Experts Matter. Find Yours.
Connect for media, speaking, professional opportunities & more.
Aston University’s approach to a global challenge Across industries, companies face mounting pressure to cut carbon, improve resource efficiency, and contribute to the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Yet many firms still struggle to move from vision statements to measurable action. At Aston Business School, Dr Breno Nunes, reader in sustainable operations management, is developing practical frameworks that help organisations embed sustainability at their core. His concept of 'sustainability fitness' captures how firms can build the capabilities they need to adapt, compete, and thrive in the transition to a net zero economy. “Many organisations want to be sustainable but struggle to operationalise what that means. My work is about bridging that gap — helping businesses translate strategies into practice.” — Dr Breno Nunes The sustainability fitness concept involves both meeting human needs and respecting environmental limits. While it can also be applied at the societal and individual level, Dr Nunes focuses on organisations, where capability building delivers the fastest, measurable change. Corporate sustainability fitness examines how a firm is able to survive and meet its own needs, while aligning itself to wider essential needs of society and operating within limits imposed by its surrounding natural environment. From research to real-world action Dr Nunes’ research examines how organisations design, implement, and monitor sustainability strategies across operations, supply chains, facilities, and product development. He is the main author of the book Sustainable Operations Management: Key practices and cases, which applies the issues of sustainability to all strategic decisions of operations. His work is already making a tangible difference, including international partnerships in Brazil, Canada, and the US, bringing cross-cultural insights into organisational transformation, as well as for various companies and organisations. In an Innovate UK Knowledge Transfer Partnership (KTP) with automotive supplier Metal Assemblies, Dr Nunes and Professor Alexeis Garcia Perez, professor of digital business and society at Aston University, are working to calculate and report the carbon cost of metal components used in car production, tackling one of the industry’s biggest sustainability challenges. The digitalisation of processes will allow Metal Assemblies to meet customers' requirements and position itself as a trusted and transparent supplier of low-carbon components. In another KTP with Brockhouse Group, a forging manufacturer in the West Midlands, Dr Nunes worked with Aston colleague Dr Muhammad Imran, reader in mechanical, biomedical and design engineering. Together they developed a sustainable manufacturing strategy centred on carbon reduction and process improvement. The work involved the development of an energy dashboard, allowing analysis of data on gas and electricity consumption. The project also included analysis of alternatives for energy recovery systems, and development of routines and procedures to improve the manufacturing process. As a result, Brockhouse group is more competitive to supply in non-captive markets. Dr Nunes has also been involved with a collaboration with Birmingham Botanical Gardens to integrate sustainability into policy and practice, expanding the use of business sustainability theories to nonprofit sectors. Sustainability can be embedded across different areas of organisations while seeking financial stability. As an environmental education charity, it is important to for Birmingham Botanical Gardens to 'practise what it preaches'. It was recently awarded almost £20m from various grants (including Heritage Lottery) in a capital project, thanks to having sustainability at the core of renovation plans. These projects highlight Aston University’s role in bridging academia, industry, and policy — ensuring research findings reach the boardroom as well as the factory floor. Key insights from the research Dr Nunes’ studies highlight several critical factors for turning sustainability from intention into measurable results: • Organisational capabilities are central to embedding sustainability. These include empowering sustainability “champions” (institutional entrepreneurs), supportive structures, superior technologies, and the ability to learn and balance economic, environmental, and social performance. • The tensions in implementing sustainability vary not just by function (supply chains, governance, innovation) but also by an organisation’s maturity level. • Start with the low-hanging fruit: tools like self-assessments, capability diagnostics, and learning games allow firms to act at lower cost before committing to full environmental impact assessments or formal reporting. • Collaboration between academia, industry, and policymakers accelerates real-world impact. Why this matters The stakes are high. Businesses worldwide are expected to reduce carbon emissions, demonstrate social responsibility, and remain competitive in a rapidly changing global economy. Aston University’s research shows that strengthening sustainability capabilities not only improves environmental outcomes but also boosts resilience and cost savings. In pilot projects, teams working with Dr Nunes have achieved up to 30% reductions in both cost and carbon emissions — proof that sustainability can drive operational performance as well as compliance. Looking ahead: expanding the Sustainable Growth Hub The next phase of Dr Nunes’ work centres on Aston’s Sustainable Growth Hub, which is being developed as a reference point for SMEs seeking sustainability solutions. In 2025, the Hub will: • Launch its first industry club cohort and expand its team. • Roll out new self-assessment tools to size sustainability needs and decarbonisation goals. • Introduce new learning formats and follow-up courses to Aston’s Green Advantage programme, alongside sessions to play a new corporate sustainability game. • Host events to bring together businesses, policymakers, and the wider sustainability management community. • Attract new research grants and publish results to share knowledge across both academic and practitioner circles. These initiatives aim to equip organisations not only to meet today’s challenges, but to anticipate tomorrow’s. Get involved Follow Dr Nunes via his profile below, and soon through the Sustainability Fitness website. Businesses can also attend Aston Business School events to explore workshops, tools, and courses first-hand. About Dr Breno Nunes Dr Breno Nunes is reader in sustainable operations management at Aston Business School and president of the International Association for Management of Technology (IAMOT). He serves as associate editor of the IEEE Engineering Management Review and has published widely on sustainability strategy execution and innovation. Aston University’s work in sustainable operations — shaped by researchers like Dr Nunes — is helping organisations worldwide move from ambition to action, building the 'sustainability fitness' needed for a net zero future.
American Nuclear Society names Lane Carasik, Ph.D., as one of its “40 Under 40”
Recognized as an emerging leader in the nuclear science and engineering field, Lane Carasik, Ph.D., assistant professor in the Department of Mechanical and Nuclear Engineering, was recently acknowledged by the American Nuclear Society as one of its top “40 Under 40.” “It is a huge honor to receive this acknowledgement from my professional community,” said Carasik. “I feel it is a reflection of the amazing nuclear engineering activities I’ve gotten the opportunity to pursue before and during my time at the VCU College of Engineering.” The list, featured in the most recent issue of Nuclear News magazine, celebrates young professionals who are driving innovation and shaping the future of nuclear science and technology. Created to spotlight a new generation of nuclear professionals, the “40 Under 40” program highlights those who are advancing technical fields, from advanced reactor deployment to AI applications and national security, while actively engaging the public, mentoring peers and advocating for nuclear’s role to achieve energy independence and security. “Dr. Carasik’s research efforts, together with his support for students and their own research goals, exemplifies the best qualities of the VCU College of Engineering,” said Arvind Agarwal, Ph.D., chair of the Department of Mechanical and Nuclear Engineering, “integrating research and teaching at the core of everything he does, from classroom and lab work to community outreach.” Carasik was selected for the “40 Under 40” from hundreds of candidates across the United States. Mentoring his first three Ph.D. graduates, Arturo Cabral, Connor Donlan and James Vulcanoff, is one of Carasik’s proudest achievements. He was also honored by the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) as a rising star in mechanical engineering in 2024 This builds off Carasik receiving the highly competitive and prestigious Department of Energy (DOE) Early Career Research Award ($875k split over five years) in 2023 to support his work on molten salt based fusion energy systems similar to Commonwealth Fusion Systems’ ARC technology. Carasik’s Fluids in Advanced Systems and Technology (FAST) research group, is a computational and experimental thermal hydraulics group focused on enabling the development of advanced energy systems and critical isotope production methods. Legendary physicist Enrico Fermi was an early inspiration to Carasik during his undergraduate studies. Fermi’s expertise mirrored Carasik’s interests, and the physicist’s impact on the field of nuclear engineering was motivating. As an established nuclear engineering faculty member, Carasik seeks to make a lasting impact on the field and the people in it. His ’s long-term goal is earning membership in the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine.
The missing AI revolution: Smarter leadership, not smarter machines, says workforce expert
Artificial intelligence has transformed industries, but its most overlooked potential lies in helping leaders themselves think more clearly and decide more effectively, according to Saleem Mistry, Associate Professor of Management at the University of Delaware’s Alfred Lerner College of Business & Economics. Mistry focuses on enabling leaders to be more productive, think clearly and make better decisions. Focusing on the leader, not just the organization Mistry’s work examines how leaders at every level can use AI to enhance productivity and decision-making. While most organizational conversations about AI focus on operational efficiency or customer service, he argues that the true frontier is leadership productivity. “Leadership productivity directly shapes organizational performance. AI can be transformative when it helps leaders think faster, decide better and regain the time they’ve lost to administration.” – Mistry As a professor of management and leadership, Mistry is often asked how AI will change the workplace. Those conversations usually revolve around automating workflows, not empowering leaders. Yet, as he notes, an MIT report found that 95 percent of generative AI pilots are failing — largely due to the absence of clear business use cases. That insight shaped his direction: leadership itself may be the missing use case. Having spent much of his earlier career in high technology, Mistry saw firsthand that innovation succeeds or fails based on how effectively leaders model new tools. Demonstrating practical applications Mistry recently analyzed the 2024-2025 U.S. Office of Inspector General reports on leadership challenges based. He analyzed each leadership challenge using three guiding questions: 1) Do the problems stem from leaders struggling with time, decisions or task management? 2) How might AI help? 3) Where could AI have the greatest impact? The results included: Executive Example (Amtrak): AI could power a real-time RACI dashboard to clarify accountability, track decisions and eliminate bottlenecks. Mid-Level Example (EPA): “Agentic AI” could cross-check allegations against verified data before termination decisions, preventing ethical and legal missteps. Supervisor Example (CISA): AI could scan incentive data for waste and anomalies, saving hours of manual review. Why it matters By automating repetitive, data-heavy tasks, AI gives leaders something they desperately need: time. Time to think strategically, coach teams and make better decisions. Mistry’s findings link AI adoption directly to mental well-being, arguing that improved decision productivity leads to improved organizational health. “Decision productivity is business productivity. Organizations that make faster, fairer and more informed decisions outperform those that don’t.” – Mistry Next steps: Building the framework for responsible AI leadership Mistry’s next milestone is to develop a set of leadership use cases that can be used by business leaders at all levels where AI can deliver the greatest impact. He is also developing frameworks for responsible AI adoption that help leaders determine when and how to deploy these tools ethically — across decision-making, communication, planning and task management. “AI won’t replace leaders,” Mistry concludes, “but leaders who learn to use AI effectively will outperform those who don’t.” ABOUT SALEEM MISTRY Associate Professor of Management Alfred Lerner College of Business & Economics Mistry’s research focuses on the future of work, with a particular emphasis on how individuals navigate workplace transitions. His research explores how people adjust to both minor and major changes in their careers, such as shifts in jobs, responsibilities, teams or entire organizations. A growing area of his expertise is the strategic use of artificial intelligence to enhance productivity for leaders, teams and human resource professionals. His research connects academic insights with practical applications, helping to shape how people and organizations adapt to an evolving professional landscape. Reporters who would like to speak to Mistry can click on his profile.
Gig worker protection law boosted overall earnings but dropped hourly pay
A 2020 California law designed to protect gig workers by classifying them as regular employees, rather than contractors, ended up increasing their earnings by about 8%. However, their hourly pay dropped by 1.6% as companies offset the higher costs of benefits. Workers’ increased earnings came from working longer hours in order to qualify for and reap benefits like employer tax sharing. These findings come from a study led by Liangfei Qiu, Ph.D., a professor in the University of Florida’s Warrington College of Business, which examined nearly 400,000 monthly work records from about 41,000 freelancers on Upwork, one of the world’s largest online labor platforms. That trove of data let the researchers ask what actually happened when the law, known as AB5, took effect. Qiu’s is the first study to reveal how AB5 affected workers’ income and comes as other states consider passing similar laws. Liangfei Qiu is an expert in social technology, including social media and social networks, as well as artificial intelligence. View his profile here “It highlights some unintended consequences,” Qiu said. “If the labor market competition is similar to what we observe in California, then you might get lower hourly rates for gig economy workers and longer working hours.” “But it’s nuanced. In surveys, gig workers said they were willing to work longer hours because they had better benefits. The outcome depends on how involved someone is in the gig economy,” Qiu added. AB5 was designed to correct what labor advocates saw as widespread misclassification of a company’s essential employees as independent contractors, who don’t typically earn any benefits. This classification gives companies a cheaper workforce, and provides maximum flexibility for workers, but doesn’t allow workers to earn any sick leave, vacation or health insurance. Self-employed contractors must also pay the full share of Social Security and Medicare taxes, which works out to about 15% of gross income. Gig economy companies fought back against the AB5 regulations. A company-sponsored ballot referendum, Prop 22, exempted well-known giants like Uber, Lyft and DoorDash from the law later in 2020. And the California legislature provided further carve outs for professions like doctors, lawyers and photographers. The law still applies to contractors used by delivery companies like FedEx, UPS or Amazon, home-service companies like Angi or Rover as well as online freelance platforms like TaskRabbit. The study is forthcoming in the journal Information Systems Research. Qiu collaborated on the analysis with researchers at Baylor University, Santa Clara University and Stony Brook University. Looking to know more about the 'gig economy' and how it impacts the workforce? Connect with Liangfei Qiu today and click is icon now to arrange a time to talk.
UF scientist studies muscle loss in space to benefit astronauts and patients on Earth
Astronauts traveling to Mars will face many challenges, but one of the most serious is muscle loss during long space missions. A new study led by University of Florida researcher Siobhan Malany, Ph.D., sheds light on how human biology changes in microgravity and could help protect astronaut health while also offering hope for patients with muscle-wasting diseases on Earth. Malany, an associate professor in the College of Pharmacy, a member of UF’s Astraeus Space Institute, and director of the in-space Biomanufacturing Innovation Hub, recently published findings showing how muscle cells adapt in space. Her team studied bioengineered three-dimensional muscle tissues derived from biopsy cells from both younger and older individuals and observed how they responded to electrical stimulation in microgravity. These micro-scale tissues called “tissue chips” were given nutrients and electric pulses autonomously in a miniature laboratory the size of a shoe box called a CubeLab.x. A camera system inside the box recorded the rate of muscle contraction. “This research is about more than just space,” Malany said. “By understanding how muscle tissue deteriorates much faster in microgravity, we can uncover new strategies to address muscle loss that occurs naturally with aging and with age-related diseases here on Earth.” Siobhan Malany studies the effects of microgravity on human muscle biology using an automated tissue chip system. View her profile here The study found that younger muscle tissue showed more pronounced changes in mitochondrial pathways — cellular systems that produce energy — than older tissue did when exposed to microgravity. Researchers also discovered that, on Earth, older muscle tissue responds less to electrical stimulation than younger tissue. But in space, the younger tissue showed a noticeable drop in its ability to contract, suggesting that younger muscle may experience a greater change when exposed to the space environment. These insights may help researchers design new treatments to protect muscles in astronauts during long missions, as well as develop therapies for people experiencing age-related muscle loss on Earth. The project was part of UF’s broader efforts to advance space biology. Through the Astraeus Space Institute, UF brings together experts across disciplines, from medicine and pharmacy to engineering and plant science, to address the unique challenges of space exploration. “UF researchers are helping lay the groundwork for humanity’s next giant leap,” Malany said. “It’s exciting to see our work contribute to both the health of astronauts and the lives of patients back home.” UF’s leadership in space biology is strengthened through collaboration with partners including the Kennedy Space Center Consortium and the Center for Science, Technology and Advanced Research in Space), both initiatives bringing together universities in Florida’s high-tech corridor, government agencies and industry leaders. Malany’s work also builds on long-term collaborations with AdventHealth, using donated tissue samples to model age-related muscle changes in space. Her team also works with SpaceTango, a NASA-certified aerospace company, to design the CubeLab that flew to the International Space Station on multiple SpaceX missions. Looking ahead, Malany and her team are developing new ways to study astronaut-derived cells, including both skeletal and heart muscle, generated from blood samples. These “avatars” could help researchers track changes before, during and after space missions, providing an unprecedented window into how microgravity affects the human body. “Now we can study cells from individual astronauts and see how they respond over time,” Malany said. “This helps us understand the risks of long-term spaceflight and also gives us a platform for testing potential treatments for muscle-wasting conditions on Earth.” By using tissue chips, small, bioengineered devices that mimic the structure and function of human organs, scientists in space can gather data more quickly and accurately than with traditional animal studies, potentially accelerating the discovery of therapies for aging-related muscle loss. Looking to know more about this amazing research or connect with Siobhan Malany - simply click on her icon now to arrange an interview today.
Treat AI as a Teammate—or Risk Falling Behind
AI is shifting from back-office tool to frontline collaborator, "We are witnessing a key inflection point in how organizations work," says LSU professor Andrew Schwarz. He argues the business case is now clear: AI boosts the quality of ideas and expands who gets to contribute, acting less like software and more like a creative partner. He adds that organizations that embed AI "as a teammate will lead," while those that treat it "as simply a cost-saver risk falling behind." That shift, he says, reaches deep into org charts and workflows. Schwarz notes that AI can flatten expertise silos, help less-experienced employees operate closer to expert levels, and spark cross-functional thinking that blends technical and commercial insight. Leaders, he said, must "rethink structures, roles and workflows — placing AI at the heart of how teams collaborate, not simply at the edge." Technology deployment alone won't deliver those gains, "it requires cultural and capability investment," Schwarz said. The priority, in his view, is to "build collaborative ecosystems where human talent and AI capabilities co-create value," invest early to make the "human-plus-AI" model the default, and tap into academic partnerships: "those companies that partner with universities, such as LSU, will have an even greater advantage." Schwarz also urges guardrails as adoption accelerates. He points to the need for transparency, accountability, fairness, and continuous skill development so the transition "enhances human agency, fosters inclusion, and delivers sustainable value for all stakeholders." His bottom line is urgent and straightforward: "When AI joins the team, better ideas truly surface. Let's prepare our organizations to make that transition, and lead from the front."
'Brain-on-a-chip': Engineering tomorrow’s breakthroughs today
A “brain-on-a-chip” technology might sound like science fiction, but it’s real-world hope. James McGrath, a biomedical engineer at the University of Rochester, leads a team that develops micro-scale tissue chips to study diseases in lieu of conducting animal experiments. The team’s “brain-on-a-chip” model replicates the blood-brain barrier — the critical membrane separating the brain from the bloodstream — to mimic how the barrier functions under healthy conditions and the duress of infections, toxins, and immune responses that can weaken it. Recent findings from McGrath’s team show how systemic inflammation, such as that caused by sepsis, can compromise the barrier and harm brain cells. The researchers also demonstrated how pericytes — supportive vascular cells — can help repair barrier damage, an insight that could guide new therapies for Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s. The research culminated in a pair of recent studies published in Advanced Science and Materials Today Bio. “We hope that by building these tissue models in chip format, we can arrange many brain models in a high-density array to screen candidates for neuroprotective drugs and develop brain models with diverse genetic backgrounds,” McGrath says. McGrath aims to transform how scientists test drugs and predict neurological side effects before they occur — helping rewrite how we study, and one day safeguard, the brain. Contact McGrath by clicking on his profile
Taking discoveries to the real world for the benefit of human health
It takes about a decade and a lot of money to bring a new drug to market—between $1 billion to $2 billion, in fact. University of Delaware inventor Jason Gleghorn wants to change that. At UD, Gleghorn is developing leading-edge microfluidic tissue models. The devices are about the size of two postage stamps, and they offer a faster, less-expensive way to study disease and to develop pharmaceutical targets. These aren’t tools he wants to keep just for himself. No, Gleghorn wants to put the patented technology he’s developing in the hands of other experts, to advance clinical solutions in women’s health, maternal-fetal health and pre-term birth. His work also has the potential to improve understanding of drug transport in the female reproductive tract, placenta, lung and lymph nodes. Gleghorn, an associate professor of biomedical engineering, was named to the first cohort of Innovation Ambassadors at UD, as part of the University’s effort to foster and support an innovation culture on campus. Below, he shares some of what he’s learned about translating research to society. Q: What is the problem that you are trying to address? Gleghorn: A lot of disease has to do with disorganization in the body’s normal tissue structure. My lab makes microfluidic tissue models, called organ-on-a-chip models, that have super-tiny channels about the thickness of a human hair, where we can introduce very small amounts of liquid, including cells, to represent an organ in the human body. This can help us study and understand the mechanism of how things work in the body (the biology) or help us do things like drug screening to test therapeutic compounds for treating disease. And while these little microfluidic devices can do promising things, the infrastructure required to make the system work often restricts their use to high-end labs. We want to democratize the techniques and technology so that nonexperts can use it. To achieve this, we changed the way we make these devices, so that they are compatible with standard manufacturing, which means we can scale them and create them much easier. Gleghorn: One of the problems with drug screening, in general, is that animal model studies don’t always represent human biology. So, when we’re using animal models to test new drugs — which have been the best tool we have available — the results are not always apples to apples. Fundamentally, our microfluidic devices can model what happens in humans … we can plug in the relevant human components to understand how the mechanism is working and then ask questions about what drives those processes and identify targets for therapies to prevent the dysfunction. Q: What is innovative about this device? Gleghorn: The innovation part is this modularity — no one makes these devices this way. The science happens on the tiny tissue model insert, which is sandwiched between two pieces of clear acrylic. This allows us to watch what’s happening on the tissue model insert in real time. Meanwhile, the outer shell’s clamshell design provides flexibility: if we’re studying lung tissue and we want to study the female reproductive tract, all we do is unscrew the outer shell and insert the proper tissue model that mimics the female reproductive tract and we’re off. We’ve done a lot of the engineering to make it very simple to operate and use, and adaptable to common lab tools that everyone has, to eliminate the need for financial investment in things like specialized clean rooms, incubators and pumps, etc., so the technology can be useful in regular labs or easily deployable to far-flung locations or countries. With a laser cutter and $500 worth of equipment, you could conceivably mass manufacture these things for maternal medicine in Africa, for example. Democratizing the technology so it is compatible and useful for even an inexperienced user aligns with the mission of my lab, which focuses on scaling the science and the innovation faster, instead of only a few specialized labs being a bottleneck to uncovering new mechanisms of disease and the development of therapies. We patented this modularity, the way to build these tiny microfluidic devices and the simplicity of how it's used as a tool set, through UD’s Office of Economic Innovation and Partnerships (OEIP). Q: How have you translated this work so far? Gleghorn: To date, we've taken this microfluidic system to nine different research labs across seven countries and four continents — including the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, France, Belgium and South Africa. These labs are using our technology to study problems in women’s health and collecting data with it. We’re developing boot camps where researchers can come for two or three days to the University of Delaware, where we teach them how to use this device and they take some back with them. From a basic science perspective, there is high enthusiasm for the power of what it can tell you and its ease of use. As engineers, we think it's pretty cool that many other people are using our innovations for new discoveries. Q: What support and guidance have you received from the UD innovation ecosystem? Gleghorn: To do any of this work, you need partners that have various expertise and backgrounds. UD’s Office of Economic Innovation and Partnerships has built a strong team of professionals with expertise in different areas, such as how do you license or take something to patent, how do you make connections with the business community? OEIP is home to Delaware’s Small Business Development Center, which can help you think about business visibility in terms of startups. Horn Entrepreneurship has built out impressive programs for teaching students and faculty to think entrepreneurially and build mentor networks, while programs like the Institute for Engineering Driven Health and the NSF Accelerating Research Translation at UD provide gap funding to be able to do product development and to take the work from basic prototype to something that is more marketable. More broadly in Delaware is the Small Business Administration, the Delaware Innovation Space and regional grant programs and small accelerators to help Delaware innovators. Q: How have students in your lab benefited from engaging in innovation? Gleghorn: Undergraduate students in my lab have made hundreds of these devices at scale. We basically built a little manufacturing facility, so we have ways to sterilize them, track batches, etc. We call it “the foundry.” In other work, graduate students are engineering different components or working on specific system designs for various studies. The students see collaborators use these devices to discover new science and new discoveries. That's very rewarding as an engineer. Additionally, my lab focuses on building solutions that are useful in the clinic and commercially viable. As a result, we've had two grad students spin out companies related to the work we've been doing in the lab. Q: How has research translation positively impacted your work? Gleghorn: I started down this road maybe five years ago, seriously trying to think about how to translate our research findings. Being an entrepreneur, translating technology — it's a very different way to think about your work. And so that framework has really permeated most of the research that I do now and changed the way I think about problems. It has opened new opportunities for collaboration and for alternate sources of funding with companies. This has value in terms of taking the research that you're doing fundamentally and creating a measurable impact in the community, but it also diversifies your funding streams to work on important problems. And different viewpoints help you look at the work you do in new ways, challenging you to define the value proposition, the impact of your work.
University Communications Needs a Bigger Role in the Research Conversation
While attending the Expert Finder Systems International Forum (EFS), several notable themes emerged for me over the 2-day event. It's clear that many universities are working hard to improve their reputation by demonstrating the real-world impact of their research to the public and to funders, but it's proving to be a challenging task - even for the largest R1 universities. Many of these challenges stem from how institutions have traditionally organized their research functions, management systems, and performance metrics. Engaging faculty researchers in this process remains a significant challenge, despite the need for rapid transformation. While this EFS conference was very well-organized and the speakers delivered a great deal of useful information, I appeared to be one of the few marketing and communications professionals in a room full of research leaders, administrative staff, librarians, and IT professionals. There's a certain irony to this, as I observe the same phenomenon at HigherEd marketing conferences, which often lack representation from research staff. My point is this. We can't build better platforms, policies, and processes that amplify the profile of research without breaking down silos. We need University Communications to be much more involved in this process. As Baruch Fischhoff, a renowned scholar at Carnegie Mellon University, notes: Bridging the gap between scientists and the public “requires an unnatural act: collaboration among experts from different communities” – but when done right, it benefits everyone. But first, let's dive in a little more into RIM's and Expert Finder Systems for context. What are Research Information Systems (RIMs) Research Information Management systems (aka Expert Finder Systems) are the digital backbone that tracks everything researchers do. Publications, grants, collaborations, patents, speaking engagements. Think of them as massive databases that universities use to catalog their intellectual output and demonstrate their research capacity. These systems matter. They inform faculty promotion decisions, support strategic planning and grant applications, and increasingly, they're what institutions point to when asked to justify their existence to funders, accreditors, and the public. But here's the problem: most RIM systems were designed by researchers, for researchers, during an era when academic reputation was the primary currency. The game has fundamentally changed, and our systems haven't caught up. Let's explore this further. Academic Research Impact: The New Pressure Cooker Research departments across the country are under intense pressure to demonstrate impact—fast. State legislators want to see economic benefits from university research. Federal agencies are demanding clearer public engagement metrics. Donors want stories, not statistics. And the general public? They're questioning whether their tax dollars are actually improving their lives. Yet some academics are still asking, “Why should I simplify my research? Doesn’t the public already trust that this is important?” In a word, no – at least, not like they used to. Communicators must navigate a landscape where public trust in science and academia is not a given. The data shows that there's a lot of work to be done. Trust in science has declined and it's also polarized:. According to a Nov. 2024 Pew Research study, 88% of Democrats vs. 66% of Republicans have a great deal or fair amount of confidence in scientists; overall views have not returned to pre-pandemic highs and many Americans are wary of scientists’ role in policymaking. While Public trust in higher education has declined, Americans see universities having a central role in innovation. While overall confidence in higher education has been falling over the past decade, a recent report by Gallup Research shows innovation scores highest as an area where higher education helps generate positive outcomes. Communication is seen as an area of relative weakness for scientists. Overall, 45% of U.S. adults describe research scientists as good communicators, according to a November 2024 Pew Research Study. Another critique many Americans hold is the sense that research scientists feel superior to others; 47% say this phrase describes them well. The traditional media ecosystem has faltered:. While many of these issues are largely due to research being caught in a tide of political polarization fueled by a significant rise in misinformation and disinformation on social media, traditional media have faced serious challenges. Newsrooms have shrunk, and specialized science journalists are a rare breed outside major outlets. Local newspapers – once a reliable venue for highlighting state university breakthroughs or healthcare innovations – have been severely impacted. The U.S. has lost over 3,300 newspapers since 2005, with closures continuing and more than 7,000 newspaper jobs vanished between 2022 and 2023 according to a Northwestern University Medill Report on Local News. Competition for coverage is fierce, and your story really needs to shine to grab a journalist's attention – or you need to find alternative ways to reach audiences directly. The Big Message These Trends are Sending We can’t just assume goodwill – universities have to earn trust through clear, relatable communication. Less money means more competition and more scrutiny on outcomes. That's why communications teams play a pivotal role here: by conveying the impact of research to the public and decision-makers, they help build the case for why cuts to science are harmful. Remember, despite partisan divides, a strong majority – 78% of Americans – still agree government investment in scientific research is worthwhile. We need to keep it that way. But there's still a lot of work to do. The Audience Mismatch Problem The public doesn't care about your Altmetrics score. The policymakers I meet don't get excited about journal impact factors. Donors want to fund solutions to problems they understand, not citations in journals they'll never read. Yet our expert systems are still designed around these traditional academic metrics because that's what the people building them understand. It's not their fault—but it's created a blind spot. "Impact isn't just journal articles anymore," one EFS conference panelist explained. "It's podcasts, blogs, media mentions, datasets, even the community partnerships we build." But walk into most research offices, and those broader impacts are either invisible in the system or buried under layers of academic jargon that external audiences can't penetrate. Expert systems have traditionally been primarily focused on academic audiences. They're brilliant at tracking h-Index scores, citation counts, and journal impact factors. But try to use them to show a state legislator how your agriculture research is helping local farmers, or explain to a donor how your engineering faculty is solving real-world problems? There's still work to do here. As one frustrated speaker put it: "These systems have become compliance-driven, inward-looking tools. They help administrators, but they don't help the public understand why research matters. The Science Translation Crisis Perhaps the most sobering observation came from another EFS Conference speaker who said it very plainly. "If we can't explain our work in plain language, we lose taxpayers. We lose the community. They don't see themselves in what we do." However, this feels more like a communication problem masquerading as a technology issue. We've built systems that speak fluent academic, but the audiences we need to reach speak human. When research descriptions are buried in jargon, when impact metrics are incomprehensible to lay audiences, when success stories require a PhD to understand—we're actively pushing away the very people we need to engage. The AI Disruption Very Few Saw Coming Yes, AI, like everywhere else, is fast making its mark on how research gets discovered. One impassioned speaker representing a university system described this new reality: "We are entering an age where no one needs to click on content. AI systems will summarize and cite without ever sending the traffic back." Think about what this means for a lot of faculty research. If it's not structured for both AI discovery and human interaction, your world-class faculty might as well be invisible. Increasingly, you will see that search traffic isn't coming back to your beautifully designed university pages—instead, it's being "synthesized" and served up in AI-generated summaries. I've provided a more detailed overview of how AI-generated summaries work in a previous post here. Keep in mind, this isn't a technical problem that IT can solve alone. It's a fundamental communications challenge about how we structure, present, and distribute information about our expertise. Faculty Fatigue is Real Meanwhile, many faculty are experiencing serious challenges managing busy schedules and mounting responsibilities. As another EFS panelist commented on the challenges of engaging faculty in reporting and communicating their research, saying, "Many faculty see this work as duplicative. It's another burden on top of what they already have. Without clear incentives, adoption will always lag." Faculty researchers are busy people. They will engage with these internal systems when they see direct benefits. Media inquiries, speaking opportunities, consulting gigs, policy advisory roles—the kind of external visibility that advances careers and amplifies research impact. And they require more support than many institutions can provide. Yet, many universities have just one or two people trying to manage thousands of profiles, with no clear strategy for demonstrating how tasks such as profile updates and helping approve media releases and stories translate into tangible opportunities. In short, we're asking faculty to feed a system that feels like it doesn't feed them back. Breaking Down the Silos Which brings me to my main takeaway: we need more marketing and communications professionals in these conversations. The expert systems community is focused on addressing many of the technical challenges—data integration, workflow optimization, and new metadata standards — as AI transforms how we conduct research. But they're wrestling with fundamental communication challenges about audience, messaging, and impact storytelling. That's the uncomfortable truth. The systems are evolving whether we participate or not. The public pressure for accountability isn't going away. Comms professionals can either help shape these systems to serve critical communications goals or watch our expertise get lost in translation. ⸻ Key Takeaways Get Closer to Your Research: This involves having a deeper understanding of the management systems you use across the campus. How is your content appearing to external audiences? —not just research administrators, but the journalists, policymakers, donors, and community members we're trying to reach. Don't Forget The Importance of Stories: Push for plain-language research descriptions without unnecessarily "dumbing down" the research. Show how the work your faculty is doing can create real-world benefits at a local community level. Also, demonstrate how it has the potential to address global issues, further enhancing your authority. And always be on the lookout for story angles that connect the research to relevant news, adding value for journalists. Structure Expert Content for AI Discoverability: Audit your content to see how it's showing up on key platforms such as Google Gemini, ChatGPT. Show faculty how keeping their information fresh and relevant translates to career opportunities they actually care about. Show Up at These Research Events: Perhaps most importantly, communications pros need to be part of these conversations. Next year's International Forum on Expert Finder Systems needs more communications professionals, marketing strategists, and storytelling experts in the room. The research leaders, administrators and IT professionals you will meet have a lot of challenges on their plate and want to do the right thing. They will appreciate your input. These systems are being rapidly redesigned - Whether you're part of the conversation or not. The question is: do we want to influence how they serve our institutions' communications goals, or do we want to inherit systems that work brilliantly for academic audiences but get a failing grade for helping us serve the public?
ChristianaCare’s Virtual Primary Care practice at the Center for Virtual Health has earned full accreditation from the National Committee for Quality Assurance (NCQA), placing it among the first health systems in the nation to achieve this distinction. ChristianaCare was one of only 18 organizations invited to participate in NCQA’s inaugural pilot program in 2023 to develop the Virtual Care Accreditation. The recognition affirms ChristianaCare’s leadership role in shaping the future of health care and its commitment to delivering accessible, equitable and patient-centered care through innovative digital platforms. “This accreditation is a powerful validation of our vision to reimagine health care,” said Sarah Schenck, M.D., FACP, executive director of ChristianaCare’s Center for Virtual Health. “We’ve built a model that meets people where they are—at home, at work or on the go—with care that is personal, proactive and powered by love and excellence.” What Accreditation Means for Patients NCQA accreditation underscores that ChristianaCare’s Center for Virtual Health meets rigorous standards for: Clinical quality and safety: clear care protocols, escalation pathways and outcome monitoring. Access and equity: technology, language and disability-inclusive design that extends care to more people. Data privacy and security: strong safeguards to protect personal health information. ChristianaCare’s participation in NCQA’s pilot helped shape the benchmarks now used nationwide. The center delivers comprehensive virtual primary care through a multidisciplinary team that includes physicians, nurses, nurse practitioners, behavioral health specialists, pharmacists and patient digital ambassadors. Virtual Care by the Numbers In 2024, ChristianaCare’s Center for Virtual Health provided more than 7,500 patient visits, reflecting both rapid growth and strong demand for its virtual-first model. Services are offered at no copay to ChristianaCare caregivers and their dependents, while availability continues to expand across Delaware and the region “At ChristianaCare, we believe virtual care isn’t just a convenience, it’s a catalyst for better health outcomes,” said Brad Sandella, D.O., MBA, medical director, Ambulatory Care for the Center for Virtual Health. “This accreditation affirms our commitment to innovation and excellence. We’re proud to be among the pioneers defining what high-quality virtual care looks like in America.” Beginning in 2026, ChristianaCare will expand its Virtual Primary Care practice, giving a broader consumer audience convenient access to primary care. At that time, the service will be covered by most insurance carriers and continue to feature dedicated providers in areas such as behavioral health and neurology. ChristianaCare will also continue working with NCQA and other partners to advance best practices nationwide.
