Research Leadership Development and Academic Inequality: How Institutional and National Academies Shape Access, Research Culture, and Career Progression

TY - JOUR

T1 - Research Leadership Development and Academic Inequality

T2 - How Institutional and National Academies Shape Access, Research Culture, and Career Progression

AU - Harries, Priscilla

AU - Morrow, Elizabeth Mary

AU - Vandrevala, Tushna

AU - Ocloo, Josephine Enyonam

AU - Corrigan, Bernadette

AU - Keohane, Aoife

AU - Withers, Marie

AU - Sunita, Lakshmi

AU - Davies, Miranda

AU - Allen, Rachel

AU - Wolfe, Ingrid

AU - Thornicroft, Graham

N1 - Publisher Copyright: © The Author(s) 2026. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).

PY - 2026/7/1

Y1 - 2026/7/1

N2 - Research leadership is central to shaping research culture, advancing institutional excellence, and fostering innovation, yet opportunities for leadership development remain unevenly distributed across disciplines, career stages, and professional roles. Inequalities in access risk reproducing privilege in academic research, raising questions about how programmes can support equitable participation and career progression. This paper examines equality, research culture, and career progression in research leadership development through a comparative case study of two research leadership academies: a university-based academy open to researchers across disciplines (Kingston University Rise Research Leadership Academy) and a national academy for applied health and care research (National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Research Leadership Academy). The study draws on survey data from six cohorts (2023–2025; n = 464), equality, diversity and inclusion monitoring, and longitudinal follow-up at 12 and 24 months. Findings indicate that while both academies enhanced participants’ self-reported leadership skills, confidence, and strategic collaboration, differences in institutional context and programme design shaped who accessed leadership development, and how learning was applied in practice. Inclusive pedagogies, including action learning sets, mentoring, and flexible online delivery, supported participation across career stages and research roles, particularly for applied researchers. Structural and organisational factors affected leadership gains, highlighting persistent barriers to equitable outcomes. The paper contributes to higher education research by conceptualising research leadership development as an equality issue, showing how institutional and national academies can both mitigate and reproduce inequalities, influence research culture, and shape careers. The findings offer evidence-informed insights for designing more inclusive and sustainable research leadership in higher education.

AB - Research leadership is central to shaping research culture, advancing institutional excellence, and fostering innovation, yet opportunities for leadership development remain unevenly distributed across disciplines, career stages, and professional roles. Inequalities in access risk reproducing privilege in academic research, raising questions about how programmes can support equitable participation and career progression. This paper examines equality, research culture, and career progression in research leadership development through a comparative case study of two research leadership academies: a university-based academy open to researchers across disciplines (Kingston University Rise Research Leadership Academy) and a national academy for applied health and care research (National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Research Leadership Academy). The study draws on survey data from six cohorts (2023–2025; n = 464), equality, diversity and inclusion monitoring, and longitudinal follow-up at 12 and 24 months. Findings indicate that while both academies enhanced participants’ self-reported leadership skills, confidence, and strategic collaboration, differences in institutional context and programme design shaped who accessed leadership development, and how learning was applied in practice. Inclusive pedagogies, including action learning sets, mentoring, and flexible online delivery, supported participation across career stages and research roles, particularly for applied researchers. Structural and organisational factors affected leadership gains, highlighting persistent barriers to equitable outcomes. The paper contributes to higher education research by conceptualising research leadership development as an equality issue, showing how institutional and national academies can both mitigate and reproduce inequalities, influence research culture, and shape careers. The findings offer evidence-informed insights for designing more inclusive and sustainable research leadership in higher education.

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105044370305

U2 - 10.1177/21582440261462347

DO - 10.1177/21582440261462347

M3 - Article

SN - 2158-2440

VL - 16

JO - SAGE Open

JF - SAGE Open

IS - 3

ER -