Experts Matter. Find Yours.
Connect for media, speaking, professional opportunities & more.
Survey says: Senior leaders are using AI, but they could use more direction
Over the years, study upon study has shown that senior leaders are slower to adapt to new technology – email, the Internet and social media – than younger employees. That’s not necessarily so with AI, according to the University of Delaware’s Saleem Mistry. Mistry, associate professor of management at UD's Alfred Lerner College of Business & Economics, recently conducted a survey of more than 200 university alumni, 75% of which had more than 16 years of professional experience. He found that senior leaders are actively adopting AI to solve their biggest challenges. However, they are doing so largely without structured support or guidance. Here are four findings from Mistry's survey that shows how AI is actually being used at the top. Senior Leaders Are Overwhelmingly Self-Taught Mistry said his most glaring finding is the gap between high AI adoption among senior leaders and the near-total absence of formal corporate support. Although a majority use these tools, they are almost entirely self-taught, which highlights visible opportunity that organizations aren’t really steering the AI conversation for leaders: High usage. 62% of all senior leaders surveyed use AI tools "regularly" or "occasionally" in their work. Training gap. Of those users, an overwhelming 80% report their organization provides "Never" or only "Sometimes" (mostly never) adequate training. Mistry said this shows that leaders from VP level down are using tools like ChatGPT and Copilot informally to keep up with heavy workloads, without any real organizational guidance. The stakes are high. In the survey, a vice president of legal was using AI for compliance tasks and a manager of three was using it for performance reviews, both with no formal training. “These are senior leaders handling sensitive work while essentially figuring it out on their own,” Mistry said. There is a clear ladder of AI use Leaders are not using AI randomly. There is a clear progression in how they use it, moving through three levels. • Tier 1 (The Drafters) This is the most common starting point. Leaders use AI to improve writing and communication. They draft emails, shape documents, and refine tone. As one Director of Product put it, it helps him "polish phrasing" and adjust tone and voice. • Tier 2 (The Synthesizers) At this stage, leaders use AI to manage information overload. They summarize meetings, condense documents, and pull together research so they can keep up with large volumes of input. As one leader managing a team of 200 said, "Being a leader requires attention in a variety of areas. AI helps me manage the vast amounts of information I need to consume." • Tier 3 (The Architects) Here, leaders move beyond writing and summarizing. They use AI to automate parts of their work. This includes building agents, creating custom GPTs, or designing tools that track work and performance. One leader managing 300 people said, "It will eliminate half or more of my overhead." Managers and individual contributors use AI for different reasons People managers and individual contributors (IC) are using AI for very different reasons based on their roles. • For people managers, their main challenge is scale. They are overloaded with communication and administration, so they use AI to reduce noise and keep up. They lean heavily on summarization and tone adjustment tools. • For project leads and ICs, their focus is output. They use AI to produce work faster, including drafting content, building decks, writing code, or generating ideas. This difference reflects their jobs. One group is trying to keep up, the other is trying to produce more. It also shows that AI is not a single-use tool. Its value depends on the problem it is being used to solve. This difference reflects their jobs. One group is trying to keep up, the other is trying to produce more. It also shows that AI is not a single-use tool. Its value depends on the problem it is being used to solve. Resistance to AI is mostly intentional Among the 38 percent of leaders who do not use AI, resistance is usually not based on lack of awareness. It falls into three groups. • The Ethical Objectors. Some avoid AI due to concerns about its broader impact. • The Quality Skeptics. Some do not trust the output and feel it is not reliable enough for important work. • The Blocked. Some are not allowed to use AI due to company policy. Mistry concludes that there is a clear overall pattern: Leaders are using AI in practical ways, but mostly without structured support or guidance. “If it feels like you are figuring this out as you go without much help from your organization, that is consistent with what most leaders are experiencing,” Mistry said. To connect directly with Mistry and arrange an interview, visit his profile page and click on the "connect" button. Interested reporters can also email MediaRelations@udel.edu.
Expert Insights: Want More Engagement? Eliminate the Barriers.
Anyone born in the 70’s or earlier will probably remember it well. Time was when playing any kind of video game meant physically disporting yourself to the local arcade—a twilight zone of flashing neon, electronic beeps and bops, and the clink of quarters hitting the slot. As technology advanced, the videogame came to you. Home consoles and TV stations rigged with joysticks duly became the mainstay of gaming. The Atari 2600 brought the arcade experience into dens all over the US; Pac-Man, Space Invaders, and Asteroids now at the fingertips of a generation of games who no longer needed to leave home to play. Fast forward to the era of smart phones and hi-tech, and gaming has evolved again. Today, Fortnite, Minecraft, and The Legend of Zelda can accompany you pretty much anywhere—onto a train or a bus, into the canteen at work or school, or under the covers at 2am. In our always-on, on-demand world, video gaming increasingly meets players where they are; a play-anywhere, digital user experience that empowers individuals to engage with their game of choice wherever they are, whenever it suits, and via whatever platform they prefer, desktop or mobile. For users, the benefits seem clear. But what about game producers? As availability expands to new channels and platforms, how does it change user behavior? Does it deepen engagement or does cross-platform continuity simply end up redistributing play—the addition of each new platform shifting players away from, and effectively cannibalizing, existing channels? It’s a conundrum, and not just for video game producers. Retailers, bankers, insurance firms, media, and hospitality providers—anyone with an online-first approach looking to meet their customers wherever they are—should also be cognizant of the potential downsides of channel expansion in the digital space. Weighing in here is research by Professor of Marketing and expert in the intersection of sports and cultural analytics and marketing Michael Lewis. Together with Wooyong Jo of Purdue, Lewis looks at the impact of omni-channel strategy on videogames—a proxy, he says, for other sectors and industries. What they find is critical for marketers and decision-makers in any context or business setting. Increasing the digital touchpoints between your product and customers does impact behavior—but the net results are overwhelmingly positive. Video game players play more, they spend more frequently, and they integrate gameplay more deeply into their everyday lives. In other words, the investment pays off. And the dividends in customer engagement are serious. Switching to the Switch To unpack all of this, Lewis and Jo partnered with a large US video game publisher to analyze player-level behavioral data for one its major titles in the Multiplayer Online Battle Arena, or MOBA genre. Players form teams and compete to destroy opposing team’s bases, selecting a character from a set of 100+ options. Revenue for the publisher comes from a “freemium” business model—users can make voluntary purchases to unlock new characters or buy cosmetic enhancements. These purchases are geared toward enhancing the gaming experience but don’t affect competitive outcomes, making them a critical measure of engagement. In 2019, the game was released for the Nintendo Switch, which can be docked in home consoles but is most commonly used as a mobile, hand-held device. PC players were given the option to download this new version and continue gameplay seamlessly using their existing accounts. Analyzing player behavior before and after the adoption of the new Switch platform, Lewis and Jo were able to zoom in on some critical measures of user engagement including game usage or the total number of matches played, in-game spending—what, when and how much players spent—and player inactivity or churn. “We were able to really get into player behavior over time, and what happens when you introduce the Switch option and remove the constraints of having to play in one place—the home or gaming PC,” says Lewis. “What happens when you make it possible for players to access the game they love while they’re commuting or on their lunchbreak?” Plenty, it turns out. Mobile access: gameplay, spending and churn Crunching the data, Lewis and Jo find that mobile access dramatically increases gameplay. Players who adopted the Switch version played approximately 31% more games than before—a dramatic uptick that underscores how flexibility gains translate into new opportunities to play and engage. And that’s not all. Lewis and Jo also find that gameplay becomes less concentrated within narrow windows—after school or work, say—and is now more spread out across the day, the result of the “ubiquity effect,” says Lewis. “Take away the constraints of having to be in a fixed location and you see players adding additional play sessions. Interestingly though, we don’t find any adverse effect on PC gaming. Players are simply playing more, and playing longer, rather than replacing PC time.” Then there’s in-game purchasing. MOBA-type games typically give players the option to voluntarily buy modifications for characters, known as “skins.” These skins are cosmetic enhancements: new armor, costumes, skill animations or effects. Crucially, these kinds of purchases don’t advance players to new levels of success in the game. Instead, they are used for personalization—to demonstrate status or to celebrate an in-game event. Lewis and Jo find that mobile adopters make more frequent in-game purchases. While the overall total doesn’t increase materially, these players are spending small amounts, more often—almost 7% more frequently than before. This makes intuitive sense, says Lewis. If players are logging in more often, they have more opportunities to feel inspired to want to spend on skins. But there’s another factor that may be at work. “With this kind of in-game purchasing, it’s likely that a lot of it is about credibility. When you buy a skin or a character pack, it’s like you have more aura within the game; you want to signal something to other players and let yourself be known. And this is more than just monetary, it’s about a deeper kind of engagement,” says Lewis. “It’s possible that as mobile access makes the game more of a frequent companion, as the rate of play increases, there’s this effect that players fall deeper into the community—their engagement deepens even more.” Interestingly, the shift to mobile access had the most significant impact precisely on those players whose pre-Switch in-game purchasing was lowest. These users, who were arguably most likely to disengage and drift away from the game, became significantly more active once the hand-held option became available. “If you have players spending less and less inside the game, the intuition is that these are the customers you are most at risk of losing,” says Lewis. “Bringing in the Switch has seen these customers—those more prone to churn—actively reengage with the game, maybe because they have greater propensity for the mobile version.” Either way, this should be a particularly interesting finding for marketers, he adds; retaining existing users is typically cheaper than attracting new ones. “The evidence suggests that mobile access can serve not only as a growth strategy, but also a defensive one if it helps keep marginal users engaged; those who might otherwise have detached from the product altogether.” Help Them Switch So far, so encouraging. There is one potential downside to porting a game or online product to a new channel, however, and that is usability. Lewis and Jo find that players who switched between platforms experience a slight, initial decline in in-game performance—likely because of differences in the control systems between devices. Players who’ve been using keyboard and mouse controls may need time to adapt to hand-held controllers. To mitigate this, he and Jo suggest that producers could offer tutorials or introductory gameplay modes that accelerate the learning curve as users adjust to the new interface. In most cases, usability should be factored in as an additional, hidden cost, when developers and organizations are contemplating investing in more online customer touchpoints. “Expanding your online channels will always have some cost. Taking a game from one platform and porting it to another one isn’t free, so you will want to anticipate the hurdles, even as you weigh up the clear benefits,” says Lewis. “The key is to make sure you protect your users. With things like video games, you want to think about how to guide or upskill your players, maybe have them play bots at first to ramp up their capabilities. Whenever you create a new channel that has a different operating system from the user’s perspective, you’re probably going to want to provide some aid to your fan community.” The benefits of omni-channel access should always be weighted against the costs involved, counsels Lewis. Even so, today’s competitive pressures—the seemingly inexorable march of technological innovation and evolving user expectations—are likely to make platform expansion unavoidable for most online businesses. In the world of video gaming, as major franchises release new products across multiple platforms, and player preferences become more sophisticated, companies may simply have to adopt similar strategies to remain competitive. “As everyone else invests in the same new technologies, you almost have to do the same—just as a matter of doing business,” says Lewis. “If you are launching a video game, you’ve got to compete with whatever Call of Duty or Grand Theft Auto are doing. You can’t just tell your players they can only engage on one platform. The competition is continuously raising the stakes just in terms of the bare minimum.” Building Fandom: the Connective Cultural Tissue More broadly, Lewis and Jo’s findings speak to how human beings form communities of shared passion around business entities and, perhaps more compellingly, around cultural phenomena: video games, for sure, but also sports teams, music, films, comic books, fashion, and more. Understanding the mechanisms that drive and deepen engagement sheds more light on what Lewis calls the “connective cultural tissue of fandom: ”the powerful social bonds, camaraderie, and shared identity that connect people to cultural entities and to each other. Fandom, he argues, is the “key to our world.” Understanding fan behavior is critical to understanding how it is that games, brands, sporting teams, or politics forge communities built on shared passion. “Whatever your organization or business is, you are going to be interested in driving passion. You want people to engage and love what you do. What we’re looking at in this study is a building block towards understanding how cultural entities fit into consumers’ lives, and how eliminating barriers helps to expand communities and drive relationships—extending reach and engagement by weaving cultural experiences more deeply into everyday life.” The real challenge in front of organizations, be they video game producers or online retailers, says Lewis, is to give their product the kind of “cultural meaning” that creates fans—and not just users. “When you think about the behavior of fans, the level of passion and engagement that exists around cultural phenomena—whatever they are from video games to FIFA, the English Football League to the Super Bowl, Taylor Swift to the Republican Party—that’s where you see the passion that really drives the world. And that to me, is critical in understanding how business works, how societies function, and how our world evolves.”
CEOs 5 times more likely to survive fraud than a personal scandal
If the CEO of Astronomer had overseen tax fraud instead of being caught on a kiss cam cuddling his HR chief in an extramarital affair, he might still have a job. That’s because, according to a new study, CEOs are five times more likely to be fired for personal misconduct than for overseeing financial fraud. “For financial fraud, the CEO can easily say, ‘Hey, it wasn’t me,’” said Aaron Hill, Ph.D., an associate professor in the University of Florida Warrington College of Business who led the study. “With personal misconduct, there’s no excuse.” The research, forthcoming in Strategic Organization, examined 59 cases of personal misconduct and compared them with more than 300 financial scandals at publicly traded companies between 1997 and 2020. The personal cases included inappropriate relationships, drug or alcohol incidents, domestic violence, falsifying credentials and derogatory speech. Hill and his colleagues found that boards move decisively when a CEO’s private behavior becomes public. By contrast, financial misconduct — such as accounting restatements that can wipe out billions in shareholder value — often leaves room for a chief executive to deflect blame onto others in the organization. Recent company performance influenced how boards responded, to a point. A CEO whose company was thriving could often survive a financial scandal because directors had both plausible deniability and a strong incentive not to disrupt success. But good numbers offered little protection when the problem was personal behavior. For example, McDonald’s ousted Steve Easterbrook in 2019 over a consensual relationship with a subordinate, even though the company’s stock price had doubled under his leadership. Hewlett-Packard similarly dismissed CEO Mark Hurd after harassment allegations despite his reputation for turning the firm around. “Even strong performance can’t erase certain kinds of misconduct,” Hill said. “There are some things you just can’t excuse.” The study also uncovered how scandals influenced succession decisions. When personal misconduct led to a firing, boards were more likely to promote an insider, signaling that the problem lay with one person rather than the culture of the company. Financial scandals, on the other hand, often prompted boards to recruit outsiders as a way of reassuring markets that the firm was serious about change. “It’s a signaling move,” Hill said. “Bring in an outsider after fraud, and the market reacts positively. Stick with an insider after a personal scandal, and it says the organization itself is sound.” The researchers argue that these choices reveal how boards balance their fiduciary duty with the reputational risks of scandal. While dismissing a CEO can serve as a public relations reset, Hill emphasized that it is almost always a financially motivated calculation. “Boards are supposed to look out for the company and its shareholders,” he said. “But when they decide to keep a CEO after misconduct, I think it sends the wrong message — to employees, to investors and to the public.”
Recently named a Fellow of the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) International, Azim Eskandarian, D.Sc., the Alice T. and William H. Goodwin Jr. Dean of the Virginia Commonwealth University (VCU) College of Engineering, received one of the organization’s highest honors. The designation recognizes individuals who have made extraordinary and sustained impacts on the mobility industry through technical excellence, leadership, innovation and dedicated service to the profession and to SAE International. “SAE Fellows – whose leadership and technical contributions strengthen our organization embody the highest level of professional achievement,” said Carla Bailo, 2026 SAE International president and chair of the board of directors. “Election to SAE Fellow reflects an individual’s lasting influence on mobility engineering and reinforces the standards of excellence that guide SAE’s strategic direction.” Selected through a comprehensive review process led by the SAE International Fellows Committee and approved by the SAE International Board of Directors, SAE Fellows exemplify the organization’s mission to advance mobility knowledge and solutions for the benefit of humanity. “It is a great honor to receive this distinction from an organization that is so essential to the advancement of the automotive industry,” said Eskandarian. “I hope to continue collaborating with engineers, researchers and other professionals who share a vision for the great work we can do to improve the safety and efficiency of transportation.” Numerous scientific and technical contributions to automotive safety, academic programs, workforce development in crashworthiness, collision avoidance, advanced driver assistance systems, intelligent vehicles, and autonomous driving have stemmed from the more than 40 years of work Eskandarian has pioneered. His research on intelligent and autonomous vehicles includes the development of novel methods for driver safety systems. As an academic leader, Eskandarian’s enduring commitment to education, mentorship and service led him to start impactful academic programs at several universities. This includes robotics and autonomous systems programs and new master’s concentrations at the VCU College of Engineering, a graduate academic program in intelligent transportation systems and an undergraduate concentration in transportation engineering at George Washington University, and an automotive engineering concentration at Virginia Tech. Eskandarian is also a Fellow of two other technical societies, the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE).
AI gives rise to the cut and paste employee
Although AI tools can improve productivity, recent studies show that they too often intensify workloads instead of reducing them, in many cases even leading to cognitive overload and burnout. The University of Delaware's Saleem Mistry says this is creating employees who work harder, not smarter. Mistry, an associate professor of management in UD's Lerner College of Business & Economics, says his research confirms findings found in this Feb. 9, 2026 article in the Harvard Business Review. Driven by the misconception that AI is an accurate search engine rather than a predictive text tool, these "cut and paste" employees are using the applications to pump out deliverables in seconds just to keep up with increasing workloads. Mistry notes that this prioritization of speed over accuracy is happening at every level of the organization: • Junior staff: Blast out polished looking but unverified drafts. • Managers: Outsource their ability to deeply learn and critically think in order to summarize data, letting their analytical skills atrophy. • Power users: Build hidden, unapproved systems that bypass company oversight. A management problem, not a tech problem "When discussing this issue, I often hear leaders blame the technology. However, I believe that blaming the tech is missing the point; I see it as a failure of leadership," Mistry said. "When already overburdened employees who are constantly having to do more with less are handed vague mandates to just use AI without any training, they use it to look busy and produce volume-based work. Because many companies still reward the volume of work produced rather than the actual impact, employees naturally use these tools to generate slick but empty deliverables." "I believe that blaming the tech is missing the point; I see it as a failure of leadership. Because many companies still reward the volume of work produced rather than the actual impact, employees naturally use these tools to generate slick but empty deliverables." The real costs to organizations and incoming employees Mistry outlines three risks organizations face if they don’t intervene: 1. The workslop epidemic "These programs allow people to generate massive amounts of workslop, which is low-effort fluff that looks good but lacks substance. It takes seconds to create, but hours for someone else to decipher, fact-check, and fix," Mistry notes. "This drains money (up to $9 million annually for large companies) and destroys morale. As an educator, researcher, and a person brought into organizations to help fix problems, I for one do not want to be on the receiving end of a thoughtless, automated data dump, especially on tasks that require real skill and deep thinking." 2. Legal disaster He also states, "When the cut and paste mentality makes its way into professional submissions, the risks to the organization are real and oftentimes catastrophic. Courts have made it perfectly clear: ignorance is no excuse. If your name is on the document, you own the liability. Recently, attorneys have faced severe sanctions, hefty fines, and case dismissals for blindly submitting fake legal citations made up by computers." Click here for a list of cases. 3. A warning for incoming talent For new graduates entering this environment, Mistry offers a warning: Do not rely on AI to do your deep thinking. "If you simply use AI to blast out polished but unverified drafts, you become a replaceable 'cut and paste' employee," he says. “To truly stand out, new grads must prove they have the discernment to review, tweak, and challenge what the computer writes. The hiring edge is no longer just saying, 'I can do this task,' but 'I know how to leverage and correct AI to help me perform it.'" Four ideas to fix it To survive and indeed thrive with these new tools and avoid the unintended consequences of untrained staff, organizations should: 1. Reinforce the importance of fact-checking and editing: Adopt frameworks that teach employees how to show their work and log how they verified computer-generated facts. 2. Change the incentives: Stop rewarding busy work, useless reports, and massive slide decks. Evaluate employees on accuracy and results. 3. Eradicate superficial work: Don’t use automation to speed up ineffective legacy processes. Instead, use it to identify and eliminate them entirely. 4. Make time for editing: Give yourself and your employees the breathing room to actually review, tweak, and challenge what the computer writes instead of accepting the first draft. Mistry is available to discuss: Why AI is causing an epidemic of corporate "workslop" (and how to spot it). The leadership failure behind the "cut and paste" employee. How to rewrite corporate incentives to measure impact instead of volume in the AI era. Strategies for implementing safe, effective AI policies at work. How new college graduates can avoid the "workslop" trap in their first jobs. To reach Mistry directly and arrange an interview, visit his profile and click on the "contact" button. Interested reporters can also send an email to MediaRelations@udel.edu.
What the World Needs Now: How Art, Culture, and Nature Can Help Heal Communities in Difficult Times
In an era marked by political division, cultural fatigue, and rapid technological change, communities are increasingly searching for places that offer connection, restoration, and shared experience. Charles Burke, President & CEO of Frederik Meijer Gardens & Sculpture Park, brings a leadership perspective shaped by decades across the arts, civic engagement, and nonprofit strategy — focused on how cultural institutions can serve as stabilizing forces in uncertain times. Through the lens of Meijer Gardens, Burke examines how art, culture, and nature can work together to restore, unite, and inspire communities, offering spaces where people can slow down, reconnect, and engage with one another beyond polarization or distraction. Charles Burke is President & CEO of Frederik Meijer Gardens & Sculpture Park. Under his direction, the organization has been recognized as Best Sculpture Park in the United States by USA Today’s 10Best Readers’ Choice Awards in 2023, 2024, and 2025, and consecutively named one of the Best Places to Work in West Michigan, solidifying its reputation as a cultural landmark of international acclaim. View his profile Why This Matters Now In an era marked by political division, cultural fatigue, and rapid technological change, communities are increasingly searching for places that offer connection, restoration, and shared experience. Charles Burke, President & CEO of Frederik Meijer Gardens & Sculpture Park, brings a leadership perspective shaped by decades across the arts, civic engagement, and nonprofit strategy — focused on how cultural institutions can serve as stabilizing forces in uncertain times. Through the lens of Meijer Gardens, Burke examines how art, culture, and nature can work together to restore, unite, and inspire communities, offering spaces where people can slow down, reconnect, and engage with one another beyond polarization or distraction. An Expert Perspective on Healing Through Experience From Burke’s leadership vantage point, institutions like Meijer Gardens demonstrate how intentional design and programming can support community well-being. Examples include: Environments that encourage mental restoration, such as forested landscapes and immersive outdoor spaces Experiences that invite reflection and emotional engagement, rather than passive consumption Programming that brings together diverse audiences around shared encounters with beauty and creativity These experiences do not attempt to solve complex societal challenges directly. Instead, they create conditions for connection, empathy, and resilience, key foundations that healthy communities depend on. Civic Spaces as “Experiential Engines” A central concept in Burke’s work is the idea of cultural institutions as experiential engines — places designed not just to display art or plants, but to generate meaning, joy, and shared memory. When thoughtfully integrated, sculpture, horticulture, architecture, and programming can transform public spaces into environments that foster belonging and inclusion. This approach positions cultural institutions as active participants in civic life, contributing to community health and cohesion rather than operating at the margins of public discourse. Technology, Humanity, and the Future of Cultural Spaces As technology continues to shape how people interact with the world, Burke’s perspective emphasizes balance. Emerging tools — including artificial intelligence — can enhance accessibility, storytelling, and personalization when used intentionally. The challenge, and opportunity, lies in ensuring that technology deepens human connection rather than distracting from it. And while AI is ideal for aggregating information and should be integrated into , it isn't inherently creative. Burke believes that cultural institutions can uniquely unlock the power of human potential in creativity. And cultural institutions that integrate innovation thoughtfully can remain relevant while staying grounded in human experience. Meijer Gardens as a Living Model Over three decades, Meijer Gardens has evolved into a nationally recognized destination where beauty, experience, and mission align. Its integration of art, nature, education, and seasonal programming offers a real-world example of how cultural institutions can grow while remaining inclusive, restorative, and community-centered. Why Journalists and Conference Organizers Should Connect Charles Burke brings informed perspective on: The role of art and nature in public healing and mental wellness Cultural responsibility during periods of division and uncertainty Designing inclusive, joyful, and interactive civic spaces Balancing technology and humanity in cultural institutions How Meijer Gardens functions as a model for innovative integration and creativity Audience fit: museum and cultural leadership forums, civic innovation conferences, mental health and wellness discussions, placemaking initiatives, higher education leadership forums, philanthropic leadership events, sustainability and design summits.
National Academy of Inventors welcomes five VCU College of Engineering researchers
The National Academy of Inventors (NAI) recently inducted five Virginia Commonwealth University (VCU) College of Engineering researchers as senior members. Chosen for their innovative engineering contributions, the honorees are recognized as visionary inventors whose groundbreaking research and patented technologies are driving meaningful societal and economic advancements across the national innovation landscape. “Invention represents the practical application of knowledge and stands as one of the many ways engineers can make a positive impact on their communities and the world,” said Azim Eskandarian, D.Sc, the Alice T. and William H. Goodwin Jr. Dean of the VCU College of Engineering. “This year’s honorees exemplify the interdisciplinary nature of our field, leveraging advanced concepts from mechanical, biomedical, chemical and pharmaceutical engineering to address today’s most pressing challenges. We are immensely proud that our dedicated researchers have earned recognition as members of the esteemed National Academy of Inventors.” The VCU College of Engineering NAI inductees are: Jayasimha Atulasimha, Ph.D. Engineering Foundation Professor Department of Mechanical & Nuclear Engineering An internationally recognized pioneer of straintronics, an approach to electrically control magnetism for ultra-low-energy computing, Atulasimha has made significant research contributions to next-generation memory, neuromorphic hardware and emerging quantum computing technologies. He holds four U.S. patents spanning energy-efficient magnetic memory, nanoscale computing architectures and medical tools. Atulasimha’s commercially viable inventions are funded by organizations like the Virginia Innovation Partnership Corporation and he leads multi-institutional collaborations that drive innovation in computing hardware, AI and quantum technologies with more than $10 million in funded research. Casey Grey, Ph.D. Postdoctoral Research Associate Department of Mechanical & Nuclear Engineering Bridging engineering and medicine, Grey’s work spans life‑saving stroke technologies, breakthrough respiratory and neurological care, and sustainable packaging. As a lead R&D scientist at WestRock, he helped create and commercialize the CanCollar® portfolio, a recyclable paperboard replacement for plastic beverage rings now used on five continents, eliminating thousands of tons of single‑use plastic annually. In medical device innovation, Grey’s patent and development work on a novel cyclic aspiration thrombectomy platform, currently in clinical trials, is advancing stroke treatment by enhancing clot removal efficiency and reducing long‑term disability. At the VCU College of engineering, Grey built a research and commercialization pipeline around neurological and respiratory technologies, securing eight provisional patents and leading multidisciplinary teams in neurology, neurosurgery, surgery, pharmacology and toxicology, internal medicine, and respiratory medicine. His work includes developing dry powder inhaler strategies for delivering life‑saving drugs to patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), a pediatric bubble CPAP system designed to protect brain development in premature infants, and non‑invasive, non‑pharmacological 40 Hz neuromodulation therapies to treat neurodegeneration and conditions with significant central nervous system complications, like sickle cell disease. In collaborations with the VCU Children’s Hospital and VCU Critical Care Hospital, Grey is leading two clinical studies that are translating these innovations to improve patient care. Ravi Hadimani, Ph.D. Associate Professor and Director of Biomagnetics Laboratory Department of Mechanical & Nuclear Engineering Hadimani founded RAM Phantoms LLC, a VCU startup company, commercializing anatomically accurate, MRI-derived brain phantoms for neuromodulation and neuroimaging applications. These brain phantoms help test and tune transcranial magnetic and deep brain stimulation technologies, improving clinical safety and enabling personalized therapy for patients. RAM Phantoms is also developing a highly-skilled workforce for employment in Virginia’s growing biomedical device industry. Beyond commercialization, Hadimani maintains a productive research program with more than $4.5 million in funding resulting in 125 original peer-reviewed publications, 17 current and pending patents, a book, and several book chapters. His biomagnetics lab serves as a training ground for undergraduate, graduate and Ph.D. students to hone their skills in innovation management, intellectual property strategy and startup development. Several students from Hadimani’s lab have engaged in translational research, patent co-authorship and start-up formation, cultivating a new generation of engineer-entrepreneurs equipped to drive future technological advances. Before joining VCU, Hadimani led the development of hybrid piezoelectric–photovoltaic materials that established FiberLec Inc., which commercialized multifunctional energy-harvesting fibers capable of converting solar, wind and vibrational energy into usable electricity. Worth Longest, Ph.D. Alice T. and William H. Goodwin, Jr. Distinguished Chair Department of Mechanical & Nuclear Engineering Uniting aerosol science, biomedical engineering and computational modeling, Longest is revolutionizing inhaled drug delivery. Working with collaborators, his lab has developed novel devices, formulations and delivery platforms that precisely target medications to the lungs, addressing conditions like cystic fibrosis, pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome and neonatal respiratory distress syndrome. These innovations have resulted in multiple patents. Some of them have been licensed through commercial partnerships like Quench Medical, an organization advancing inhaled therapies for applications like lung cancer. Collaborating with the Gates Foundation and the lab of Michael Hindle, Ph.D., from the VCU Department of Pharmaceutics, Longest’s team developed a low-cost, high-efficacy aerosol surfactant therapy for pre-term infants based entirely on technology developed at VCU. The invention eliminates intubation, reduces dosage by a factor of 10, and cuts treatment costs. Over 9 million infant lives are projected to be saved by this technology between 2030 and 2050. Through a long-term collaboration with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Longest’s in vitro and computational methods provide federal regulatory guidance for generic inhaled medications. The VCU mouth-throat airway models developed under his leadership are used globally across the pharmaceutical industry and in government laboratories. Hong Zhao, Ph.D. Associate Professor Department of Mechanical & Nuclear Engineering Zhao holds 40 patents with innovations spanning additive manufacturing, stretchable electronics, inkjet printing technologies and superoleophobic materials that repel oils, greases, and low-surface-tension liquids. Her research has applications across health care, sustainable energy and advanced manufacturing. Prior to joining the College of Engineering, Zhao served as a senior research scientist and project leader at the Xerox Research Center, where she developed high-performance materials and printing technologies for commercial deployment. Her industry experience makes Zhao’s lab a hub for innovation and mentorship, with students engaging in innovative research and co-authoring publications. Zhao is an invited reviewer for more than 50 premier journals and grant agencies. “Working with distinguished researchers and innovators like those inducted into the National Academy of Inventors is a great honor for me,” said Arvind Agarwal, Ph.D., chair of the Department of Mechanical & Nuclear Engineering and NAI fellow. “They are an inspiration and showcase the kind of impact engineers can make. Having all five of these innovators as part of our department amplifies the scientific richness of our college and its societal impact. They advance the college’s mission of Engineering for Humanity, with research that brings a positive change to our world.” The 2026 NAI class of senior members, composed of 231 emerging inventors from NAI’s member institutions, is the largest to date. Hailing from 82 NAI member institutions across the globe, they hold over 2,000 U.S. patents.
When you are first introduced to expertise marketing it can be hard to imagine that there are experts hiding within your organization. We tend to think of experts as a small group at the top but in reality that is just the tip of the iceberg. Across teams and departments there are people with the knowledge, skills and experience to contribute to meaningful conversations with your audiences. These individuals may not always carry the title of expert but their perspectives can help explain complex issues, contribute to research and shape the content your organization produces. When their expertise is recognized and supported it can help build trust with key audiences including media, industry partners and prospective clients. The challenge many organizations face is knowing how to assess expertise in the first place. To identify these hidden experts and understand the role they can play in an expertise marketing program it helps to start with a simple question. What actually makes someone an expert? The 7 Attributes of Expertise By definition an expert is someone with comprehensive or authoritative knowledge in a particular area of study. While formal education and certifications can be important starting points many fields do not have a clear set of criteria that determines expertise. In practice expertise develops through a combination of training, research, professional experience and real-world application. It is also shaped by the level of trust and recognition someone has earned within their profession or community. When evaluating expertise across your organization it is important to consider the different roles people can play. Many individuals have invested years developing deep knowledge in their fields but not everyone is interested in speaking at conferences or appearing in the media. That does not reduce the value of their expertise. Many contribute through research, insights and content development that support broader visibility for the organization. Here are several attributes that help define expertise and the roles people can play within an expertise marketing strategy. Authority: Has a reputation with an audience as a trusted source of insight and perspective. Advocate: Demonstrates a commitment to advancing a professional community or area of practice. Educator: Teaches and inspires others through lectures, presentations or classroom instruction. Author: Develops articles, commentary or thought leadership that expands their reach and influence. Researcher: Generates new insights through research, analysis or field work. Practitioner: Applies specialized knowledge in a professional setting by delivering services or solutions. Graduate: Has formal education or professional training that demonstrates proficiency in a subject area. Understanding these attributes helps organizations see that expertise exists across many roles. Once those individuals are identified the next step is determining how their expertise can contribute to broader visibility and engagement. The 4 Levels of Expertise Understanding how to promote expertise is an emerging discipline for many organizations. Unlike traditional career paths expertise does not always follow a predictable hierarchy. When we consider which experts are most visible to audiences it becomes clear that visibility is not always tied to seniority or authority within an organization. Professionals at many stages of their careers are now sharing insights through social networks, industry publications and personal platforms. This means that a senior researcher with decades of experience and a younger professional actively sharing insights online could have a similar level of visibility. Because visibility is influenced by personal motivation and interest in public engagement many organizations recognize the need to better identify and support experts across their teams. Doing so helps ensure that valuable knowledge is not overlooked and that more voices can contribute to meaningful conversations. The framework below can help organizations take inventory of their expertise and develop a path for individuals who are interested in contributing content and building visibility with key audiences. Now that we’ve provided a broader picture of what expertise looks like, it’s time for you to ask, “How does my organization stack up?” Bench Strength: Taking Stock of Expertise Across Your Organization Expertise is in high demand. Audiences are looking for credible voices who can provide context and insight on complex issues. For organizations, this means it is critical to understand how their collective expertise can be channeled into meaningful conversations with their audiences. As you review the attributes and levels of expertise outlined above you may begin to recognize individuals within your organization who have valuable knowledge but may not have been considered visible experts before. Identifying these individuals is an important first step but recognition alone is not enough. Mobilizing expertise marketing requires support and investment from leadership across the organization. Senior leaders will want to understand the value of elevating internal expertise and how it contributes to reputation, visibility and opportunity. The organizations that succeed are those that recognize expertise as a strategic asset and take deliberate steps to surface it, support it and share it with the audiences who are actively searching for it. The Complete Guide to Expertise Marketing For a comprehensive look at how expertise marketing benefits the entire organization and drives measurable return on investment, follow the link below to download an industry-focussed copy of ExpertFile’s Complete Guide to Expertise Marketing: The Next Wave in Digital Strategy
Study: What makes a smell bad?
You wouldn’t microwave fish around your worst enemy — the smell lingers both in kitchen and memory. It is one few of us like, let alone have positive associations with. But what makes our brains decide a smell is stinky? A new study from UF Health researchers reveals the mechanisms behind how your brain decides you dislike — even loathe — a smell. Or as first author and graduate research fellow Sarah Sniffen puts it: How do odors come to acquire some sort of emotional charge? In many ways, our world capitalizes upon the importance of smells to influence emotions, running the gamut from perfumes to cooking and even grocery store design. “Odors are powerful at driving emotions, and it’s long been thought that the sense of smell is just as powerful, if not more powerful, at driving an emotional response as a picture, a song or any other sensory stimulus,” said senior author Dan Wesson, Ph.D., a professor of pharmacology and therapeutics in the UF College of Medicine and interim director of the Florida Chemical Senses Institute. But until now, researchers have puzzled over what circuitry connects the parts of the brain vital to generating an emotional response with those responsible for smell perception. The team started off with the amygdala, a brain region that curates your emotional responses to sensory stimuli. Although all our senses (sound, sight, taste, touch and smell) interact with this small part of your brain, the olfactory system takes a more direct route to it. “This is, in part, what we mean when we say your sense of smell is your most emotional sense,” Sniffen said. “Yes, smells evoke strong, emotional memories, but the brain’s smell centers are more closely connected with emotional centers like the amygdala.” In the study, researchers looked at mice, who share neurochemical similarities with people. They can learn about odors and categorize them as good or bad. After observing their behavior and analyzing brain activity, the team found two genetically unique brain cell types that allow odors to be assigned into a bucket of good feelings or bad feelings. Initially, the team expected that one cell type would generate a positive emotion to an odor, and another would generate a negative emotion. Instead, the brain’s cellular organization gives the cells the capability of doing either. “It can make an odor positive or negative to you,” Wesson said. “And it all depends upon where that cell type projects in your brain and how it engages with structures in your brain.” But why is knowing more about how we categorize smells important? Well, for starters, smells — and our reactions to them — are a part of life. Sometimes, however, our reactions to them can be outsized, or take on a negative association so strong it disrupts how we live. “We’re constantly breathing in and out and that means that we’re constantly receiving olfactory input,” Sniffen said. “For some people that’s fine, and it doesn’t impact their day-to-day life. They might even think, ‘Oh, odors don’t matter that much.’ But for people who have a heightened response to sensory stimuli, like those with PTSD or anxiety or autism, it’s a really important factor for their day-to-day life.” In the future, the research could help clinicians adjust for heightened sensory response that some people struggle with in their everyday lives, Wesson added. One example? A patient associating a clinic’s smell with transfusions that made them queasy. Based upon the receptor systems in these specific brain pathways, the team members believe they might be able to change those associations. Potentially, medications could suppress some of these pathways’ activity to allow you to overcome stressful and aversive emotional responses. Conversely, these pathways could be activated to restore enjoyment to things that people might have grown indifferent to — like those who lose their appetite from illness. “Emotions in part dictate our quality of life, and we’re learning more about how they arise in our brain,” Wesson said. “Understanding more about how our surroundings can impact our feelings can help us become happier, healthier humans.” This research was supported by funding from the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders and the National Institute on Drug Abuse. Sarah Sniffen was supported by a fellowship from the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders.
How to Make Your Experts “AI-Ready"
AI is changing how people discover expertise. Today, journalists, event organizers, researchers, and the public increasingly turn to tools like ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity, and Google Search’s AI summaries powered by Gemini. Instead of clicking through pages of links, they expect clear, credible answers—often delivered instantly, with citations. That shift has major implications for organizations. It’s no longer enough for your experts to “rank well.” They need to be understood, trusted, and accurately represented by AI systems. So the real question becomes: When AI talks about your experts, does it get it right? This is where LLMs.txt plays an important role—especially when paired with an ExpertFile-powered Expert Center. What is LLMs.txt (In Plain English)? ...and why is it essential for expert content LLMs.txt is a small, machine-readable file placed on your organization’s website—in the case of your expert content alongside your main Expert Center. Its purpose is simple: to explain your expertise to AI systems clearly and unambiguously. “AI systems don’t just scan for keywords; they look for clear meaning, consistent context, and clean formatting — precise, structured language makes it easier for AI to classify your content as relevant.” Microsoft: Optimizing Your Content for Inclusion in AI Search Answers Rather than forcing AI to infer meaning from scattered pages, LLMs.txt explicitly tells systems: Who your experts are Which pages represent official, curated content How expert profiles differ from articles, Q&A, or research content How your organization’s expertise should be interpreted as a whole Think of it as a table of contents and usage guide for AI —helping large language models understand your site the way a communications professional would. Why This Matters for Visibility and Trust It Establishes Your Organization as the Source of Truth AI systems routinely synthesize information from multiple places. Without guidance, they may rely on outdated bios, scraped content, or secondary references. LLMs.txt provides a clear signal: This is our official expert content. This is what represents us. For ExpertFile clients, this matters because the platform already centralizes and curates expert content—from profiles and directories to Spotlights and Expert Q&A—ensuring that what AI sees is current, governed, and institutionally endorsed. The result: Greater accuracy, stronger attribution, and reduced risk of misrepresentation when your experts appear in the ever growing AI-generated overviews and answer. ahrefs: AI Overviews Have Doubled How It Improves Discovery Across AI Platforms It Makes Structured Expertise Easier for AI to Use ExpertFile is purpose-built to publish structured expert content at scale—content that goes well beyond static bios. LLMs.txt simply helps AI recognize and use that structure correctly. It clarifies the role of key ExpertFile content types, including: Expert Profiles → Canonical identity, credentials, and areas of expertise Spotlight Posts → Timely commentary, thought leadership, and research insights Expert Q&A → Authoritative answers to real-world questions Directories, Research Bureaus, and Speakers Bureaus → Curated collections of expertise by topic or audience This makes it easier for AI systems to: Match your experts to breaking news and trending topics Pull accurate summaries for AI-generated responses Identify the right expert for journalists, event organizers, and researchers Combined with ExpertFile’s extended distribution through expertfile.com and the ExpertFile Mobile App, your expertise is not only published—but actively discoverable across channels used by key audiences . How It Builds Organizational Authority It Connects Individual Experts to Institutional Credibility Without context, AI may treat expert pages as isolated profiles. LLMs.txt helps connect the dots. It tells AI that: Your experts are curated and endorsed by the organization Their insights are part of a broader expertise ecosystem Your institution has depth across priority subject areas This aligns closely with how ExpertFile structures content to support E-E-A-T (Experience, Expertise, Authority, Trust)—not just at the individual level, but across the organization . The outcome: Your organization is recognized not just as a collection of experts, but as an authoritative source of knowledge. How It Works with Google, Gemini, and AI Search Supports AI Summaries, Citations, and Knowledge Panels LLMs.txt helps ensure that when Google’s AI: Summarizes your organization Cites expert commentary Builds “about this topic” panels …it draws from your official, structured ExpertFile content, rather than fragmented third-party sources. This complements ExpertFile’s existing SEO and AI-discoverability foundation, which includes clean code, proper meta data, schema markup, and frequent crawling by both search engines and AI bots. How LLMS.txt Fits with SEO, Meta Tags, and Schema LLMS.txt doesn’t replace SEO—it builds on it. Traditional SEO elements such as page titles, meta descriptions, schema.org markup, and internal linking remain essential for helping search engines index and rank your content. ExpertFile already delivers these fundamentals out of the box, continually testing and evolving SEO and GEO (Generative Engine Optimization) standards as search changes . “Semantic SEO helps search engines understand context... it now helps bridge a critical gap between traditional SEO and newer generative engine optimization (GEO) and AI optimization (AIO) efforts.” Search Engine Land: Semantic SEO: How to optimize for meaning over keywords LLMS.txt adds a layer designed specifically for AI systems: Schema explains individual pages LLMs.txt explains your entire expertise ecosystem In simple terms: SEO helps your content get found LLMs.txt helps AI understand, summarize, and cite it correctly Together, they ensure your experts are not only visible—but accurately represented wherever AI is shaping discovery. Why This Is Especially Powerful on ExpertFile ExpertFile was designed to future-proof expert visibility—offering structured publishing, governance, distribution, inquiry management, analytics, and professional services as part of a continuously evolving SaaS platform . LLMS.txt acts as a multiplier on that foundation: Turning your Expert Center into a machine-readable expertise hub Strengthening AI discovery without adding operational burden Supporting emerging use cases like automated expert matching and AI-assisted research It’s not about chasing new technology. It’s about ensuring your expertise is clearly defined, properly attributed, and trusted—now and in the future. The Takeaway An LLMs.txt file on your ExpertFile organization page helps ensure that: Your experts are found by AI tools, not overlooked Your content is interpreted correctly, not flattened or misrepresented Your organization earns authority and trust in AI summaries, citations, and search results “AI search isn’t eliminating organic traffic. But it is reducing visits to source websites… Measure presence (citations, mentions) alongside traffic to see real impact.” Semrush: AI Search Trends for 2026 & How You Can Adapt As AI becomes the front door to information, LLMs.txt helps make sure that when people ask for expertise, your organization is the answer they get.