Experts Matter. Find Yours.

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?

Georgia Southern researchers survey flood-stricken area of Bangladesh

Cox’s Bazar is a bustling tourist destination located on the southeastern coast of Bangladesh. It’s home to more than 3 million people living along the longest naturally occurring sea beach in the world, extending into the Bay of Bengal. But during the monsoon season, the area is prone to flooding and frequent landslides due to its geographical location and low altitude. More than 7,000 people living in the region were displaced in 2024 after a particularly severe season that destroyed thousands of shelters, leaving three dead. Georgia Southern University Assistant Professor Munshi Rahman, Ph.D., knows the dangers and devastation monsoon season can bring to this area. As a native of Bangladesh, he has witnessed firsthand how environmental changes, urbanization and deforestation contribute to the devastation. This is why he is actively working to help his home country identify the most disaster-prone areas through the use of geographic information systems and surveys. In January, Rahman and junior geoscience major Emma Robinson traveled to Cox’s Bazar to survey and identify the areas most prone to landslides and flooding with a goal of providing data to local government and nongovernmental organizations that could help address disaster risks. Robinson says she was thrilled to gain experience in field research and engage in work she’s passionate about. “Dr. Rahman’s project really inspired me because I’ve always had a drive to help the environment,” she said. “I thought this would be a great first step into research, especially since geology and geography are so closely related.” The two used geographic information systems, GPS and community input to pinpoint vulnerable spots near residential areas and population centers. Specifically, they found that many homes and refugee camps were built on slopes. Aside from being geographically vulnerable, they observed that many of these dwellings, built from bamboo poles, tarps, and corrugated metal, lacked the infrastructure to withstand flooding. “The key findings reveal a serious environmental degradation on local landscapes exacerbating the frequency and severity of landslides and flooding events in the region,” Rahman said. He added that these insights highlight the urgency for sustainable ecosystem management and the adoption of inclusive disaster management to reduce social and environmental vulnerabilities Rahman and Robinson suggest that their findings, combined with additional socioeconomic research, could provide a more comprehensive understanding of the situation on the ground. This would enhance disaster preparedness while promoting sustainable land use. “Not too many undergrads have opportunities like this,” she said. “I know this will help me get a jump-start on my senior thesis and give me a whole new perspective for future research projects. It’s made me more confident overall as a student and researcher.” Rahman is similarly grateful for the opportunity to give his students experience in the field. “As a professor, I’ve always wanted to give my students as much real-world experience as possible,” he said. “I also give Emma full credit. Prior to this trip, she had never traveled outside the U.S. She showed incredible courage and a real talent for research.”

Disaster Reduction: Key Insights for Risk Managers & Corporate Executives

The need for comprehensive disaster risk management has never been more evident. In recent years, major storms, earthquakes, wildfires, tornados, derechos, and other destructive large-scale events have been significant. According to the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR) 2025 Global Assessment Report, disaster costs now exceed over $2.3 trillion annually when cascading and ecosystem costs are taken into account.  What can be done to minimize both the damaging effects and significant costs associated with these types of events? In this article, J.S. Held EHS experts John Dulude and Bill Zoeller examine the critical components of disaster resilience – preparedness, mitigation, and resilience – and delve into the insights that can empower risk managers and corporate executives to safeguard their organizations. What’s covered : • Proactive Disaster Planning and Preparedness • Case Study: Hurricane Hilary 2023 | Western United States • Tailoring Resilience to Geographic Risks • Learning from Disaster for Continuous Improvement The insights shared in this article underscore the critical importance of proactive planning, meticulous preparation, and resilience in the face of inevitable disasters. For media inquiries, contact : Kristi L. Stathis, J.S. Held +1 786 833 4864 Kristi.Stathis@JSHeld.com

The Canadian Housing Market is a Mess

The Social Contract is Broken—And We Forgot to Tell Our Kids There was a time in Canada when the rules seemed straightforward: work hard, stick to the plan, and your kids would have an even better future than you did. That was the unspoken social contract—not legally binding, but deeply believed. A handshake between generations, sealed with maple syrup and mutual optimism. You purchased a modest home, stayed with one employer for 30 years, and retired with a gold watch, a pension, and a house you owned outright. Life wasn’t flashy, but it was fair. And your kids? They would climb even higher. Well… about that! The Housing Market: From Stepping Stone to Stumbling Block Homeownership used to be a rite of passage. Now it feels more like winning The Amazing Race: Toronto Edition. According to Statistics Canada housing data, in 1990, the average Canadian home sold for approximately $215,000. Fast-forward to late 2023–early 2024, and that number has ballooned to around $670,000–$700,000 on average —a more than 200–225% increase in just over three decades. Meanwhile, wages didn’t get the memo. Since 1990, they’ve only doubled. So, while home prices soared, incomes shifted to the kitchen for more instant noodles. It's not just a gap—it’s a canyon. Sure, there was a housing correction in the early ’90s. But if you’re under 40, you’ve never seen a price drop—only stable prices (on a good day). Meanwhile, boomers and older Gen Xers bought homes when down payments didn’t require a GoFundMe page. Boomers Rode the Rocket—Then Pulled Up the Ladder Let’s be honest: we did quite well. If you purchased property in the ’70s, ’80s, or ’90s, you benefited from a wave of equity that transformed retirement into a cruise ship brochure. For many, the house became the largest—and only—source of real wealth. We got used to it. Then we got protective. Then... well, a bit smug. • NIMBYism? Guilty. • Zoning restrictions? Voted yes. • Capital gains reform? Over my arthritic body. • Preferred Pronouns – Me, Myself and I We feared anything that could lower our property values. A 25% correction? Not in my golden years! But that might be what it takes to give our kids a fair shot. We told them to "work hard," then quietly reinforced a game they couldn’t win. We Told Them to Hustle—Then Rigged the Game Today’s young Canadians aren’t lazy; they’re exhausted. They’ve done everything we asked—degrees, careers, even side hustles—and still can’t afford a 500-square-foot shoebox in Toronto without cashing in their RRSPs or moving back into our basements. By the way, they’re doing this—not because they missed us, but because rent is eating up half their paycheque and still asking for dessert. Even worse? Many are looking abroad, not for a gap year, but for an economy in which they can participate—one where they might be able to afford a home and groceries in the same month. If the best and brightest are quietly packing their bags, it’s not wanderlust; it’s a policy failure. There’s now a whole ecosystem catalyzed by everything from consultants to cloud-based software and payment platforms that has aided a global movement of “creative-class” digital nomads. For those who want a more affordable cost of living and have the skills necessary to work remotely, this generation has options to move. In "Intelligent Money," author Chris Skinner envisions a future where AI-powered financial systems won’t just advise against homeownership—they’ll actively discourage it. Why commit to mortgage debt when you can rent flexibly, invest digitally, and maintain liquidity in your life? Not a dream, but a necessity. We told them to pull up their socks. They’re wondering if we sold their shoes. What Happened to Profit Sharing? Remember when companies used to share their success? Microsoft, Google, and yes, still Costco, offered profit-sharing or stock options that turned employees into unexpected millionaires. It wasn’t charity; it was a fair deal. Then gig work emerged, HR departments disappeared, and the only thing we shared was burnout. We need to restore fairness—perhaps even incentivize companies that value loyalty. Renter Equity Accounts: A Radical Concept—Equity You're not building wealth if rent is more than 30% of your income. You’re funding someone else’s retirement. So, here’s a thought: when rent exceeds 30%, why don’t we match the excess—25% to 50%—and deposit it into a locked “Renter Equity Account”? It grows tax-free and can be used for: • A down payment • Retirement savings • Student debt relief • Emergency funds Employers could contribute to REA plans. Governments could provide incentives, and renters could finally receive more than just a rent receipt and a pat on the back. It's Time for Bold, Practical Ideas We can’t rewind to 1990. (Although the fashion world is trying.) But we can fix what’s broken: Let Canadians earn their first $250,000 tax-free, provided it is used for a down payment or to eliminate student loans. That’s helping reduce overall debt. Ensure zoning reform is effective by linking federal infrastructure funding to genuine housing development. Establish public wealth tools - TFSA-style accounts for low-wealth, high-effort Canadians. Forgive student loans for public service, specifically for individuals filling positions such as nurses, teachers, early childhood educators, and tradespeople, with added incentives for those relocating to underserved areas. Invest in them, and they will reinvest in us. What Families Can Do—Right Now No, you can’t rewrite national policy from the kitchen table. (Unless you’re Chrystia Freeland.) But here’s what you can do: Start a down payment fund—consider using a TFSA or an investment account to help your kids build capital. Create an ADU—laneway homes, granny suites, legal basement rentals. Housing and support combined. Access your home equity—HELOCs or reverse mortgages can be lifelines, not luxury options. Create a rent-to-own family plan—turn monthly rent into future equity. Discuss finances—share your successes, warn against mistakes, and share the financial knowledge you’ve gained from hard lessons. An Apology—from the Heart To our kids and to the next generation, we should say we’re sorry. We didn’t plan for this outcome. We assumed the paths we walked would still be open for you, that the same rules would still apply, and that equity would be available to all. We forgot that a contract—even an unspoken one—still needs to be honoured. But it’s not too late. We can speak out. We can share our thoughts. We can change the policies, shift the mindsets, and reopen the doors that have been closed, because the future of this country shouldn’t be something you have to leave to find. Let’s fix this. So, you can stay. And thrive. And lead. Let’s rebuild the contract together. Deal? Don’t Retire … Re-Wire! Sue

Fuller E. Callaway Professor of Economics Michael Toma appointed to Governor’s Council of Economic Advisers

When an invitation to sit on the Georgia Governor’s Council of Economic Advisers arrived in an informal email from a colleague, Michael Toma, Ph.D., welcomed the chance to share his ongoing research on the economic health of southeastern Georgia with Gov. Brian Kemp, the Georgia House of Representatives and Senate leadership and their constituents. However, when he joined a small group of colleagues from around the state in a legislative office near the capitol in Atlanta late last year, the opportunity felt far from casual. “It does seem like it’s an honor because I looked around the table and there were only 10 or so of us from the entire state of Georgia,” said Toma, the Fuller E. Callaway professor of economics in Georgia Southern University’s Parker College of Business. “It’s nice to be invited to join this council informing the executive and legislative branches of government about economic conditions in the state of Georgia. I know the southeastern part of the state, so it’s nice to be recognized and be invited to speak about this region to a state-level audience.” The Governor’s Council of Economic Advisers is a select group of mostly higher education economists from various University System of Georgia institutions, in addition to the chief economist from Georgia Power, who meet annually. Toma, who specializes in macroeconomics and regional economics, is well known for his expertise throughout Savannah and the surrounding region. Since 2000, he has written and distributed The Economic Monitor, a quarterly publication housed within Georgia Southern’s Economics Department and Center for Business Analytics and Economic Research. The economic analysis offers a snapshot of the Savannah Metropolitan Statistical Area economy, including Bryan, Chatham and Effingham counties, and informs business owners across the Coastal Empire. He also regularly speaks to chambers of commerce and business groups in the region. In the governor’s council meeting, which was televised to state legislators, the economists took turns speaking about their respective areas of expertise to Gov. Kemp as part of an educational process and annual update for the executive and legislative branches. “The academics from the different institutions discussed economic conditions in their regions of the state,” Toma said. “I highlighted the activity here in Savannah, the growing manufacturing base and the wages associated with the Hyundai plant being injected into the regional economy, and the build-out of the supply chain for the Hyundai plant. “I discussed manufacturing development in the context of broader economic growth within the region that’s layered on top of our normal growth pattern, and that the economic development initiative is starting to pay the dividends it was anticipated to pay.” Following each individual presentation, the governor held an open forum for all in attendance to speak more fluidly with the group. “He had questions for the panel in general about small business activity,” stated Toma. “So I was able to characterize the ecosystem for small businesses in Chatham County. “He said that was a great report.” Toma holds a Ph.D. in economics from George Mason University. He joined Georgia Southern on the Armstrong Campus in Savannah in 1997. If you're interested in learning more about this topic and want to book time to talk or interview with Michael Toma then let us help - simply click on his icon now or contact Georgia Southern's Director of Communications Jennifer Wise at jwise@georgiasouthern.edu to arrange an interview today.

The Hidden Power of Invisible Experts

In a fast-moving landscape shaped by AI, hybrid work, and constant information shifts, organizations can’t afford to overlook their own expertise. Yet many still do — because the most valuable voices are often hiding in plain sight. We call them "invisible experts". These aren’t just the well-known thought leaders or executives quoted in media. They’re the researchers, engineers, clinicians, analysts, and project leads quietly shaping strategy, driving innovation, and influencing outcomes every day. They have deep knowledge, practical insight, and the credibility to build trust — but they’re often left out of the spotlight. And that’s a problem. --- The Expertise Gap Many organizations, both corporate and institutional struggle to define what makes someone an “expert”. Without a clear framework, expertise is often equated with job title, seniority, or public visibility. But in reality, expertise is multidimensional. It includes formal education, yes — but also lived experience, community influence, original research, and the ability to explain complex ideas clearly. If your organization wants to stay competitive, earn media attention, attract speaking engagements, partnerships, or influence your industry, you need a deeper bench of visible expertise. And it starts by identifying who your real experts are — not just the obvious ones. --- 7 Dimensions of Expertise Here are seven ways to think about expertise beyond the traditional credentials: Authority – Known as a go-to source in their domain. Advocate – Actively supports and elevates their professional community. Educator – Shares knowledge through teaching, speaking, or mentoring. Author – Publishes original insights or thought leadership content. Researcher – Contributes new data, analysis, or findings in their field. Practitioner – Applies knowledge in real-world contexts daily. Graduate – Has academic or technical training in a focus area. Not every expert is made for the stage or the media spotlight — and that’s okay. Some are best behind the scenes, helping create compelling content, briefing spokespeople, or surfacing insights from the field. Your job is to recognize the different ways people can contribute and make that part of your strategy. --- Visibility ≠ Seniority In the era of LinkedIn, personal branding, and AI-powered content, professional visibility is no longer tied to hierarchy. A mid-career professional, with a sharp take on current events might be more discoverable — and more in demand — than a long-tenured exec with little digital presence. That’s why organizations need to shift from thinking about expertise as a ladder, to thinking of it as an ecosystem. Not every expert wants to build a personal brand, but many are ready to contribute — if they’re supported and recognized. Here’s the truth: If you don’t tell your story, someone else will. And if you don’t help your experts show up in the right places — search engines, newsrooms, speaker directories, donor meetings — opportunities will go elsewhere. --- Give Your Experts a Digital Home Even after you've identified your internal experts, the next question is: Where do they live online? Too many organizations treat expert content like an afterthought — scattered across bio pages, outdated PDFs, or buried in press releases. To unlock the real value of your expertise, you need to give it a proper home. That means: Expert Profiles that showcase credentials, insights, and media-friendly info Expert Posts that surface their latest research, commentary, and thought leadership Searchable Directories that help media, partners, and the public find the right voice fast Inquiry Management tools that streamline incoming requests and drive results A centralized platform makes it easier for both internal teams and external audiences to discover, engage, and activate your expertise — whether it’s for media interviews, event invitations, donor conversations, or strategic partnerships. Without it, you're leaving visibility and value on the table. --- Is Your Organization Ready? Expertise is one of your most valuable and underutilized assets — but turning it into impact requires more than a list of names. You need to take stock of your internal bench strength, identify the experts who are ready to lead, and invest in the systems that make their voices heard. Start by asking: Who in our organization has untapped insight? Who’s already engaging audiences but flying under the radar? What tools, platforms, and support can we provide to amplify them? Recognizing your invisible experts is just the first step. Giving them a digital home and helping them engage with the right audiences — that’s how you turn knowledge into opportunity. Learn more about how ExpertFile helps organization's shine the light in these Invisible Experts.

Decoding the Future of AI: From Disruption to Democratisation and Beyond

The global AI landscape has become a melting pot for innovation, with diverse thinking pushing the boundaries of what is possible. Its application extends beyond just technology, reshaping traditional business models and redefining how enterprises, governments, and societies operate. Advancements in model architectures, training techniques and the proliferation of open-source tools are lowering barriers to entry, enabling organisations of all sizes to develop competitive AI solutions with significantly fewer resources. As a result, the long-standing notion that AI leadership is reserved for entities with vast computational and financial resources is being challenged. This shift is also redrawing the global AI power balance, with a decentralised approach to AI where competition and collaboration coexist across different regions. As AI development becomes more distributed, investment strategies, enterprise innovation and global technological leadership are being reshaped. However, established AI powerhouses still wield significant leverage, driving an intense competitive cycle of rapid innovation. Amid this acceleration, it is critical to distinguish true technological breakthroughs from over-hyped narratives, adopting a measured, data-driven approach that balances innovation with demonstrable business value and robust ethical AI guardrails. Implications of the Evolving AI Landscape The democratisation of AI advancements, intensifying competitive pressures, the critical need for efficiency and sustainability, evolving geopolitical dynamics and the global race for skilled talent are all fuelling the development of AI worldwide. These dynamics are paving the way for a global balance of technological leadership. Democratisation of AI Potential The ability to develop competitive AI models at lower costs is not only broadening participation but also reshaping how AI is created, deployed and controlled. Open-source AI fosters innovation by enabling startups, researchers, and enterprises to collaborate and iterate rapidly, leading to diverse applications across industries. For example, xAI has made a significant move in the tech world by open sourcing its Grok AI chatbot model, potentially accelerating the democratisation of AI and fostering innovation. However, greater accessibility can also introduce challenges, including risks of misuse, uneven governance, and concerns over intellectual property. Additionally, as companies strategically leverage open-source AI to influence market dynamics, questions arise about the evolving balance between open innovation and proprietary control. Increased Competitive Pressure The AI industry is fuelled by a relentless drive to stay ahead of the competition, a pressure felt equally by Big Tech and startups. This is accelerating the release of new AI services, as companies strive to meet growing consumer demand for intelligent solutions. The risk of market disruption is significant; those who lag, face being eclipsed by more agile players. To survive and thrive, differentiation is paramount. Companies are laser-focused on developing unique AI capabilities and applications, creating a marketplace where constant adaptation and strategic innovation are crucial for success. Resource Optimisation and Sustainability The trend toward accessible AI necessitates resource optimisation, which means developing models with significantly less computational power, energy consumption and training data. This is not just about cost; it is crucial for sustainability. Training large AI models is energy-intensive; for example, training GPT-3, a 175-billion-parameter model, is believed to have consumed 1,287 MWh of electricity, equivalent to an average American household’s use over 120 years1. This drives innovation in model compression, transfer learning, and specialised hardware, like NVIDIA’s TensorRT. Small language models (SLMs) are a key development, offering comparable performance to larger models with drastically reduced resource needs. This makes them ideal for edge devices and resource-constrained environments, furthering both accessibility and sustainability across the AI lifecycle. Multifaceted Global AI Landscape The global AI landscape is increasingly defined by regional strengths and priorities. The US, with its strength in cloud infrastructure and software ecosystem, leads in “short-chain innovation”, rapidly translating AI research into commercial products. Meanwhile, China excels in “long-chain innovation”, deeply integrating AI into its extended manufacturing and industrial processes. Europe prioritises ethical, open and collaborative AI, while the APAC counterparts showcase a diversity of approaches. Underlying these regional variations is a shared trajectory for the evolution of AI, increasingly guided by principles of responsible AI: encompassing ethics, sustainability and open innovation, although the specific implementations and stages of advancement differ across regions. The Critical Talent Factor The evolving AI landscape necessitates a skilled workforce. Demand for professionals with expertise in AI and machine learning, data analysis, and related fields is rapidly increasing. This creates a talent gap that businesses must address through upskilling and reskilling initiatives. For example, Microsoft has launched an AI Skills Initiative, including free coursework and a grant program, to help individuals and organisations globally develop generative AI skills. What does this mean for today’s enterprise? New Business Horizons AI is no longer just an efficiency tool; it is a catalyst for entirely new business models. Enterprises that rethink their value propositions through AI-driven specialisation will unlock niche opportunities and reshape industries. In financial services, for example, AI is fundamentally transforming operations, risk management, customer interactions, and product development, leading to new levels of efficiency, personalisation and innovation. Navigating AI Integration and Adoption Integrating AI is not just about deployment; it is about ensuring enterprises are structurally prepared. Legacy IT architectures, fragmented data ecosystems and rigid workflows can hinder the full potential of AI. Organisations must invest in cloud scalability, intelligent automation and agile operating models to make AI a seamless extension of their business. Equally critical is ensuring workforce readiness, which involves strategically embedding AI literacy across all organisational functions and proactively reskilling talent to collaborate effectively with intelligent systems. Embracing Responsible AI Ethical considerations, data security and privacy are no longer afterthoughts but are becoming key differentiators. Organisations that embed responsible AI principles at the core of their strategy, rather than treating them as compliance check boxes, will build stronger customer trust and long-term resilience. This requires proactive bias mitigation, explainable AI frameworks, robust data governance and continuous monitoring for potential risks. Call to Action: Embracing a Balanced Approach The AI revolution is underway. It demands a balanced and proactive response. Enterprises must invest in their talent and reskilling initiatives to bridge the AI skills gap, modernise their infrastructure to support AI integration and scalability and embed responsible AI principles at the core of their strategy, ensuring fairness, transparency and accountability. Simultaneously, researchers must continue to push the boundaries of AI’s potential while prioritising energy efficiency and minimising environmental impact; policymakers must create frameworks that foster responsible innovation and sustainable growth. This necessitates combining innovative research with practical enterprise applications and a steadfast commitment to ethical and sustainable AI principles. The rapid evolution of AI presents both an imperative and an opportunity. The next chapter of AI will be defined by those who harness its potential responsibly while balancing technological progress with real-world impact. Resources Sudhir Pai: Executive Vice President and Chief Technology & Innovation Officer, Global Financial Services, Capgemini Professor Aleks Subic: Vice-Chancellor and Chief Executive, Aston University, Birmingham, UK Alexeis Garcia Perez: Professor of Digital Business & Society, Aston University, Birmingham, UK Gareth Wilson: Executive Vice President | Global Banking Industry Lead, Capgemini 1 https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/news/researchers-claim-they-can-cut-ai-training-energy-demands-by-75/?itm_source=Bibblio&itm_campaign=Bibblio-related&itm_medium=Bibblio-article-related

A Bumpy Ride Ahead for HigherEd

A confluence of political, economic, and social challenges is threatening the very fabric of US universities.  In both red and blue states, the political and economic headwinds facing institutions are fierce, public skepticism is high, and social media has become a polarizing battleground of filter bubbles filled with mis/disinformation. Universities find themselves squeezed by funding cuts, scrutinized by lawmakers, and caught in cultural crossfire. This presents a unique challenge for communications professionals. In this era of declining trust and “alternative facts,” they need to be hyper-informed, adapt quickly, and boldly emphasize the critical value institutions have in society. Communications should function as a vital link, bridging this growing divide between town and gown. In red and blue states, the political and economic headwinds hitting higher education are fierce, public skepticism is high, and social media has become a polarizing battleground of filter bubbles filled with mis/disinformation. It's important to note that throughout history, universities often emerge stronger and more deeply connected to the public during times of turbulence. Universities played a key role in partnering with the government to implement Roosevelt's New Deal, helping with emergency relief and agricultural programs. They helped democratize education with the GI Bill after World War II. They responded to societal demands during the civil rights era. Most recently, they played a key role in public health amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. Campus communicators have a unique set of skills and a vital responsibility to steer their institutions through these tough times. But the road ahead will be hard. The New Reality for Campus Communicators Cuts to Research Funding The lifeblood of academic innovation—research dollars—is under threat. The new political regime in Washington is looking to cut billions in federal research funding. A sudden cap on NIH indirect costs (slashed to 15% from an average of 28%) will have a profound impact on programs. Many researchers report that major grants are frozen or are expected to shrink. This “budget axe” isn’t theoretical for research universities—it’s biting right now. Communicators must convey what’s at stake: essential contributions such as groundbreaking science, community health programs, and innovation pipelines that fuel the economy hang in the balance as money gets tighter. Increasing State Oversight & Regulation In state capitals, politicians are muscling into campus affairs like never before. Republican-controlled statehouses are overhauling higher education governance, introducing over 150 bills in 35 states aimed at tightening control over public institutions. Even tenure is threatened. In the past year, lawmakers in seven states moved to eliminate or curb tenure and impose stricter post-tenure reviews – an unprecedented encroachment on academic freedom. New laws and proposals are creating oversight committees, mandating changes to the curriculum, and even threatening funding for programs out of political favor. The message from some state capitols is clear: “We’re watching you.” This surge in oversight and regulatory meddling means university communicators must navigate an increasingly fine line, demonstrating transparency and accountability at every turn to appease regulators while fiercely defending their institution’s academic autonomy. Political Pressure and DEI Backlash Diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives are under open attack. What began as partisan rhetoric has evolved into concrete threats – and actions – against campus diversity efforts. Dozens of states have passed or proposed laws to defund DEI offices, ban diversity training, or restrict teaching about race and gender. The result? An “inconsistent and confusing landscape” for colleges as they respond to swelling political pressure. The campaign against campus DEI has dramatically accelerated in 2025, turbocharged by signals from the Trump administration pushing to eliminate DEI efforts across government and higher ed. According to The Chronicle of Higher Education 270 campuses in 38 states have already scaled back or dismantled some DEI programs under this pressure. For communications teams, the DEI backlash creates a messaging minefield. They must affirm institutional values of inclusion and support for marginalized groups, even as those very programs face hostile scrutiny from powerful critics. Threats to the Federal Department of Education In Washington, the unthinkable is suddenly on the table: the U.S. Department of Education itself is in the crosshairs. President Trump has made good on campaign promises by signing an executive order to dismantle the Department of Education. While outright abolition requires Congress, the administration has already laid off nearly half of the department’s staff and moved to strip the agency to its bare bones. “We’re going to shut it down… it’s doing us no good,” Trump declared. This unprecedented move could upend federal support and guidelines for universities – from financial aid administration to civil rights enforcement – leaving states to fill the void. Communications professionals must reassure students, faculty, and the public that education won’t grind to a halt if federal oversight wanes. It’s a communications tightrope: acknowledging the potential for massive change while conveying stability in the university’s core mission. After all, even if Washington pulls back, universities still answer to accreditation bodies and the public trust. The Misinformation Deluge on Social Media The information ecosystem has never been more chaotic – or more dangerous. Universities are grappling with viral misinformation and disinformation that can ignite campus controversies overnight. In the age of TikTok rumors and politicized Twitter (or “X”) feeds, false narratives spread like wildfire before facts can catch up. Recent campus incidents have shown how quickly truth gets muddled: one university saw fake reports about a protest spread widely. At the same time, another dealt with a gross misinterpretation of a student gathering that went viral. Photos and videos are routinely ripped out of context or deliberately edited with misleading labels. The public, meanwhile, is “bombarded with misinformation” online and growing distrustful of experts. For higher ed communicators, countering misinformation means fighting a two-front war: rapidly correcting falsehoods about their institution and proactively pushing out accurate, compelling content to capture attention before the rumors do. Economic Uncertainty and Budget Turbulence. Even aside from targeted funding cuts, universities are feeling economic whiplash. Inflation, endowment fluctuations, and post-pandemic enrolment dips have collided to squeeze campus finances. Many institutions face structural deficits and tough choices about programs and staffing. In fact, according to the Chronicle of Higher Education, two-thirds of colleges now show at least one sign of financial stress – a startling statistic that underscores how widespread the budget crunch has become. From flagship public universities to small private colleges, hiring freezes and spending cuts are the order of the day. Every dollar is scrutinized by trustees and legislators alike. Communications pros must now operate in a climate of fiscal anxiety, where messages about any new initiative or expense can trigger questions about priorities. The task at hand is to highlight the university’s economic stewardship and continued value to students and the community, even as belts tighten. It’s critical to communicate that the institution is navigating the storm responsibly—protecting its academic core and maximizing the impact of every precious dollar. Demands to Prove Real-world Impact “What is higher ed really doing for society?” In 2025, that question echoes from state capitols, donors’ boards, and kitchen tables across America. Universities are under intense pressure to demonstrate the real-world value of their research and teaching like never before. Lawmakers openly discuss ROI (return on investment) for degrees and research grants, seeking data on graduates’ earnings and innovations spawned per taxpayer dollar. Public confidence in higher education has been shaken – a recent Gallup survey found Americans’ confidence in colleges has plummeted to 36%, down from 57% in 2015. Many believe in personal value (a college degree for better jobs) but doubt that higher education delivers for the greater good. In short, the public is skeptical whether campus research and scholarship are worth the cost. University communicators must do more than publicize exciting discoveries – they must connect the dots for people. Every media release, story, or tweet should answer: Here’s how this university’s work benefits you, your community, and the world. Whether it’s a medical breakthrough, a tech startup from the lab, or a student project solving a local problem, the mandate is clear: show impact or risk losing support. In my next post, I'll provide a detailed blueprint to help communications professionals proactively plan and organize their teams for the road ahead. This actionable framework will help you better identify where you can add value for your institution where it needs it the most and confirm your critical role as a trusted resource.  To your success! Upcoming Speaking Events April 23 PRSA Virtual Workshop "Cutting Through the Noise: What Thought Leadership Strategies are Working in Today’s Environment” Register Here June 8 IABC World Conference, Vancouver “The Thought Leadership Blueprint: Why & How to Build a High-Impact Program” Register Here Sept. 12-13 PRSA East Central Conference, Cleveland “The New Comms Leadership Skillset” Register Here About ExpertFile ExpertFile is revolutionizing how organizations connect their experts to journalists, podcasters, and conference organizers who need to find credible experts on tight deadlines…fast. Featuring experts on over 50,000 topics, our free Apple and Android mobile app is the go-to resource for journalists at media outlets such as the New York Times, CNN, NPR Radio, Fox News, BBC, The Guardian, ABC News, CBC, AXIOS and Time Magazine. For over a decade, our award-winning software platform has been helping marketing departments better manage and promote their online thought leadership to reach a wider audience. Clients include Carnegie Mellon University, ChristianaCare Health, Villanova University, Aston University and Emory University. Learn more at: expertfile.com/getstarted

Exploring the ripple effect: How teachers' emotions impact student engagement and learning outcomes

The classroom environment is a dynamic ecosystem where the emotional state of educators can significantly influence students' engagement and learning outcomes.  In a new article published in Contemporary Educational Psychology, University of Delaware Associate Research Professor Leigh McLean offers a new tool—the Teacher Affect Coding System—for measuring teachers’ emotional expressions and studying how these expressions affect their students’ attitudes toward learning. With co-author Nathan Jones of Boston University, McLean uses this tool to gather new data showing emotional transmission between teachers and their students in fourth-grade classrooms. In the study, McLean and Jones, found that teachers displayed far more positive emotions than negative ones. But they also found that some teachers—about 10%—displayed notable amounts of negative emotions, with some showing negativity during as much as 80% of their instructional time. The students of these teachers reported reduced enjoyment and engagement in their ELA classes and reduced engagement in their math classes. Given the findings of their study, McLean and Jones make several recommendations for teacher preparation and professional learning programs. As a first step, they recommend that teacher preparation and professional learning programs share information about how negative emotions and experiences are a normal part of the teaching experience. As McLean said, “It’s okay to be frustrated!” McLean is available for interviews on the study, the tool and how teachers can help mitigate this effect. Click on her profile to contact her.