Rethinking Trust and Collaboration in Academic Development
Reposted from my LinkedIn articles, first published February 2, 2025.
Thanks to Prof. Karen Heard-Lauréote and co-author Carina Buckley for sharing their thought-provoking article “Building trustful relationships through intrapreneurship in Academic Development” (see reference below). It raises some important points about the role of academic developers and the challenges they face, and I appreciate the effort to foreground trust and collaboration in that process. That said, I’d like to offer a few reflections that might open up the conversation further.
One thing that stood out to me was the subtle emphasis on teaching as the subject of development, rather than learning. The use of the phrase “teaching and learning,” rather than “learning and teaching,” hints at an implicit positioning of the teacher or teaching practice as the primary site of development. While this may seem minor, it suggests a focus on what needs to change in teaching, rather than viewing the learning process—and the learners, including ourselves as academics—as equally dynamic and in need of attention.
I also think trust, which is rightly highlighted as fundamental, is more complex than it’s sometimes framed here. Trust isn’t just about academic developers being trusted by academics; it’s reciprocal. It’s about listening to and valuing each other’s experiences and recognising that both sides hold valid perspectives. Trust is built through negotiation and mutual respect, and that includes acknowledging the complexities academics face at the learning and teaching coalface, often balancing institutional pressures with pedagogical integrity.
I was particularly struck by the absence of the academic voice in the article. While it’s clearly a reflection from the academic development side, there’s little, if any, sense of how academics themselves experience the process of “being developed.” That’s an important gap. Trust begins with listening, and it feels as though this piece might have benefitted from including the perspectives of those on the receiving end of development initiatives.
I do, however, appreciate the focus on meeting course teams where they are. In my own institution, I’ve seen how powerful and empowering this can be when it’s done thoughtfully. But I’ve also experienced the opposite—where initiatives were imposed without meaningful engagement. That didn’t just erode trust; it shattered it. This highlights the need for leadership that genuinely values and embodies the principle of meeting people where they are.
Lastly, a quick note on contracts: I was surprised to learn that many academic developers aren’t on academic contracts. It’s one of the reasons I didn’t pursue a development role myself. That’s a broader conversation, but it certainly has implications for how academic development is perceived and positioned within institutions.
Overall, the concept of pedagogical citizenship grounded in trust is compelling, but for it to take root, it needs to be shared and diffused across both sides of the academic-development relationship. That requires time—a resource increasingly rare in the academy—and, crucially, a willingness to let go of top-down approaches in favour of genuine collaboration.
Thanks again for sharing the article—I hope my reflections contribute to the broader conversation.
Reference:
Heard-Lauréote, K. and Buckley, C. (2025) “Building trustful relationships through intrapreneurship in Academic Development”, Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education, (33). doi: 10.47408/jldhe.vi33.1177.
Direct link: https://journal.aldinhe.ac.uk/index.php/jldhe/article/view/1177