Five ways to make the academic workplace happier and healthier this year
Summary
Academia still prizes publications and prestige over respectful leadership and safe working conditions. Ferhan G. Sağın and Robert A. Harris outline practical steps — drawn from conversations with an international Academic Think Tank and institutional examples such as the Karolinska Institutet — to shift culture away from hierarchy and towards accountability, inclusion and better supervision. The piece argues for structural changes that make reporting meaningful, improve leadership skills, and measure departmental climate alongside research metrics.
Key Points
- Make leadership training mandatory for anyone supervising students or teams, with regular refreshers and 360-degree feedback.
- Create anonymous reporting systems that actually lead to action, document outcomes and publish anonymised data for transparency.
- Introduce regular cultural climate audits of departments to assess inclusivity, respect and equity, not just productivity and finances.
- Change incentives so respectful behaviour and good supervision count in assessments and promotions, reducing protection for high-performing but abusive individuals.
- Protect and empower early-career researchers with mentorship, clear channels for complaints, and institutional accountability to prevent exploitation.
Content summary
The authors describe a persistent disconnect: institutional policies exist, but entrenched hierarchies and reward systems blunt their effect. Many supervisors are promoted for research prowess rather than people skills, while those lower in the hierarchy — doctoral students and postdocs — are vulnerable and fearful of speaking up. Sağın and Harris recommend five practical measures that institutions should adopt as standard practice to create lasting change: mandatory leadership training, effective anonymous reporting with follow-up, departmental climate audits, reformed assessment criteria that value behaviour, and stronger protections and mentorship for early-career staff.
Examples such as Karolinska Institutet’s anonymised PhD surveys are highlighted as models for transparency. The piece stresses that isolated policies are insufficient: cultural change requires regular assessment, visible accountability, and incentives aligned with respectful conduct.
Context and relevance
This article matters because academic institutions worldwide are struggling with retention, mental-health burdens and reputational damage tied to toxic workplace cultures. As funding pressures and publication-driven assessment persist, these recommendations aim to rebalance priorities so people — not only papers — are valued. For anyone involved in higher education, research management or doctoral training, these steps offer concrete levers to improve morale and protect vulnerable staff.
Why should I read this?
Short answer: if you work in or with universities and you’re tired of the same old excuses, this is a neat, practical checklist to start fixing things. It’s punchy, actionable and points to actual examples of what works — so you don’t need to reinvent the wheel or sit through another empty workshop.