Caitlin Higgott, Communications and Engagement Manager at the Rosalind Franklin Institute and Stempra committee member, shares tips from Stempra’s 2026 Communications Training Day.
What is the value of communications in research‑intensive organisations and how do we communicate that value to our senior leaders?
These were the central questions explored by an expert panel of communications leaders spanning higher education, publishing, innovation and polar science.
Our panel:
Chair: Alice Henchley, Director of Communications, Integrity, Ethics and Editorial, Springer Nature Group
Athena Dinar, Head of Media and Deputy Head of Communications, British Antarctic Survey
Simon Hall, Course leader for Compelling Communications Skills, University of Cambridge
Sarah Collins, Research Communications Manager, University of Cambridge
Georgia Broome, Head of Comms and Marketing, Oxford University Innovation
While their organisations and roles differed, the conclusions were strikingly consistent. At its best, communications enables impact, builds trust, shapes culture and helps organisations make better decisions.
Here are the key themes that emerged.
1. Communications creates real‑world outcomes – not just coverage
Several speakers challenged the idea that media coverage is an end in itself. Instead, they emphasised outcomes: what changes as a result of communications.
Simon shared an example that showed how a carefully framed media campaign transformed a stalled research project. A study that had recruited just 15 participants reached over 5,000 after national and international coverage — radically improving the quality of the research.
The lesson was a simple but important one: good communications removes barriers to participation, understanding, collaboration and adoption.
2. The most important question is “why are we communicating at all?”
A recurring frustration was that organisations often want to communicate with the public without a clear understanding of why.
Communications is still too often treated as a “fixer” – a function brought in to smooth over controversy, improve sentiment, or “make people like us”. But that framing limits its effectiveness.
Instead, the panellists argued for a more strategic approach:
- Who exactly are we trying to reach?
- Why does this matter to those you are trying to reach?
- What would success look like?
This shift moves communications away from one‑way broadcasting and towards dialogue, relevance and purpose.
3. Facts fade, but stories stick
Data was widely acknowledged as essential, particularly when engaging scientific or analytically minded leaders. But panellists were clear: not all data is equally valuable.
Speakers repeatedly returned to the limits of metrics-only thinking. Media hits, follower growth and awareness scores may satisfy reporting requirements, but on their own they rarely change minds, influence decisions or build lasting understanding. Leaders may glance at a dashboard; but they remember a story.
More powerful evidence included qualitative feedback from researchers months after a story ran – did any new partnerships, funding conversations or invitations follow the story?
While quantitative data has its place, it fades quickly. A well‑told story about a researcher who flourished, a risk that was quietly avoided, or an opportunity that emerged months later sticks. It offers leaders something they can repeat, relate to and use.
4. Relationships and trust are the real currency
Trust is not built through a single campaign. It comes from:
- Showing up consistently
- Giving sound advice (including when that advice is uncomfortable)
- Investing in people, not just stories
- Following through and feeding back impact
Athena described seeing researchers grow into confident communicators – securing new collaborations and opportunities as a result. A few panellists also spoke about how building long-term relationship with senior leaders not only helps the team to influence day-to-day decision making but is critical in times of crisis.
Importantly, trust also enables prevention: stopping poor ideas, poorly timed announcements or unnecessary reputational damage before it happens.
5. Prevention and issue management are part of the value
Much of our most critical work happens when things don’t go wrong or don’t go as wrong as they could have.
Demonstrating this value requires:
- Clearly articulating risks upfront
- Setting out scenarios and mitigation strategies in advance
- Being explicit about what was avoided, not just what happened
Leaders may not always realise a reputational bullet was stopped but over time, consistent judgement builds credibility and influence.
6. Communications needs to stop underselling itself
Finally, several contributors spoke candidly about communications having a “PR problem”. When people don’t understand what communicators do, they struggle to value it.
That can show up as:
- Treating comms as a delivery service rather than a strategic partner
- Assuming “anyone can do it”
- Bringing comms in at the end, not the start
The panel was clear: communicators must advocate for their expertise. That means explaining decisions, articulating trade‑offs, and confidently offering strategic advice. Every interaction is an opportunity to educate colleagues about the value of communications.
It seemed like on the day this was the point of “knowing your value” was one that really resonated with attendees.
What was your biggest takeaway from this session? Share your thoughts with the Stempra community on social or the mailing list.