institutions—whether academic, healthcare, corporate or others—aren't aligning its expert content with these new rules of discovery, your experts may be left out of the conversation altogether.  Don't miss being featured in media stories, invited to speak at events, or approached for business and collaboration opportunities. This is the moment to double down on structured data and transparent authorship—because AI-first search is rewarding expert clarity, not just content volume. The following provides a quick breakdown as to how AI Search, Google’s EEAT principles, and Schema.org structured data work together—and what you can do to ensure your expert content...and your experts, gets surfaced, cited, and trusted. What Is EEAT and Why It Matters in AI Search EEAT stands for Experience, Expertise, Authoritativeness, and Trustworthiness—the core framework Google uses to evaluate whether content is reliable and deserves to rank, especially in high-stakes areas like health, education, and finance. In AI-powered summaries, Google doesn’t just look at keywords—it looks for: Real people with demonstrable credentials Clear affiliations with reputable institutions Consistent authorship and transparency Trust signals like citations, bios, and professional history EEAT in Action: Why Schema Markup Is Your AI SEO Power Tool EEAT signals work best when they’re machine-readable—that’s where Schema.org structured data comes in. It acts as a translator between your content and Google’s AI.  Schema tags are pieces of structured data that help search engines understand the content and context of your web pages. They translate human-readable information—like author names, job titles, and article types—into machine-readable signals that boost visibility AI overviews and search results. Implementing Schema helps ensure your expert content is eligible for inclusion in AI overviews. Key schema types include: {Person} – for expert bios {ScholarlyArticle}, {Article}, {FAQ} – for authored content {Organization}, {MedicalOrganization}, {EducationalOrganization} – to establish credibility {sameAs} – to reinforce expertise by connecting external profiles (LinkedIn, ORCID, Google Scholar) Schema in Action: AI Overviews Favor Structured, Credible Expert Content Google’s AI overviews are designed to synthesize trustworthy sources—not just surface-level blog posts or SEO-churned pages. That means expert content that is: Authored by named individuals with clear credentials Structured for readability and machine parsing Linked to institutional authority and trust domains If your experts don’t meet these criteria—or if Google’s crawlers can’t understand the relationships between person, organization, and content—your insights may never reach the surface of the AI summary box. How ExpertFile Optimizes for AI-Driven Search AI search is no longer just about keywords—it’s about credibility, structure, and clarity. Institutions that invest in properly structured expert content will not only rank better—they’ll become the source quoted in the next generation of search. ExpertFile is purpose-built to maximize visibility and trust in this new era of AI search. Here’s how: Structured Expert Profiles: Every expert has a dedicated page with rich Person schema, bios, credentials, affiliations, and publication history. Schema-Tagged Content: Articles, media spotlights, and FAQs are marked up using Schema.org types like ScholarlyArticle, FAQPage, and Article. Institutional Credibility: Profiles are embedded within .edu, .org, or corporate domains—reinforcing trust with Google’s algorithms. Cross-Linked Authority: Integration with Google Scholar, LinkedIn, and ORCID ensures a 360° trust profile across the web. Mobile-Ready & Indexed: ExpertFile content is fully indexable and distributed across web and mobile platforms—supporting discoverability everywhere AI pulls from. With ExpertFile, your experts are not just listed—they’re positioned, structured, and ready for the AI spotlight. Learn more about how ExpertFile helps organization's benefit in the new era of AI.

Google's New AI Overviews Isn’t Just Another Search Update

Google's recent rollout of AI Overviews (previously called “Search Generative Experience”) at its annual developer conference is being hailed as the biggest transformation in search since the company was founded. This isn’t a side project for Google — it fundamentally alters how content gets discovered, consumed, and valued online. If you're in marketing, PR, content strategy, or run a business that depends on online visibility, this requires a fundamental shift in your thinking. What Is AI Overviews? Instead of showing users a familiar list of blue links and snippets, Google now uses artificial intelligence to generate a summary answer at the very top of many search results pages. This AI-generated box pulls together content from across the web and tries to answer the user’s question instantly—without requiring them to click through to individual websites. Here’s what that looks like: You type in a question like “What are the best strategies for handling a media crisis?” Instead of just links, you see a big AI-generated paragraph with summarized strategies, possibly quoting or linking to 3-5 sources—some of which might not even be visible unless you scroll or expand the summary.  Welcome to the new digital gatekeeper. Elizabeth Reid, VP of Search at Google states "Our new Gemini model customized for Google Search brings together Gemini’s advanced capabilities — including multi-step reasoning, planning and multimodality — with our best-in-class Search systems. Let's breakdown this technobabble. Think of Gemini as the brain behind Google’s search engine that’s now: Even More Focused on User intent For years, SEO strategies were built around guessing and gaming the right keywords: “What exact phrase are people typing into Google?” That approach led to over-optimized content — pages stuffed with phrases like “best expert speaker Boston cleantech” — written more for algorithms than actual humans.  But with Google Gemini and other AI models now interpreting search queries like a smart research assistant, the game has changed entirely.  Google is no longer just matching phrases — it’s interpreting what the user wants to do and why they’re asking. Here’s What That Looks Like: Let’s say someone searches: “How do I find a reputable expert on fusion energy who can speak at our cleantech summit?” In the old system, pages that mentioned “renewable energy,” “expert,” and “speaker” might rank — regardless of whether they actually helped the user solve their problem. Now Google more intuitively understands: • The user wants to evaluate credibility • The user is planning an event • The user needs someone available to speak • The context is likely professional or academic If your page simply has the right keywords but doesn’t send the right signals — you’re invisible. Able to plan ahead Google and AI search platforms now go beyond just grabbing facts. They string together pieces of information to answer more complex, multi-step queries.  In traditional search, users ask one simple question at a time. But with multi-step queries, users are increasingly expecting one search to handle a series of related questions or tasks all at once — and now Google can actually follow along and reason through those steps.  So imagine you’re planning a conference. A traditional search might look like: "Best conference venues in Boston” But a multi-step query might be: “Find a conference venue in Boston with breakout rooms, check availability in October, and suggest nearby hotels with group rates.” This used to require three or four different searches, and you’d piece it together yourself. Now Google can handle that entire chain of related tasks, plan the steps behind the scenes, and return a highly curated answer — often pulling from multiple sources of structured and unstructured data. Even Better at understanding context Google now gets the difference between ‘a speaker at a conference’ and ‘a Bluetooth speaker’ — because it understands what you mean, not just what you type.”  In the past, Google would match keywords literally. If your page had the word “speaker,” it might rank for anything from event keynotes to audio gear. That’s why so many search results felt off or required extra digging. Now Google reads between the lines. It understands that “conference speaker” likely refers to a person who gives talks, possibly with credentials, experience, and a bio.  And that “Bluetooth speaker” is a product someone might want to compare or buy. Why this matters for marketers: If you’re relying on vague or generic content — or just “keyword-stuffing” — your pages will fall flat. Google is no longer fooled by superficial matches. It wants depth, clarity, and specificity. Reads More Than Just Text Google now processes images, videos, charts, infographics, and even audio — and uses that multimedia information to answer search queries more completely.  This now means that your content isn’t just being read like a document — it’s being watched, listened to, and interpreted like a human would. For example: • A chart showing rising enrollment in nursing programs might get picked up as supporting evidence for a story about healthcare education trends. • A YouTube video of your CEO speaking at a conference might be indexed as proof of thought leadership. • An infographic explaining how your service works could surface in an AI-generated summary — even if the keyword isn’t mentioned directly in text. Ignoring multimedia formats?  Then, your competitors’ visual storytelling could be outperforming your plain content.  Because you're not giving Google the kind of layered, helpful content that Gemini is now designed to highlight. Why This Matters There's a big risk here.  Marketers who ignore these developments are in danger of becoming invisible in search. Your old SEO tricks won’t work. Your content won’t appear in AI summaries. Your organization won’t be discovered by journalists, customers, or partners who now rely on smarter search results to make decisions faster. If you’re in communications, PR, media relations, or digital marketing, here’s the key message. You are no longer just fighting for links. You need to fight to be included in the Google AI summary itself at the top of search results - that's the new #1 goal.  Why? Journalists can now find their answers before ever clicking on your beautifully written news page. Prospective students, donors, and customers will often just see the AI’s version of your content. Your brand’s visibility now hinges on being seen as “AI-quotable.” If your organization isn’t optimized for this new AI-driven landscape, you risk becoming invisible at the very moment people are searching for what you offer. How You Can Take Action (and Why Your Role Is More Important Than Ever) This isn’t just an IT or SEO problem. It’s a communications strategy opportunity—and you are central to the solution. What You Can Do Now to Prepare for AI Overviews 1. Get Familiar with How AI “Reads” Your Content AI Overviews pull content from websites that are structured clearly, written credibly, and explain things in simple language. Action Items: Review your existing content: Is it jargon-heavy? Outdated? Lacking expert quotes or explanations? Then, it's time to clean house. 2. Collaborate with your SEO and Web Teams Communicators and content creators now need to work hand-in-hand with technical teams. Action Items: Check your pages to see if you are using proper schema markup.  Are you creating topic pages that explain complex ideas in simple, scannable formats? 3. Showcase Human Expertise AI values content backed by real people—especially experts with credentials. Action Items: Make sure your expert profiles are up to date.  Make sure you continue to enhance them with posts, links to media coverage, short videos, images and infographics that highlight the voices behind your brand and make you stand out in search. 4. Don’t Just Publish—Package AI favors content that it can easily digest and display such as summary paragraphs, FAQs, and bold headers that provide structure for search engines.  This also makes your content more scannable and engaging to humans. Action Items: Repurpose your best content into AI-friendly formats: think structured lists, how-tos, and definitions. 5. Monitor Your Presence in AI Overviews Regularly search key topics related to your organization and see what shows up. Action Items: Is your content featured? If not, whose is—and identify what they doing differently. A New Role for Communications: From Media Pitches to Machine-Readable Influence This isn’t the end of communications as we know it—it’s an evolution. Your role now includes helping your organization communicate clearly to machines as well as to people. Think of it as “PR for the algorithm.”  You’re not just managing narratives for the public—you’re shaping what AI systems say about you and your brand. That means: • Ensuring your best ideas and experts are front and center online. • Making complex information simple and quotable. • Collaborating cross-functionally like never before. Final Thought: AI Search Rewards the Prepared Google’s new AI Overviews are here. They’re not a beta test. This is the future of search, and it’s already rolling out. If your institution, company, or nonprofit wants to be discovered, trusted, and quoted, you can no longer afford to ignore how AI interprets your online presence. Communications and media professionals are now at the front lines of discoverability. And the best way to lead is to act now, work collaboratively, and elevate your role in this new era of search. Want to see how leading organizations are getting ahead in the age of AI search? Discover how ExpertFile is helping corporations, universities, healthcare institutions and industry associations transform their knowledge into AI-optimized assets — boosting visibility, credibility, and media reach. Get your free download of our app at www.expertfile.com

Why Simultaneous Voting Makes for Good Decisions

How can organizations make robust decisions when time is short, and the stakes are high? It’s a conundrum not unfamiliar to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Back in 2021, the FDA found itself under tremendous pressure to decide on the approval of the experimental drug aducanumab, designed to slow the progress of Alzheimer’s disease—a debilitating and incurable condition that ranks among the top 10 causes of death in the United States. Welcomed by the market as a game-changer on its release, aducanumab quickly ran into serious problems. A lack of data on clinical efficacy along with a slew of dangerous side effects meant physicians in their droves were unwilling to prescribe it. Within months of its approval, three FDA advisors resigned in protest, one calling aducanumab, “the worst approval decision that the FDA has made that I can remember.” By the start of 2024, the drug had been pulled by its manufacturers. Of course, with the benefit of hindsight and data from the public’s use of aducanumab, it is easy for us to tell that FDA made the wrong decision then. But is there a better process that would have given FDA the foresight to make the right decision, under limited information? The FDA routinely has to evaluate novel drugs and treatments; medical and pharmaceutical products that can impact the wellbeing of millions of Americans. With stakes this high, the FDA is known to tread carefully: assembling different advisory, review, and funding committees providing diverse knowledge and expertise to assess the evidence and decide whether to approve a new drug, or not. As a federal agency, the FDA is also required to maintain scrupulous records that cover its decisions, and how those decisions are made. The Impact of Voting Mechanisms on Decision Quality Some of this data has been analyzed by Goizueta’s Tian Heong Chan, associate professor of information systems and operation management. Together with Panos Markou of the University of Virginia’s Darden School of Business, Chan scrutinized 17 years’ worth of information, including detailed transcripts from more than 500 FDA advisory committee meetings, to understand the mechanisms and protocols used in FDA decision-making: whether committee members vote to approve products sequentially, with everyone in the room having a say one after another; or if voting happens simultaneously via the push of a button, say, or a show of hands. Chan and Markou also looked at the impact of sequential versus simultaneous voting to see if there were differences in the quality of the decisions each mechanism produced. Their findings are singular. It turns out that when stakeholders vote simultaneously, they make better decisions. Drugs or products approved this way are far less likely to be issued post-market boxed warnings (warnings issued by FDA that call attention to potentially serious health risks associated with the product, that must be displayed on the prescription box itself), and more than two times less likely to be recalled. The FDA changed its voting protocols in 2007, when they switched from sequentially voting around the room, one person after another, to simultaneous voting procedures. And the results are stunning. Tian Heong Chan, Associate Professor of Information Systems & Operation Management “Decisions made by simultaneous voting are more than twice as effective,” says Chan. “After 2007, you see that just 3.4% of all drugs and products approved this way end up being discontinued or recalled. This compares with an 8.6% failure rate for drugs approved by the FDA using more sequential processes—the round robin where individuals had been voting one by one around the room.” Imagine you are told beforehand that you are going to vote on something important by simply raising your hand or pressing a button. In this scenario, you are probably going to want to expend more time and effort in debating all the issues and informing yourself before you decide. Tian Heong Chan “On the other hand, if you know the vote will go around the room, and you will have a chance to hear how others’ speak and explain their decisions, you’re going to be less motivated to exchange and defend your point of view beforehand,” says Chan. In other words, simultaneous decision-making is two times less likely to generate a wrong decision as the sequential approach. Why is this? Chan and Markou believe that these voting mechanisms impact the quality of discussion and debate that undergird decision-making; that the quality of decisions is significantly impacted by how those decisions are made. Quality Discussion Leads to Quality Decisions Parsing the FDA transcripts for content, language, and tonality in both settings, Chan and Markou find evidence to support this. Simultaneous voting or decision-making drives discussions that are characterized by language that is more positive, more authentic, and more even in terms of expressions of authority and hierarchy, says Chan. What’s more, these deliberations and exchanges are deeper and more far-ranging in quality. We find marked differences in the tone of speech and the topics discussed when stakeholders know they will be voting simultaneously. There is less hierarchy in these exchanges, and individuals exhibit greater confidence in sharing their points of view more freely. Tian Heong Chan “We also see more questions being asked, and a broader range of topics and ideas discussed,” says Chan. In this context, decision-makers are also less likely to reach unanimous agreement. Instead, debate is more vigorous and differences of opinion remain more robust. Conversely, sequential voting around the room is typically preceded by shorter discussion in which stakeholders share fewer opinions and ask fewer questions. And this demonstrably impacts the quality of the decisions made, says Chan. Sharing a different perspective to a group requires effort and courage. With sequential voting or decision-making, there seems to be less interest in surfacing diverse perspectives or hidden aspects to complex problems. Tian Heong Chan “So it’s not that individuals are being influenced by what other people say when it comes to voting on the issue—which would be tempting to infer—rather, it’s that sequential voting mechanisms seem to take a bit more effort out of the process.” When decision-makers are told that they will have a chance to vote and to explain their vote, one after another, their incentives to make a prior effort to interrogate each other vigorously, and to work that little bit harder to surface any shortcomings in their own understanding or point of view, or in the data, are relatively weaker, say Chan and Markou. The Takeaway for Organizations Making High-Stakes Decisions Decision-making in different contexts has long been the subject of scholarly scrutiny. Chan and Markou’s research sheds new light on the important role that different mechanisms have in shaping the outcomes of decision-making—and the quality of the decisions that are jointly taken. And this should be on the radar of organizations and institutions charged with making choices that impact swathes of the community, they say. “The FDA has a solid tradition of inviting diversity into its decision-making. But the data shows that harnessing the benefits of diversity is contingent on using the right mechanisms to surface the different expertise you need to be able to see all the dimensions of the issue, and make better informed decisions about it,” says Chan. A good place to start? By a concurrent show of hands. Tian Heong Chan is an associate professor of information systems and operation management. he is available to speak about this topic - click on his con now to arrange an interview today.

Hiring More Nurses Generates Revenue for Hospitals

Underfunding is driving an acute shortage of trained nurses in hospitals and care facilities in the United States. It is the worst such shortage in more than four decades. One estimate from the American Hospital Association puts the deficit north of one million. Meanwhile, a recent survey by recruitment specialist AMN Healthcare suggests that 900,000 more nurses will drop out of the workforce by 2027. American nurses are quitting in droves, thanks to low pay and burnout as understaffing increases individual workload. This is bad news for patient outcomes. Nurses are estimated to have eight times more routine contact with patients than physicians. They shoulder the bulk of all responsibility in terms of diagnostic data collection, treatment plans, and clinical reporting. As a result, understaffing is linked to a slew of serious problems, among them increased wait times for patients in care, post-operative infections, readmission rates, and patient mortality—all of which are on the rise across the U.S. Tackling this crisis is challenging because of how nursing services are reimbursed. Most hospitals operate a payment system where services are paid for separately. Physician services are billed as separate line items, making them a revenue generator for the hospitals that employ them. But under Medicare, nursing services are charged as part of a fixed room and board fee, meaning that hospitals charge the same fee regardless of how many nurses are employed in the patient’s care. In this model, nurses end up on the other side of hospitals’ balance sheets: a labor expense rather than a source of income. For beleaguered administrators looking to sustain quality of care while minimizing costs (and maximizing profits), hiring and retaining nursing staff has arguably become something of a zero-sum game in the U.S. The Hidden Costs of Nurse Understaffing But might the balance sheet in fact be skewed in some way? Could there be potential financial losses attached to nurse understaffing that administrators should factor into their hiring and remuneration decisions? Research by Goizueta Professors Diwas KC and Donald Lee, as well as recent Goizueta PhD graduates Hao Ding 24PhD (Auburn University) and Sokol Tushe 23PhD (Muma College of Business), would suggest there are. Their new peer-reviewed publication* finds that increasing a single nurse’s workload by just one patient creates a 17% service slowdown for all other patients under that nurse’s care. Looking at the data another way, having one additional nurse on duty during the busiest shift (typically between 7am and 7pm) speeds up emergency department work and frees up capacity to treat more patients such that hospitals could be looking at a major increase in revenue. The researchers calculate that this productivity gain could equate to a net increase of $470,000 per 10,000 patient visits—and savings to the tune of $160,000 in lost earnings for the same number of patients as wait times are reduced. “A lot of the debate around nursing in the U.S. has focused on the loss of quality in care, which is hugely important,” says Diwas KC. But looking at the crisis through a productivity lens means we’re also able to understand the very real economic value that nurses bring too: the revenue increases that come with capacity gains. Diwas KC, Goizueta Foundation Term Professor of Information Systems & Operations Management “Our findings challenge the predominant thinking around nursing as a cost,” adds Lee. “What we see is that investing in nursing staff more than pays for itself in downstream financial benefits for hospitals. It is effectively a win-win-win for patients, nurses, and healthcare providers.” Nurse Load: the Biggest Impact on Productivity To get to these findings, the researchers analyzed a high-resolution dataset on patient flow through a large U.S. teaching hospital. They looked at the real-time workloads of physicians and nurses working in the emergency department between April 2018 and March 2019, factoring in variables such as patient demographics and severity of complaint or illness. Tracking patients from admission to triage and on to treatment, the researchers were able to tease out the impact that the number of nurses and physicians on duty had on patient throughput. Using a novel machine learning technique developed at Goizueta by Lee, they were able to identify the effect of increasing or reducing the workforce. The contrast between physicians and nursing staff is stark, says Tushe. “When you have fewer nurses on duty, capacity and patient throughput drops by an order of magnitude—far, far more than when reducing the number of doctors. Our results show that for every additional patient the nurse is responsible for, service speed falls by 17%. That compares to just 1.4% if you add one patient to the workload of an attending physician. In other words, nurses’ impact on productivity in the emergency department is more than eight times greater.” Boosting Revenue Through Reduced Wait Times Adding an additional nurse to the workforce, on the other hand, increases capacity appreciably. And as more patients are treated faster, hospitals can expect a concomitant uptick in revenue, says KC. “It’s well documented that cutting down wait time equates to more patients treated and more income. Previous research shows that reducing service time by 15 minutes per 30,000 patient visits translates to $1.4 million in extra revenue for a hospital.” In our study, we calculate that staffing one additional nurse in the 7am to 7pm emergency department shift reduces wait time by 23 minutes, so hospitals could be looking at an increase of $2.33 million per year. Diwas KC This far eclipses the costs associated with hiring one additional nurse, says Lee. “According to 2022 U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, the average nursing salary in the U.S. is $83,000. Fringe benefits account for an additional 50% of the base salary. The total cost of adding one nurse during the 7am to 7pm shift is $310,000 (for 2.5 full-time employees). When you do the math, it is clear. The net hospital gain is $2 million for the hospital in our study. Or $470,000 per 10,000 patient visits.” Incontrovertible Benefits to Hiring More Nurses These findings should provide compelling food for thought both to healthcare administrators and U.S. policymakers. For too long, the latter have fixated on the upstream costs, without exploring the downstream benefits of nursing services, say the researchers. Their study, the first to quantify the economic value of nurses in the U.S., asks “better questions,” argues Tushe; exploiting newly available data and analytics to reveal incontrovertible financial benefits that attach to hiring—and compensating—more nurses in American hospitals. We know that a lot of nurses are leaving the profession not just because of cuts and burnout, but also because of lower pay. We would say to administrators struggling to hire talented nurses to review current wage offers, because our analysis suggests that the economic surplus from hiring more nurses could be readily applied to retention pay rises also. Sokol Tushe 23PhD, Muma College of Business The Case for Mandated Ratios For state-level decision makers, Lee has additional words of advice. “In 2004, California mandated minimum nurse-to-patient ratios in hospitals. Since then, six more states have added some form of minimum ratio requirement. The evidence is that this has been beneficial to patient outcomes and nurse job satisfaction. Our research now adds an economic dimension to the list of benefits as well. Ipso facto, policymakers ought to consider wider adoption of minimum nurse-to-patient ratios.” However, decision makers go about tackling the shortage of nurses in the U.S., they should go about it fast and soon, says KC. “This is a healthcare crisis that is only set to become more acute in the near future. As our demographics shift and our population starts again out, demand for quality will increase. So too must the supply of care capacity. But what we are seeing is the nursing staffing situation in the U.S. moving in the opposite direction. All of this is manifesting in the emergency department. That’s where wait times are getting longer, mistakes are being made, and overworked nurses are quitting. It is creating a vicious cycle that needs to be broken.” Diwas Diwas KC is a professor of information systems & operations management and Donald Lee is an associate professor of information systems & operations management. Both experts are available to speak about this important topic - simply click on either icon now to arrange an interview today.

“Females are not autistic enough”: Aston University academic hosts talk on new book exploring female autism

Professor Gina Rippon signs a copy of The Lost Girls of Autism for talk attendee Dr Georgie Agar Professor Gina Rippon’s new book, The Lost Girls of Autism, investigates why autism was thought to be a male condition for so long She gave a public talk at Aston University on 6 May 2025 exploring the central themes of the book Women and girls with autism have long been overlooked as they are better at masking and camouflaging so ‘fail’ standard tests. Autism in women and girls has been overlooked for decades, and Gina Rippon, professor emeritus of cognitive neuroimaging at Aston University Institute of Health and Neurodevelopment (IHN), has given a talk about her new book on the topic at Aston University. The book, The Lost Girls of Autism, was released on 3 April 2025, coinciding with Autism Acceptance Month, with the subtitle ‘How Science Failed Autistic Women and the New Research that’s Changing the Story’. Autism is characterised by a number of now well-known traits, including social awkwardness, extreme obsessions, and unusual movements and coping mechanisms known as ‘stimming’. It was (allegedly) first described in the 1940s separately by Austrian psychiatrists Leo Kanner and Hans Asperger. Originally identified as a rare developmental condition, since the 1980s, there has been an 800% increase in diagnoses, leading to concerns about an ‘autism epidemic’. There is a strong and enduring belief that it is a condition much more prevalent in males. Professor Rippon described her research as “looking at how brains get to be different and what that means for the owners of those brains”. This includes looking at the functions of different areas of the brain using scanners. During research into a number of brain conditions and diseases with obvious differences between the sexes, including how the disease progresses, such as Alzheimer’s in women, or prevalence in one particular sex, such as Parkinson’s in men, Professor Rippon also became interested in autism, also assumed to be largely a condition in males. However, during a research review, she found that many autism studies made no reference to sex differences. Amalgamated data from autism studies found that 80% of participants were male, and 25% of testing centres only tested males with autism. By only looking at males, Professor Rippon explained, the notion that autism is a male disorder became self-fulfilling. This does not just refer to scientific research. Even now, boys are ten times more likely to be referred for assessment for autism and twice as likely to be diagnosed than girls, even when they have exactly the same traits. 80% of autistic females have received multiple wrong diagnoses, including borderline personality disorder, social anxiety or obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). But why? The reason is the unchallenged belief that ‘autism is a “boy” thing’ causing a male spotlight problem in all aspects of the autism story. It could also be that females with autism express the condition differently. Professor Rippon said: “This took me back to [my previous book] The Gendered Brain when I was looking at the very clear view of what males should be like and what females should be like. If you look at the autistic population you have this clear idea that males are like this, but females, er, not so much? Females have poor social skills, but not as poor, or obsessive interests, but not as obsessive, so the trouble with females, is that they are not autistic enough.” The gold standard tests for autism are the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (ADOS) and the Autism Diagnostic Interview (ADI) tests. Professor Rippon believes these are heavily biased towards how the condition manifests itself in males, such as social awkwardness or extreme obsessions. For example, parents may well be asked if their son has an unusual interest in weather patterns or train timetables, but they are not asked if their daughter has an unusual interest in Barbie dolls, because dolls are seen as socially acceptable. Research has shown that females with autism are more likely to ‘camouflage’ their symptoms, watching how ‘normal people’ behave, even practising social interactions, so they appear more normal. They are also more likely to ‘mask’ symptoms behind a persona, such as the ‘class clown’ or ‘star athlete’, in an effort to fit in. Autistic females describe this behaviour as a ‘survival strategy’ to avoid being spotted as different. It is also the case that girls are more likely to have sensory processing problems, such as aversion to strong smells, which can be enough to affect their day-to-day lives. This has only recently been added to the diagnostic criteria for autism. If the camouflaging or masking collapses, rates of other conditions such as disordered eating or anorexia, self-harm and gender dysphoria are disproportionately high, and it is these which will become identified as the underlying difficulty, rather than autism itself. Professor Rippon said: “The next stage should be asking why this group of individuals persists in hiding their autism, especially when autism has been defined as a lack of interest in social connection. There’s what I call the ‘born to be mild’ effect, where little girls are trained to socialise more, to behave, not to make a fuss, if you feel uncomfortable, don’t tell anyone else about it. There’s a lovely comment from one late-diagnosed female who rues the fact that she was so well behaved and wishes that she had just burned more cars so that someone would have spotted her carefully camouflaged distress!” The final slide in the presentation covered what Professor Rippon called “an ironic footnote”. While Leo Kanner and Hans Asperger are described as the fathers of autism, writing in the 1940s, it was in fact a Soviet female psychiatrist, Grunya Sukhareva, writing in the 1920s, who first described autism, even clearly examining the differences in the condition between boys and girls. Why her research was ignored for so long is unclear, but the male spotlight problem may well have been avoided. For more information about The Lost Girls of Autism, visit https://www.panmacmillan.com/authors/gina-rippon/the-lost-girls-of-autism/9781035011629.

#Expert Research: The Use of AI in Financial Reporting

Artificial intelligence (AI) is developing into an amazing tool to help humans across multiple fields, including medicine and research, and much of that work is happening at Emory University’s Goizueta Business School. Financial reporting and auditing are both areas where AI can have a significant impact as companies and audit firms are rapidly adopting the use of such technology. But are financial managers willing to rely on the results of AI-generated information? In the context of audit adjustments, it depends on whether their company uses AI as well. Willing to Rely on AI? Cassandra Estep, assistant professor of accounting at Goizueta Business School, and her co-authors have a forthcoming study looking at financial managers’ perceptions of the use of AI, both within their companies and by their auditors. Research had already been done on how financial auditors react to using AI for evaluating complex financial reporting. That got Estep and her co-authors thinking there’s more to the story. “A big, important part of the financial reporting and auditing process is the managers within the companies being audited. We were interested in thinking about how they react to the use of AI by their auditors,” Estep says. “But then we also started thinking about what companies are investing in AI as well. That joint influence of the use of AI, both within the companies and by the auditors that are auditing the financials of those companies, is where it all started.” The Methodology Estep and her co-authors conducted a survey and experiment with senior-level financial managers with titles like CEO, CFO, or Controller – the people responsible for making financial reporting decisions within companies. The survey included questions to understand how companies are using AI. It also included open-ended questions designed to identify key themes about financial managers’ perceptions of AI use by their companies and their auditors. In the experiment, participants completed a hypothetical case in which they were asked about their willingness to record a downward adjustment to the fair value of a patent proposed by their auditors. The scenarios varied across randomly assigned conditions as to whether the auditor did or not did not use AI in coming up with the proposed valuation and adjustment, and whether their company did or did not use AI in generating their estimated value of the patent. When both the auditor and the company used AI, participants were willing to record a larger adjustment amount, i.e., decrease the value of the patent more. The authors find that these results are driven by increased perceptions of accuracy. It’s not necessarily a comfort thing, but a signal from the company that this is an acceptable way to do things, and it actually caused them to perceive the auditors’ information as more accurate and of higher quality. Cassandra Estep, assistant professor of accounting “Essentially, they viewed the auditors’ recommendation for adjusting the numbers to be more accurate and of higher quality, and so they were more willing to accept the audit adjustment,” Estep says. Making Financial Reporting More Efficient Financial reporting is a critical process in any business. Companies and investors need timely and accurate information to make important decisions. With the added element of AI, financial reporting processes can include more external data. We touched on the idea that these tools can hopefully process a lot more information and data. For example, we’ve seen auditors and managers talk about using outside information. Cassandra Estep “Auditors might be able to use customer reviews and feedback as one of the inputs to deciding how much warranty expense the company should be estimating. And is that amount reasonable? The idea is that if customers are complaining, there could be some problem with the products.” Adding data to analytical processes, when done by humans alone, adds a significant amount of time to the calculations. Research from the European Spreadsheets Risks Interest Group says that more than 90% of all financial spreadsheets contain at least one error. Some forms of AI can process hundreds of thousands of calculations overnight, typically with fewer errors. In short, it can be more efficient. Efficiency was brought up a lot in our survey, the idea that things could be done faster with AI. Cassandra Estep “We also asked the managers about their perspective on the audit side, and they did hope that audit fees would go down, because auditors would be able to do things more quickly and efficiently as well,” Estep says. “But the flip side of that is that using AI could also raise more questions and more issues that have to be investigated. There’s also the potential for more work.” The Fear of Being Replaced The fear of being replaced is a more or less universal worry for anyone whose industry is beginning to adopt the use of AI in some form. While the respondents in Estep’s survey looked forward to more efficient and effective handling of complex financial reporting by AI, they also emphasized the need to keep the human element involved in any decisions made using AI. What we were slightly surprised about was the positive reactions that the managers had in our survey. While some thought the use of AI was inevitable, there’s this idea that it can make things better. Cassandra Estep “But there’s still a little bit of trepidation,” Estep says. “One of the key themes that came up was yes, we need to use these tools. We should take advantage of them to improve the quality and the efficiency with which we do things. But we also need to keep that human element. At the end of the day, humans need to be responsible. Humans need to be making the decisions.” A Positive Outlook The benefits of AI were clear to the survey participants. They recognized it as a positive trend, whether or not it was currently used in their financial reporting. If they weren’t regularly using AI, they expected to be using it soon. I think one of the most interesting things to us about this paper is this idea that AI can be embraced. Companies and auditors are still somewhat in their infancy of figuring out how to use it, but big investments are being made. Cassandra Estep “And then, again, there’s the fact that our experiment also shows a situation where managers were willing to accept the auditors’ proposed adjustments. This arguably goes against their incentives as management to keep the numbers more positive or optimistic,” Estep continues. “The auditors are serving that role of helping managers provide more reliable financial information, and that can be viewed as a positive outcome.” “There’s still some hesitation. We’re still figuring out these tools. We see examples all the time of where AI has messed up, or put together false information. But I think the positive sentiment across our survey participants, and then also the results of our experiment, reinforce the idea that AI can be a good thing and that it can be embraced. Even in a setting like financial reporting and auditing, where there can be fear of job replacement, the focus on the human-technology interaction can hopefully lead to improved situations.” Cassandra Estep, is an assistant professor of accounting at Goizueta Business School, and a co-author of the forthcoming study looking at financial managers’ perceptions of the use of AI. She's available to speak about this important topic - simply click on her icon now to arrange an interview today.

UD researchers launch open-source tool to boost global food security and water sustainability

Efficient water usage in agriculture is crucial for sustaining a growing human population. A better understanding of the systems that support agriculture, farmers and farmlands allows for food production to become more efficient and prosperous. That's what makes the Monthly Irrigated and Rainfed Cropped Areas Open Source (MIRCA-OS) dataset so important. MIRCA-OS offers high-resolution data on 23 crop classes — including maize, rice and wheat — and helps researchers, students and farmers examine irrigation, rainfall and croplands and how they interact with global water systems. Co-authored by Endalkachew (Endi) Kebede, a doctoral student in University of Delaware’s Department of Geography and Spatial Sciences, a recent paper focused on MIRCA-OS was published in Nature Scientific Data. Kyle Davis, assistant professor in the Department of Geography and Spatial Sciences and the Department of Plant and Soil Sciences, served as a co-author on the paper and coordinated the study. “We first developed a comprehensive data library of crop-specific irrigated and rainfed harvested areas for all countries,” Kebede said. “This involved two years of gathering data from a wide range of international, national and regional sources. Through this process, we produced a tabulated crop calendar, annual harvested area grids and monthly harvested area grids for all irrigated and rainfed crops.” “The amount of effort that Endi put in to gather, process and harmonize all of this data is truly incredible,” Davis said. “His effort is a very important contribution to the scientific and development communities.” Doctoral student Endalkachew Kebede (left) and Assistant Professor Kyle Davis. (Photo credit: University of Delaware) Cropland accounts for 13% of Earth's total habitable land, and the preservation of cropland is important in feeding the growing global population. “Crop production has been a widespread human activity for a few thousand years, and it has a huge role in global food security,” Kebede said. “But it also has unintended impacts on the environment, such as overutilization of water resources, pollution through rivers or the effects on soil and the environment.” MIRCA-OS can play a crucial role in helping to better understand croplands and agriculture, allowing the global population to be successfully fed while minimizing the agricultural effects on the environment. In addition to the data included on cropland and water resources, MIRCA-OS allows researchers to view social aspects like poverty and unemployment through an agricultural lens, creating a better understanding of the interconnectivity of agriculture and social issues. MIRCA-OS is an updated version of the earlier MIRCA2000 dataset. Kebede said the MIRCA2000 was released nearly two decades ago, so renewing the data gives users more accurate and timely information. Both datasets specialized in examining irrigation and rainfall, but the MIRCA-OS added two new complexities to their data. First, MIRCA-OS is open source, meaning it is publicly available for anyone to use, download, or modify. Kebede said the added accessibility allows the technology to contribute to anyone's work, whether it be a student, a researcher or a farmer. “Anybody can use, update it, or upscale it to the special skill they’re interested in,” Kebede said. “Some might use it for research, some might use it to create policies and some might use it to practice agriculture.” To arrange an interview with Davis, visit his profile and click on the contact button.