In the ever evolving world of higher education, effective leaders are required at all levels of our organisations.
Emerging leaders lead in the middle of an organisation, with responsibility for delivering aspects of an institution’s mission, vision and strategy. Their roles are wide-ranging, they work with colleagues at all levels, striving to deliver an enhanced student experience, assuring academic quality and contributing (sometimes delivering) key aspects of their provider’s strategic plan.
Emerging leaders find themselves sitting on committees, representing others, and championing particular topics, having listened to the views of their teams. For some these are new experiences, requiring support and encouragement from peers and senior leaders to embrace the opportunities and challenges.
These colleagues are often leaders of a team or group, responsible for delivering not only their personal objectives, but that of the collective group. Emerging in their leadership journey they are often new to people management, navigating the concept of developing others. Their skillset requirement is vast, their teams need them to listen to many voices and views, and synthesise this into priority areas for campaign.
Learning as leaders
Attention must be paid to those embracing leadership roles, ensuring they are supported to develop. There will inevitably be contextualised opportunities and challenges, requiring understanding of the provider, location, and/or disciplinary focus. Leaders must swiftly understand the context in which they operate, previous developments in topical matters, and the drivers of various stakeholders. We must make space for leaders to learn, providing opportunity to develop.
Emerging leaders learn through observation of senior or more established leaders, modelling behaviours and approaches, through peer networking, and crucially through experience. At different times, in different circumstances, the most beneficial learning opportunities will vary. Emerging leaders will be adaptable, recognising their own developmental need, seeking support and input based on their growing networks, and reflect on their own experiences as part of the learning journey.
Space and encouragement are needed to explore and experience leadership qualities, styles and approaches. Important qualities for all leaders in HE are highlighted here by Shân Wareing: curiosity, confidence, team work, clarity in complexity, and fearlessness.
Not as easy as it sounds
While they are learning to lead, their university requires understanding, interpretation and application of activity to ensure delivery of strategic priorities – which, as we know, aren’t always aligned to the voices and views they are being asked to represent.
Representing the views of others can be challenging, especially when a range of views need collating and presenting back to university management or the team from which they came. Colleague feedback provides leaders with the thoughts and opinions of those around them, through listening to what is being shared – and what isn’t.
Emerging leaders have to synthesise great volumes of information, pulling out the very core of an issue, articulating this back to others, making strategy understandable. Collating and considering the voices of others is important, but critically, as we know from experiences with students, we must keep those who have contributed informed about what may happen next as a result of their engagement. This can empower communities to recognise input, and demonstrates an appreciation of the value of shared views.
The views of colleagues do not always align to strategy or intended direction. In this space leaders develop heightened negotiation and articulation skills, an ability to represent strategic drivers as the mechanism for change, whilst recognising an interconnected web of views and opinions. Often responsible for the support and welfare of colleagues, they are mindful of the impact of decisions and actions on others.
Developed with experience is the ability to identify where and when swift intervention is required, or when a longer-term more measured approach is needed. Uncertainties, questions and challenges surround daily life. There are times when action is required without full knowledge of a situation, confidence and the support of your surrounding team are critical when the occasion arises.
Significant transformation
It’s widely recognised that higher education has experienced significant transformation in recent years. Emerging leaders in our sector must recognise what has gone before and seek to make the most of the opportunities and challenges to come. Transformation can be invigorating, but it also brings uncertainty, and if poorly managed can cause greater uncertainty, leading to more challenges, and so the cycle continues.
To avoid this, Catherine Moran summarises the skills required in three key principles for academic leadership. Leaders must be aware of what they are aiming for, and recognise it when achieved. Emerging leaders will develop the ability to be “present” in relationships with others, drawing on authentic skills of listening and inclusivity. And once a decision is reached, emerging leaders need to be accountable.
Emerging leaders play a vital role in HE, and must be supported to develop appropriate skills, attributes and behaviours. They are delivering strategic impact, leading teams, and enhancing the student and staff experience – let’s take a moment to ensure all those in leadership roles have the opportunity to develop and grow.
The author has written this piece as an emerging leader who has participated in Minerva’s Emerging Leadership Programme, and wishes to acknowledge the support and guidance received from Mary Stuart, Kerry Shepherd, Ben Tucker, and fellow programme participants, in shaping their emerging leadership journey.
This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.
Recent attacks on diversity, equity and inclusion have rocked the higher education sector, with the Trump administration ratcheting up the conservative-led fight against those efforts.
President Donald Trump has signed multiple executive orders aimed at eliminating DEI across higher education and other sectors.
More recently, the U.S. Department of Education issued guidance barring colleges from weighing race in any decision-making or promoting diversity efforts. The letter — which used broad language and stirred confusion among colleges — triggered immediate backlash from free speech and faculty groups.
The department gave colleges until Friday to comply or risk losing their federal funding.
Higher education groups have challenged the legality of the directives from both the White House and the Education Department.
But with no clear outcome, the following colleges are stripping down their diversity efforts to avoid endangering their funding.
Ohio State University
Ohio State University said Thursday it will eliminate its DEI offices and programming effective Friday.The state flagship plans to close its Office of Diversity and Inclusion and discontinue services at its Center for Belonging and Social Change less than 24 hours after announcing the change.
The move will result in job cuts, though Ohio State did not specify how many.
“The federal government has signaled its intent to enforce guidance invalidating the use of race in a broad range of educational activities, including by withdrawing federal dollars that are so important to our student, academic and operational success,” Ohio State President Ted Carter wrote in a letter to students and employees.
In addition to federal forces, the university faces anti-DEI efforts from the Ohio Legislature. The Republican-controlled body is weighing a massive higher education bill that would, among other things, ban the state’s public colleges from having DEI offices or taking positions on “controversial” topics, such as climate or immigration policies, DEI, or abortion.
“Here in Ohio, a bill barring DEI is also making its way through the legislature, and the Attorney General of Ohio – our statutory counsel – has advised us that his office concurs with the federal government’s position regarding the use of race in educational activities,” Carter said.
The university’s Office of Academic Affairs will continue to offer the Young Scholars Program and the Morrill Scholarship Program with modified eligibility. The former is currently open to low-income, first generation students, while the latter is open to students “actively engaged in diversity-based leadership, service, and social justice activities,” according to their web pages.
The university will also rename its Office of Institutional Equity as the Office of Civil Rights Compliance “to more accurately reflect its work,” according to Carter.
“Our goal is to ensure that Ohio State continues to be a place where all are welcomed and treated with respect, while following the letter and spirit of the laws and regulations that govern us,” he said.
Ohio State leaders announced earlier this month they were evaluating the university’s roles and DEI work so they could “make changes if state or federal law requires it or if we decide a different approach is in the university’s best interests.”
The cuts to DEI will not reduce current student scholarships or financial aid, Carter said Thursday. Ohio State will offer alternative jobs to affected student employees.
The University of Cincinnati
The University of Cincinnati is stuck in limbo — its president announced a complete dissolution of the public institution’s DEI efforts before appearing to walk back the announcement just days later.
On Feb. 21, President Neville Pinto said the university would eliminate all DEI initiatives to comply with one of Trump’s executive orders and the Education Department’s guidance.
“It is untenable to operate as if noncompliance with these directives is an effective option,” Pinto wrote in a community letter. “Given this new landscape, Ohio public and federally supported institutions like ours have little choice but to follow the laws that govern us.”
Pinto said at the time that the University of Cincinnati was reviewing its jobs, programming and projects to eliminate DEI aspects. The institution had also begun removing “references to DEI principles” from its web presence and communications.
“I recognize that these decisions are weighty, and these actions are a departure from decades of established practice within academic communities,” Pinto wrote. “I also continue to ask for your patience and understanding as we do the hard work that will be required to unwind many years of DEI efforts under an extremely compressed timeline.”
The decision sparked multiple days of protests from students, faculty and staff.
According to localnews sources, Pinto told protesters at the university’s Feb. 25 board of trustees meetingthat all DEI-related programming would continue until final decisions had been made regarding the proposed state legislation and Trump’s executive orders.
The University of Pennsylvania
The University of Pennsylvania has recently scrubbed references to DEI from its offices, websites and policies, as well as the phrase “affirmative action.”
The Ivy League institution renamed its “Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action Policy” to its “Policy on Equal Opportunity.”
A previous version of the policy said “Diversity is prized at Penn as a central component of its mission and helps create an educational and working environment that best supports the University’s commitment to excellence in teaching, research, and scholarship.”
The current version does not reference diversity, instead saying: “The University of Pennsylvania’s special character is reflected in the wide variety of backgrounds, experiences, and perspectives of the Penn community.”
The university also retitled its main inclusion website as “Belonging at UPenn,” replacing “Diversity and Inclusion.”Beginning Feb. 22, diversity.upenn.edu redirected to belonging.upenn.edu.
One of the university’s student resource centers, previously known as The Office of Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity Programs, is now called the Office of Equal Opportunity Programs.
Several schools and departments within UPenn — including its schools of medicine, design, communications and law — have also removed or replaced references to DEI from their web presences, according to The Daily Pennsylvanian, the university student-led newspaper.
Philadelphia lawmakers met with university leaders this week but two walked out after they took issue with college officials’ explanations on why UPenn had reversed its stance on DEI, according to WHYY.
Ivy Tech Community College
In Indiana, Ivy Tech Community College announced it will close its DEI programs and offices on March 12,following Trump’s executive orders.”
Ivy TechPresident Sue Ellspermann said the college relies largely on state and federal funding, citing pending policies at both levels of government when announcing the forthcoming closures,according to a copy of her letter obtained by WTHI.
“While state laws and federal actions are not yet finalized, the College is acting now to protect our federal and state funding so we can ensure uninterrupted services and provide ample time for adjustment in our operations,” she said.
Affected college employees will receive career support services and will be “encouraged to apply for open positions in the College,” according to Ellspermann.
The soon-to-be closed office promotes “cultural and intellectual diversity” and hosts events for cultural heritage months, including for Women’s History Month, Black History Month, LGBTQ+ History Month and Native American Heritage Month, according to Ivy Tech’s website.
The University of Alaska
Regents for the University of Alaska ordered the system to scrub all references to diversity, equity, inclusion “or other associated terms” from its communications and programs, including websites and job titles. The Feb. 21 directive cited Trump’s executive orders against DEI.
The regent vote was nearly unanimous, with the only dissent coming from the board’s student member, Alaska Public Media reported.
In a recent op-ed in the Anchorage Daily News, the leadership of the University of Alaska Faculty Alliance called the regents’ decision “rash and censorious”and noted that the board’s approved meeting agenda did not give the public notice of the anti-DEI motion.
“This unilateral decision undermines our universities’ respective strategic plans that form the foundation for our accreditations,” the chairs wrote. “A decision without public process belittles the dedication and labor of those who openly collaborated to create these plans.”
The alliance also criticized the ban’s broad language, saying it gave regents free reign to expand the list of prohibited words.
The University of Iowa
Amid federal and state pressures, the University of Iowa has eliminated some of its living learning communities — residential programs allowing on-campus students to live in groups based on identity, degree program or common interest.
The university will not offer living learning communities for Black students, Latinx studentsand LGBTQ+ students during the 2025-2026 academic year, according to its website. University officials confirmed to The Gazette that it will not offer those three living learning communities going forward but declined to comment further.
In July, a new state law will take effect banning Iowa’s three public universities from funding or maintaining DEI offices. And back in 2023, the Iowa Board of Regents — which oversees the universities — ordered them to cut all DEI efforts not required to comply with the law or accreditation standards.
On Feb. 24, the president of the University of Iowa, Barbara Wilson, told lawmakers that the college has complied with their DEI ban.
“We’ve closed offices, we’ve gotten rid of every DEI committee in every department across every college,” she said, according to The Gazette. “We have retained a central office, but we’ve eliminated about 11 positions in that central office, and it’s focused primarily on civil rights, access and opportunity.”
Wilson also said she couldn’t “imagine getting rid of the word diversity” but would do so if directed to by lawmakers.
Des Moines Area Community College
Des Moines Area Community College in Iowahas paused its DEI efforts, including diversity-focused trainings and task forces, according to the Des Moines Register. It also removed information regarding its diversity commission from its website, as of Jan. 27.
Like the University of Iowa, the public college has faced increasing pressure from conservative state lawmakers to roll back diversity efforts.
On Feb. 26, the Iowa House’s higher education committee advanced a bill that would prohibit community colleges from having DEI offices, like their university counterparts. The committee chair acknowledged the state’s community colleges are already complying with the proposed standard but said lawmakers should codify the rule, according to the Iowa Capital Dispatch.
Grand View University
Grand View University, in Iowa, canceled its plans for International Women’s Dayset for March 8 amid changing federal and state anti-diversity policies, according to Axios. A spokesperson for the private college said Grand View wants to ensure its events aren’t exclusionary.
Iowa lawmakers are also taking aim at private colleges’ DEI efforts.
On Feb. 26, the House’s higher education committee advanced a bill that would ban DEI offices at the state’s private colleges, unless required by federal law or accreditation. If the legislation passes, those that don’t comply could lose access to the Iowa Tuition Grant program, which offers scholarships to students enrolled in private colleges in the state.
Senior Vice President of Human Services Julie Kochanek discusses how social science informs her leadership at American Institutes for Research (AIR), emphasizing trust, collaboration, and community-building in research.
Julie Kochanek
Senior Vice President, Human Services Division, American Institutes for Research (AIR)
How does your experience in behavioral and social science research inform your approach to leadership?
As a leader, I always return to themes I observed while training to be a researcher: trust, culture, and community. In graduate school, I studied how East African nations used education as a mechanism to build community. I dug deeper into this community theme as part of my Ph.D. studies, focusing on how U.S. schools operate organizationally and how teachers, school leaders, and parents must all interact to better support student learning.
How do you build strong teams to accomplish AIR’s mission?
At AIR, collaboration is key to our success. Project teams at AIR often include staff with different backgrounds, various methodological expertise, unique content knowledge, and/or experience working directly with community leaders. Our work is strengthened by bringing people together. This allows us to fully consider the challenge we’re studying and understand the needs of the communities we serve.
As a leader, I am responsible for creating the conditions to help staff develop meaningful partnerships, recognize everyone’s contributions, and reward meaningful collaboration. We collect and share information on staff interests, skills, and experiences so teams can easily identify those they might recruit to fill a gap. My weekly internal messages to staff often highlight examples of great team building and how our work is strengthened by diverse teams.
What are some of the most important results you have uncovered across your 20+ years in the research sector?
Discussions about education policy often inadvertently leave people and human connection out of the equation. Throughout our work, I am constantly reminded that working collaboratively and building relationships among educators and students is an essential part of setting the right conditions for learning.
I’m impressed, for example, by how educators, researchers, and school leaders have partnered to build stronger support systems for students who are at risk of not graduating from high school. Researchers help school districts collect and interpret data on early warning signs and develop an evidence-based approach to address the challenge and boost graduation rates. As more districts across the country adopt these early warning systems, we’re seeing real results: More young people are able to continue on the path to success.
Another example is how we use research and technical assistance to help teachers strengthen their reading and literacy instruction. There are proven strategies (e.g., the science of reading) to help kids learn to read. Working alongside teachers and giving them the tools they need to adopt evidence-based approaches has been successful. However, this requires hands-on training, coaching, and human connection — a significant investment. We know that making this kind of investment in our nation’s teachers is well worth the reward.
What advice would you give women just beginning their careers in research?
Women are better represented in behavioral and social science research than in other scientific fields, but we still face barriers, including balancing work and family, dealing with bias, and having fewer opportunities for funding and leadership. Addressing these barriers is important because evidence shows that diverse research teams bring more innovative and effective solutions.
Whatever your field, I think it is important to live with integrity. Remember that there is not one right path to follow. Upon completing my post-doctoral position and considering my next move, I worried about making a career-defining wrong turn. This is normal. I definitely made choices that concerned my graduate school advisors, but I don’t regret any of them. I’ve gotten to where I am today by learning from the different contexts in which I’ve worked, taking some risks, and staying true to my values.
Dr. Hadiyah-Nicole Green has developed a novel cancer-killing technology, Laser-Activated NanoTherapy (LANT), that is of high clinical relevance in the field of oncology.
In 2003, Dr. Hadiyah-Nicole Green graduated with a B.S. in Physics from Alabama A&M University with a plan to revolutionize the way consumers receive cable TV and internet. She had diligently prepared herself for her future career in fiber optics and optical communication, and she was excited to finally be on her way. The day after graduation, Dr. Green’s aunt, who had raised her along with her two older brothers, disclosed that she had cancer.
“She told us she had ‘woman’s cancer,’ which usually means cervical or ovarian cancer, and was only given three months to live,” Dr. Green recalled. “She also said she’d rather die than experience the side effects of chemo or radiation treatments.” As Dr. Green nursed her aunt through the ravages of the disease, she remembers thinking, “We have satellites in outer space that can tell whether a dime on the ground is face up or face down, but we can’t treat a tumor just at the site of the tumor? That doesn’t make sense.”
Three months after her aunt died, Dr. Green’s uncle, her late aunt’s husband, was diagnosed with esophageal cancer and given up to six months to live. Dr. Green was the primary caregiver for her uncle while he received the conventional treatments of radiation and chemo. Although with treatment, Dr. Green’s help, and God’s grace, her uncle lived 10 years past his original prognosis, Dr. Green saw his body bear the brunt of the treatment’s brutal side effects.
“I watched him wither down to nothing after losing 150 pounds,” Dr. Green said. “He lost all of his hair on his head, his eyebrows, and his eyelashes, and his skin looked like it had been barbequed.” Seeing her aunt and uncle suffer at the hands of cancer and cancer treatments inspired Dr. Green to dedicate her life to developing innovative and more humane ways to attack and destroy cancer. In 2005, she enrolled in the physics Ph.D. program at the University of Alabama in Birmingham (UAB) to develop this inspired cancer treatment using lasers and nanotechnology.
A cure without suffering
Cancer has impacted most of us. While cancer that is detected early has a high cure rate, nearly 10 million people still die from cancer each year worldwide. Even with the best care, any of us — our family, friends, or colleagues — can be subjected to ineffective treatments, harsh side effects, lengthy treatment durations, prohibitive costs, and limited accessibility. Now, there’s a better way!
Dr. Green developed a novel cancer-killing technology, Laser-Activated NanoTherapy (LANT), that is of high clinical relevance in the field of oncology. LANT directly addresses the urgent yet unmet global need for more effective treatment options for millions of people with difficult-to-treat cancers. LANT is designed as a minimally invasive, curative treatment for solid tumors that induces site-specific (not cell type-specific) cellular death and tumor regression precisely at the site of laser activation. The peer-reviewed, preclinical in vivo LANT data showed complete tumor regression with clear tumor margins and healed skin in just 15 days after a single, 10-minute treatment without surgery, chemotherapy, radiation, or observed side effects. Because its mechanism of action is based on physics instead of biology, LANT is a platform therapy designed to have clinical indications for a variety of difficult-to-treat solid tumors, such as brain, pancreatic, breast, prostate, and head and neck cancers.
Dr. Green founded the Ora Lee Smith Cancer Research Foundation, a cancer nonprofit, to keep the technology she developed affordable for all. The Ora Lee Smith Cancer Research Foundation is on a mission to change the way cancer is treated and reduce cancer patient suffering by providing a treatment that is accessible, affordable, and effective. Limited by funding, not technological advancements, the Ora Lee Foundation is ready to move LANT beyond the laboratory and into humans with tax-deductible donations. When you support the Ora Lee Smith Cancer Research Foundation, your donations will help ensure Dr. Green’s research comes to life by helping to fund human clinical trials, taking this tech from the lab to the living.
The future of cancer research
Dr. Green acknowledges that none of us are islands; we all stand on the shoulders of those who came before us. As such, she pays it forward by creating opportunities in her research laboratory and nonprofit for women and students in STEM to grow their research and personal skills. She also advises her mentees and trainees on educational, career, and life strategies.
“My advice to young women interested in pursuing research careers would be to excel in your coursework and obtain summer and work-study research experiences to help confirm or narrow your scientific interests,” Dr. Green said. “Put your best into everything that you do, so that when opportunities come, you will be prepared. Everyone has a divine purpose for being on the planet. Channel your joy or pain and the things that make you happy or angry, into your purpose or to help you identify your purpose.”
Dr. Green says, “I turned my pain into passion and used the loss of my loved ones to cancer to develop new ways to fight cancer. I also channeled the skills I built as the president of different organizations in college into my position as the founder of my nonprofit.” If you haven’t found your purpose, Dr. Green recommends supporting something or someone you believe in, and by dedicating time and effort to something bigger than yourself, you will gain experience and skills that may be the investment needed to achieve your own success.
The term “bittersweet” isn’t one typically associated with healthcare, but for many women today, their healthcare journeys are just that.
Irene O. Aninye, Ph.D.
Chief Science Officer, Society for Women’s Health Research (SWHR)
A woman walks out of her doctor’s office. She sits down — in the lobby, in her car, on a bench — to process what she just heard. She thinks to herself, “They said I have…”
She feels fearful. She feels confused. She feels overwhelmed. But, she also feels hope and relief, because today’s visit was different. After multiple trips to urgent care, months-long wait times to see different specialists, countless days that turned into years going to work while feeling unwell, and surmounting out-of-pocket costs for medications that were unable to manage her symptoms, today, she finally received an accurate diagnosis — a name to associate with her experience. Now there is hope for a pathway to improve not only her health but also her quality of life.
The importance of women in research
Many factors contribute to the diagnostic delays women experience, including insufficient research funding and prioritization of women’s health issues; historical exclusion of women from medical research; and societal norms and stigma that hinder access and engagement with the healthcare system. As such, preventive care and interventions that address the unique health needs of women are lacking. It is only since 1993, when public law established a precedent mandating the inclusion of women and minoritized populations in clinical research, that the tide for women’s health research began to systemically shift.
Now, over 30 years later, many still fail to realize how essential women are to every corner of the healthcare ecosystem. Women are needed as investigators toward research discovery just as much as they must lead care delivery as healthcare providers. An often-minimized role for women in research, however, is their engagement as participants in clinical studies. Including women in research allows us to effectively study sex differences and learn more about diseases in both men and women alike.
Without the appropriate and safe inclusion of women in medical research, our medications, interventions, clinical guidelines, and basic understanding of human health are compromised, and we are left with persistent knowledge gaps and disparities in health outcomes between women and men. These disparities exist for disease prevalence, time to diagnosis, treatment efficacy, health span, and quality of life. For women of color, women living in rural communities, women at older ages, and pregnant populations, the unknowns about how to effectively diagnose and provide care are compounded in unacceptable proportions.
We must improve
We must include women in research and study sex differences to truly understand the nuances of health and disease. We must empower women to engage the healthcare system at all levels to ensure their best health. We must work with communities safely and transparently, sharing findings and solutions with those who participated in the research. We must eliminate the barriers women experience accessing quality and innovative care. We must continue to invest widely and often in women’s health research to sustain momentum in our progress.
I’ll leave you with this: A clinical study that passively enrolls women does not necessarily meet the standard of inclusivity. If a woman’s participation is not recognized and sex differences are not appropriately reflected in the data analysis, the scientific and healthcare ecosystem will continue to lag. We all have to commit attention and care to valuably including women in research, for as long as it takes to close the knowledge gaps, eliminate diagnostic delays, and empower patients in their care. We have to prioritize resources to advance women’s health until the health of every person is improved. We do this work for ourselves, and we do this work for the woman walking into the doctor’s office right now.
WASHINGTON – Today, the U.S. Department of Education launchedEndDEI.Ed.Gov, a public portal for parents, students, teachers, and the broader community to submit reports of discrimination based on race or sex in publicly-funded K-12 schools.
The secure portal allows parents to provide an email address, the name of the student’s school or school district, and details of the concerning practices. The Department of Education will use submissions as a guide to identify potential areas for investigation.
“For years, parents have been begging schools to focus on teaching their kids practical skills like reading, writing, and math, instead of pushing critical theory, rogue sex education and divisive ideologies—but their concerns have been brushed off, mocked, or shut down entirely,” said Tiffany Justice, Co-Founder of Moms for Liberty. “Parents, now is the time that you share the receipts of the betrayal that has happened in our public schools. This webpage demonstrates that President Trump’s Department of Education is putting power back in the hands of parents.”
Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) are the center of innovation, fueling advancements that drive economic growth and improve lives. Yet, despite decades of progress, the gender gap in STEM remains a barrier.
Gloria L. Blackwell
CEO, American Association of University Women (AAUW)
Women, particularly women of color, are still underrepresented in these critical fields, and recent efforts to dismantle diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives in higher education threaten to push us back even further. If we are serious about securing America’s place as a global leader in innovation, we should be doubling down on investing in women — not gutting the very programs that support their success.
The data is clear: Diverse companies are 39% more likely to drive better solutions than those that are not. In fields like artificial intelligence, where racial and gender biases have led to flawed algorithms with real-world consequences, the need for a broad range of perspectives is undeniable. Diverse scientific teams are more likely to challenge assumptions, identify blind spots, and develop creative solutions that benefit everyone. Yet, despite these clear advantages, women continue to face systemic barriers that push them out of STEM careers.
Encouraging our women and girls
According to the National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics (NCSES), women, particularly women of color, leave STEM fields at significantly higher rates than men. In fact, 43% of women leave the STEM workforce after their first child. While the percentage of women in STEM occupations has grown modestly from 15% to 18% over the last decade, men’s participation continues to outpace them. This represents an enormous loss of talent, innovation, and economic opportunity.
The American Association of University Women (AAUW) has been on the front lines of this fight for over a century. Our commitment to supporting women in STEM is deeply rooted in our history, from raising $100,000 to buy a gram of radium for Marie Curie’s groundbreaking research — making her the only woman to win the Nobel Prize twice — to our present-day efforts funding the next generation of women scientists, engineers, and technologists. Through our Community Action Grants, we support organizations like Self-eSTEM, an Oakland-based nonprofit dedicated to empowering Black, Indigenous, and girls of color through hands-on STEM experiences. These programs are not just feel-good initiatives — they are essential pipelines ensuring that the brightest minds, regardless of gender or race, can contribute to the future of science and technology.
But today, our progress is under attack. Across the country, lawmakers are dismantling DEI programs in higher education, rolling back decades of hard-fought progress for women and marginalized communities. These efforts are not just misguided; they directly impact our nation’s ability to compete in a global economy. When we eliminate DEI initiatives, we don’t just shut doors on individual women — we close off entire avenues of discovery, limit our technological advancements, and stifle economic growth.
Doubling down on women in STEM
This is not the time to retreat; it’s time to fight. We should be doubling down on investments in women in STEM, expanding opportunities for historically excluded groups, and ensuring that STEM fields reflect the full diversity of our nation. Our economy, our national security, and our future depend on it.
AAUW will not stand by as decades of progress are dismantled. We will continue to advocate for policies and programs that support women and underrepresented communities in STEM. We call on policymakers, educators, and industry leaders to do the same. The future of American innovation depends on it.
Want more women in your organizations? It’s time to start talking about the three M’s: menstruation, menopause, and motherhood.
Meleah Ashford
Writer and Life Coach, Find Solid Ground Coaching
“Today, discussing women’s health remains a taboo because people feel uncomfortable when anyone broaches it,” says Dr. Carolina Amador, the associate director of corporate intelligence at BioMarin, in a recent AWIS Magazine article. “I believe that we should talk about and advocate for women’s health as the first step in creating an equitable workplace.”
The vast majority of women in the workplace have dealt with challenges related to monthly menstruation during their careers. In a 2023 survey, respondents cited their top symptoms as abdominal cramps, irritability, and fatigue. 15% of respondents had a more chronic menstrual condition such as endometriosis, polycystic ovary syndrome, premenstrual dysphoric disorder, or fibroids. Sixty-one percent had worked when they didn’t feel well enough to work. According to Let’s Talk Menopause, 20% of the workforce is in some phase of menopause transition, which comes with its own extensive list of uncomfortable and potentially debilitating symptoms.
Motherhood includes yet another set of considerations. Between 10% and 20% of all known pregnancies end in miscarriage. Sadly, not all companies have policies for infant loss. If they do, they offer a scant 3-5 days off when recovery can take weeks. After successful births or adoptions, mothers are four times more likely than men to have their competence questioned, they are offered fewer opportunities than men, and they earn less than men over their careers.
Implementing effective, inclusive policies
Organizations have a huge opportunity to craft policies that support the three M’s. What does this look like?
Normalize conversations around these topics
Allow flexible work hours or remote work for those with menstrual pain, menopausal symptoms, mental health needs, and caregiving responsibilities for children, elders, or dependents with disabilities
Provide lactation rooms and on-site childcare or stipends to offset caregiving expenses
Create clear and transparent leave policies for childbirth, adoption, loss of a child, illness of a child, and how to return smoothly to work
Explicitly extend sick or personal leave for menstruation and menopause challenges
Initiate employee resource groups focused on the three M’s
Supporting women’s health is not just good for women; other employees would benefit from flexible hours. It is also good for your business. It will help you attract and retain more women. Research from McKinsey & Company shows that companies with more women in leadership have healthier cultures, generate more innovation, and experience better performance.
“We see companies within all facets of the STEM enterprise competing to attract and retain impactful women,” says Meredith Gibson, CEO of the Association of Women in Science, whose Career Center connects recruiters with women in STEM. “Organizations have an opportunity to differentiate themselves by creating policies and offering benefits that support women’s health.”
We need to retain more women in STEM to effectively tackle the world’s complex challenges. I encourage businesses to boldly and proactively address women’s health as an avenue to creating a more inclusive, attractive, and productive enterprise — or run the risk of losing out.
Applying Principles of Organizational Development in Higher Education
If you work in higher education, you know the industry is constantly evolving. Shifting student demographics, emerging technologies, and market pressures require institutions to be proactive in building a stronger, more adaptable foundation for long-term success.
That’s where organizational development (also known as org dev or OD) comes in.
OD uses a strategic approach that goes beyond surface-level fixes to create lasting, meaningful change. In higher ed, that means optimizing infrastructure, investing in the right people and resources, and fostering the leadership skills necessary to drive sustainable growth. This article breaks down the four essential pillars of organizational development and how they can help your institution navigate change with confidence.
Organizational Development Definition
Organizational development is a strategic, science-backed approach to improving an organization’s effectiveness, adaptability, and culture.
At its core, org dev is about aligning people, processes, and strategy to create a stronger, more resilient institution.
How Is Org Dev Applied in the Higher Ed Industry?
At higher education institutions, organizational development is used to drive strategic change, improve institutional effectiveness, and enhance the student and faculty experience.
Universities can apply OD to initiatives such as:
Conducting leadership training and faculty development
Restructuring academic programs to align with industry demands
Fostering an inclusive campus culture
Improving communication across departments
Streamlining administrative processes
By leveraging data, collaboration, and iterative improvement strategies, org dev helps institutions stay competitive in a volatile educational landscape.
But how can your institution actually execute on these initiatives? Let’s dig into the nuts and bolts of true organizational development.
The Four Pillars of Organizational Development
Organizational development can be distilled into four essential pillars that need to be addressed to create lasting, effective change. From the right technological infrastructure to the competencies that drive leadership, each element plays a critical role in shaping a university’s success.
1. Infrastructure
A strong OD strategy starts with the right tools. A school’s information technology (IT) infrastructure encompasses all the systems and programs that support the institution’s goals by facilitating seamless communication, data management, and student engagement across all departments.
Learning management systems (LMS), customer relationship management (CRM) platforms, and student information systems (SIS) are all essential for effective operations.
Additionally, collaboration tools — like Asana, Trello, Monday.com, Slack, and Microsoft Teams — are critical for project management and internal communications. With a solid tech foundation, faculty, staff, and administrators can more easily work toward common objectives.
2. Resources
People and capital investments drive organizational development forward. Universities need dedicated staff to support their online and on-campus programs, including instructional designers, student success coaches, and faculty development specialists.
Beyond personnel, financial resources play a crucial role in funding curriculum development, marketing initiatives, and partnerships with third-party service providers. The right investments empower institutions by giving them the capacity to scale programs, enhance student support, and maintain a competitive edge.
3. Skills
Skills are the specific, teachable abilities that allow team members to execute org dev initiatives effectively. In higher education, these range from technical expertise — such as search engine optimization (SEO), paid media management, and statistical analysis skills — to operations skills in areas such as course mapping, instructional design, and system administration for LMS, CRM, and SIS platforms.
Providing training and professional development to staff members in these skill areas can help them better implement and manage institutional improvement efforts.
4. Competencies
While skills focus on execution, competencies are the broader abilities needed to apply knowledge and lead meaningful change. Important org dev competencies for university leaders and staff members include being able to align online growth initiatives with institutional goals, make data-driven decisions, and foster a culture of adaptability.
Higher ed leaders also should be able to communicate a clear vision and gain buy-in from stakeholders to navigate transitions with confidence. Without these competencies, even the most well-equipped institutions can struggle to implement lasting transformation.
Benefits of Org Dev for Institutions
Effective organizational development creates lasting improvements in how institutions operate, innovate, and serve students. By investing in OD, colleges and universities can:
Enhance their efficiency through streamlined processes, better technology, and clear workflows to reduce bottlenecks and improve day-to-day operations
Improve their student outcomes through strong support systems, streamlined curriculum design, and data-driven decision-making processes
Increase their adaptability to become better equipped to navigate market shifts, policy changes, and emerging educational trends
Strengthen their collaboration through communication tools and cross-functional teamwork to break down silos and align departments toward common goals
Drive their sustainable growth through strategic investments in people, technology, and training to ensure the institution can scale programs without sacrificing quality
Ready to Level Up Your Institution’s Org Dev Strategy?
At Archer Education, we take a strategic, structured approach to organizational development, starting with a full assessment of your institution across all four pillars using our Good, Better, Best framework.
From there, we partner with you to implement targeted changes, optimize your processes, and drive your long-term growth.
Our ultimate goal? To make ourselves obsolete. By the time we’re done, your institution will be operating at its best across all dimensions, equipped to sustain growth and innovation without relying on external vendors.
Let’s build a stronger, more resilient future — together. Contact us today to get started.
