Expanding capacity as a tool of writing

We often think the key to writing more is time. More hours. Longer weekends. Clearer calendars.

But the truth is, time isn't the only currency that matters when it comes to writing. If you're mid-career, juggling research, admin, mentoring, and teaching (not to mention life beyond the university), then you already know: the time never magically appears. And even when it does , it doesn’t always help.

Why? Because what actually determines whether writing gets done isn’t just time, it's capacity.

What Do I Mean by Capacity?

Capacity is your cognitive, emotional, and energetic availability to engage meaningfully with your writing. It’s what allows you to think clearly, focus deeply, and make intellectual decisions on the page. It’s what lets you approach your manuscript without dread. What gives you the presence to connect ideas, find your argument, and push the work forward. It’s the difference between sitting at your desk for three hours and producing nothing, and sitting down for 45 minutes and making real progress.

Your capacity is what fuels your writing engine. Without it, time is just an empty container.

Mid-Career and the Myth of Experience

One of the trickiest parts about mid-career writing is that you’re experienced enough to know what excellent writing looks like and often too stretched to consistently produce it. At this stage, most academics are carrying a heavy load: editorial boards, external reviews, committee leadership, PhD supervision, multiple research projects. These obligations accumulate just as personal responsibilities peak too: caregiving, financial pressures, health.

This results in a frustrating paradox: your expertise is at its peak, but your capacity is thinned to its lowest ebb.

And here’s the kicker: because you can still produce under pressure, you often do… until you burn out or drop below the quality you know you’re capable of. So you push harder, but not smarter. You get stuck in what I call the “over-functioning / under-producing” cycle; always working, never quite writing.

The Cost of Shrinking Capacity

Shrinking capacity doesn’t just slow down your writing: it erodes confidence. You begin to mistrust your ability to think clearly or follow through. You stop planning ambitious pieces or pull back from risky or innovative scholarship. You choose smaller, faster projects just to stay afloat and slowly start to compromise your scholarly identity.

This is not a writing issue. It’s a capacity issue. And it’s why productivity tips alone are never enough.

So the question isn’t just “How do I find time to write?” It’s also:
How do I expand my capacity so that when I do sit down to write, I’m available to do the work that matters?

Expanding Capacity: What It Really Looks Like

Let’s be clear: expanding capacity doesn’t mean doing more. It means becoming more resourced, that is, intellectually, emotionally, practically, so writing feels possible, energising, and sustainable.

Here are four essential components:

1. Strategic Clarity

Nothing drains capacity faster than fog. Many academics waste enormous mental energy wondering: Is this the right project?, What’s the argument?, Is this publishable?

Getting crystal clear on your project’s purpose, contribution, and fit eliminates decision fatigue and frees up cognitive space. This is why the very first phase of any writing plan should be strategic thinking — not blind drafting.

2. Realistic Project Design

A project that overwhelms your current capacity is poorly designed. Period. You need to match the scope and timeline of your work to the actual time and energy you can give it . Not your fantasy version of yourself in a parallel universe with no teaching, admin, or children. Designing right-sized writing goals is an act of self-respect. And it creates momentum rather than guilt.

3. Boundaried Work Practices

If writing is always squeezed into the margins of your day, your brain starts to associate it with stress, scarcity, and failure. That’s a capacity killer. Creating small but sacred writing containers — protected, time-bound, and realistic — trains your brain to trust that writing will happen. That it’s not another broken promise. Boundaries restore capacity by reducing guilt, preserving energy, and creating psychological safety around your writing time.

4. Support Structures

You weren’t meant to do this alone. Academics are some of the most structurally unsupported knowledge workers in the world. Writing isn’t just hard, it’s isolating. Especially at mid-career, when peer support drops off and everyone assumes you’ve “got it handled. Investing in structured support, whether that’s coaching, peer accountability, or a strategic writing programme , restores capacity by taking the burden of “figuring it out” off your plate.

You don't need more discipline. You need more support.

Writing from Capacity — Not Collapse

If you're only writing when you're at your limit, you’re reinforcing a pattern that makes your best work harder and harder to access. Writing should not be a survival activity. It should be a scholarly one.

Expanding your capacity isn’t a luxury — it’s the foundation of your intellectual life. It's what allows you to return to your writing with energy, not dread. Clarity, not confusion. Purpose, not panic.

Workload management in Universities: time versus stress management & burnout

I’m not talking about the University Workload Allocation Matrix or whatever fantasy football equivalent your particular institution runs. We all know what we know: they are not accurate, they are not realistic because if they were the University would need to hire 50 more people in your department.

So let’s just get over that now, move past it, this is not a discussion about that.

Time and stress management

I’m talking about how YOU manage the workload YOU have been allocated, how much mental real estate you give to various parts of that allocation, and how you manage and sometimes bargain - because, yes, people do this - so that you optimise YOUR particular workload into something that won’t lead to burnout for YOU.

As you can see, my feelings are: this is different for people.

I talk alot about time management in my training because ‘not enough time’ is a preoccupation of many academics not getting to their writing. Whilst time management is important because efficiency matters, and unpicking stories around time is central to making sustainable writing progress, what if you already have all the time management systems in place?

You are a time management ninja.

You have good systems of capture, you have a way of allocating time to task, and you know why you are writing what you are doing and have multi-scale planning down to a fine art? What then?

What if the writing problems are located not in how much you have to do (yes, we know too much) or how you manage that, but WHAT you have to do. We all have more or less tolerance for certain things in our working environment, and if you are consistently rubbing up against the thing that stresses you out in particular, your stress levels are high and then your capacity to engage in deep work - and particularly writing – is vastly diminished. So, it’s important to identify, what is it for you?

In his podcast, Cal Newport gives 4 categories of the type of stress that you might find in the work environment.

·      Time stress- overload of tasks, not enough time to do it in

• Expectation stress- that you have to deliver a very high quality outcome (real or perceived)

• Uncertainty/Risk - possible bad things will happen (eg if you set boundaries, if something isn’t done) or you don’t know the next steps

• Conflict - toxic workplaces or individuals, or systems that encourage conflict

I am going to add one here which is related to uncertainty and risk, but not the same.

• Control – control over your tasks (not allocation) – but execution

Less things to do is not always the answer

The mistake I see both individual academics and institutions make over and over again is the concentration on ‘how many tasks’ a person is allocated as for example the root cause of burnout, failure to perform or failure to produce quality outputs. A classic response to a member of staff coming back from sick leave caused by burnout is in fact to take away the number of tasks. And of course if that was the root cause, GREAT. Problem solved. Rarely though is the problem this clear cut.  Sometimes fewer tasks being allocated cannot and will not cure the problem, and that is why return to work practices can fail.

We need to think more carefully about the things that gives particular individuals huge stress, to prevent burnout yes, but also to create greater capacity for everyone so they can get their writing done.

Let’s give a concrete example. A classic way to game the WAM system when I was a wee small academic was to teach across many small modules – to avoid the core subjects at all costs - but not be in charge of anything. Essentially you taught across a breadth of subjects, but you did little else except grade the papers of those students. You had no responsibility for course leadership, exams and other assessments, meetings and so on and your WAM figures looked very impressive. This type of approach leaves you with no control, but little risk, low expectations, low conflict and fewer tasks. You deploy as a teaching robot, but otherwise your mental real estate is preserved for other stuff.

For some, this is optimally low stress and high capacity, because breadth of teaching is not the stressor. Stress for this person might look like one of the other things – high number of tasks, high expectations, high level of responsibility, perhaps conflict.

In other cases (me) I would rather have MORE work - more tasks, more responsibility, high expectations /or conflict, because lack of control is my number 1 stressor. I don’t mind allocating work (possible conflict), being the decision makers (high expectations and accountability) and I can tolerate risk well (if I get it wrong, it’s on me). Task overload is not then my stressor as I am a very organised person and have good time management skills, so ‘too many tasks’ is not what leads to burnout in me. But if I lack control over my work and my schedule, because Barbara is my course leader and she is a chaos monster, I am on my last nerve in 3 minutes flat. I can’t tolerate working with Barbara, and I will take on more tasks to avoid her. I will have more work, but less Barabra and less stress. If I were to burn out  and my back to work was you only have 1 class to teach, but you guessed it, it’s with Barbara, I am back on sick leave.

Review what stresses you out

Do an audit about what really pushes your buttons. Is it that you just cannot stand ONE MORE MINUTE working with Barbara? You would rather teach 3 more courses - take it. Bargain your way out of the stress triggers. Is it the uncertainty around the role you have been allocated (very common in academia where roles – and tasks😂 - are never defined)? Uncertainty feels like you are doomed to fail because you cannot know what you are meant to be doing, and high expectations around ill-defined tasks cause some people to allocate a lot of metal real estate to unsolvable problems.

Don’t conflate stressors: I’m not afraid of conflict with Barbara – I’ll do that all day long. My stress is Barbara is chaos and no amount of shouting will undo that. I need to avoid the chaos caused by Barbara – the uncertainty, the lack of organisation, the last minute requests, the student unhappiness caused by Barbara’s chaos that ends up in my inbox. I can’t deal with THAT, not Barbara. Of course sometimes a toxic co-worker should just be avoided because it ‘gets on us’ like radiation, and we don’t want that.

When these stressors are gone, you’ll be amazed how much capacity appears for writing when your mental real estate is spacious and untroubled. How much you realise it was not the number of things to do, but the other stuff that dragged you under.

If in fact it IS task overload – you need to get rid of some roles and keep others – remember not all roles bring the same level of task exposure, or the same type of stressors. Boundaries are your friend, negotiation is key and not everything requires 100% of your capacity. Choose wisely, and deploy your real estate judiciously.

Why Writing a Book Still Matters in Academia — And What’s Stopping You

There’s a strange silence around book writing in academia these days. A whisper that says maybe it’s not worth it. That journal articles and grants are better for your time. That no one really reads monographs anymore.

But the truth?

Writing a book still matters. Immensely. Especially if you’re in the humanities, social sciences, or any field where extended argument, original contribution, and field visibility are currency.

And yet, for many academics, the idea of writing a book—especially their first monograph—feels like standing at the base of a mountain with a broken map and no gear. They want to write it. They know they should write it. But somehow, they’re not.

If that’s you, I want to talk about why that’s happening—not just practically, but psychologically. Because in my work coaching academic writers, I see it again and again: the book doesn’t just expose your ideas. It exposes your fears.

Why Books Still Matter

Let’s clear something up: books still carry weight in the academic world.

• They’re often the benchmark for tenure and promotion in many disciplines.

• They’re where your ideas get space to fully breathe—beyond the tight word counts and constraints of journals.

• They establish intellectual leadership in your field.

• They can shift conversations, launch collaborations, and open doors to keynote invitations, editorial boards, and career-defining recognition.

No, they’re not fast. No, they’re not always immediately cited. But they are legacy-building.

If you’re working in a field where books are the standard, not finishing one can quietly stall your momentum, even if you’re productive in every other way.

So why are so many brilliant scholars not finishing their books?

The Fear Beneath the Delay

Let me say what most people won’t: not writing your book often has very little to do with time.

It has everything to do with fear.

• Fear that your idea isn’t “big enough” for a book.

• Fear that it was big, but you missed your moment.

• Fear that your voice doesn’t carry enough weight.

• Fear that once you put it all on the page, you’ll prove your deepest suspicion: that maybe you’re not as smart as they think.

This is the emotional undercurrent that turns into procrastination, spirals of rewriting, and endless “I’ll get to it after [insert excuse].”

And here's the kicker: these fears often show up not as full-blown breakdowns, but as perfectionism, avoidance, and over-committing to other work that feels more “urgent.”

It’s not laziness. It’s self-protection disguised as productivity.

No One Teaches You How to Write a Book

Another hard truth? The academy rarely teaches you how to actually write a book.

You might have written articles. You might have done a PhD. But translating a big idea into a compelling, structured, finished monograph? That’s a different skillset entirely.

The structure, pacing, reader journey, even how to craft a persuasive proposal—these aren’t intuitive. And without guidance, many scholars just keep moving chapters around, unsure of whether they’re building toward anything coherent.

They start, stop, rewrite. The idea starts to feel stale. Self-doubt creeps in. Confidence dips. And soon, the book becomes something they dread, not something they’re proud to build.

The Longer You Wait, The Harder It Feels

Here’s something I see all the time: the longer a book project drags on, the heavier it becomes.

Guilt starts to compound. “I should be further along.”
Shame creeps in. “Maybe I’m not cut out for this.”
Comparison adds fuel. “Everyone else is publishing. Why can’t I?”

And once those emotions attach to the book, even opening the document can feel loaded.

That’s why I always say: the first step isn’t finishing the book. It’s rebuilding your relationship to it. From dread to clarity. From avoidance to momentum.

And that’s absolutely possible.

You Don’t Need More Time—You Need a System

If you’ve been stuck in the same chapter for 6 months, or rewriting the introduction for the fifth time, you don’t need another writing retreat or inspirational podcast.

You need a repeatable, supportive structure to get the book done—with accountability, feedback, and clarity at every stage.

You need a plan that respects your teaching load, your emotional bandwidth, and the size of your idea.

This is exactly why I created Mastering the Monograph—a 12-month writing program built for scholars like you. It doesn’t just teach you how to write a book. It gives you the framework, coaching, and community to actually finish it—with confidence.

Because you don’t need to hustle harder. You need to write smarter.

Final Word: Your Voice Deserves the Page

Your book is the fullest expression of your intellectual vision. It’s where your voice doesn’t just contribute to your field—it shapes it.

And the world needs that voice. Not someday. Not “when things calm down.” But now.

So if fear’s been sitting in the driver’s seat, consider this your permission to take back the wheel.

Your ideas matter. Your work is worthy. Your book can be written—and I can help you write it.

Why You’re Not Getting Anywhere with Your Monograph: It’s Not Discipline, It’s the Idea

If you’ve ever found yourself saying, “I just need to sit down and write the book,” you’re not alone, and you’re also not going to get very far. Most academics assume that the hard part of writing a monograph is the writing itself. They wait until they “have time,” open a fresh document, and try to draft their way into clarity.

But here’s the truth: your biggest obstacle isn’t writing discipline : it’s a weak or undeveloped idea.

And that’s not your fault. Most academic systems don’t teach us how to develop ideas. We’re taught how to research, how to analyse, how to cite, how to structure arguments. But no one teaches us how to build a compelling book-level idea — something coherent enough to sustain 80,000 words and compelling enough to make a genuine contribution.

The Fatal Mistake: Writing Before You’re Truly Ready

The biggest block I see in monograph writing — particularly for mid-career academics — is starting the book too early.

Writers sit down with a vague theme or topic and start producing content around chapters, sections, word counts in the hope that the shape of the book will eventually “reveal itself.”

But writing is not excavation. You can’t dig your way to a finished book.

What usually happens instead?

• Endless redrafting of early chapters

• Constant restructuring because “it doesn’t quite fit”

• Uncertainty about the overall argument

• Inability to explain what the book is really about

• Idea drift so you no longer even like the original starting point

What you’re experiencing isn’t a failure of writing habits or motivation. It’s a failure of ideation.

What Does Real “Readiness” Look Like?

Readiness doesn’t mean you’ve read everything or have every chapter outlined. It means you’ve done the intellectual heavy lifting to define:

• A clear, central argument (not just a theme)

• A coherent contribution to your field

• A book-worthy structure that sustains that argument

• A set of through-lines that hold the book together across chapters

• A target audience and a vision for how the book will land with them

Without this, you don’t have a monograph project — you have a topic with some ideas orbiting it.

Why Mid-Career Writers Fall Into This Trap

Mid-career academics are experienced. You’ve taught, published articles, supervised students. You’ve written enough to trust your ability to “just start writing.”

But a book is not a long article. It’s an entirely different intellectual and emotional process. You can’t brute-force your way through it with discipline alone.

And because you are experienced, it’s even more painful when the book stalls. You blame your time, your discipline, your energy when what’s missing is the invisible architecture of a well-developed idea.

The Hidden Cost of Skipping Ideation

When you skip or rush ideation, it shows up later — in painful ways:

• Chapters that need to be thrown out or entirely rewritten

• Confusion over how chapters relate to one another

• A book that doesn’t know what it’s arguing, or who it’s for

• A reviewer asking: what is this book actually trying to say?

These are not problems of expression. They are problems of conception. And the cost is years of wasted time, effort, and emotional energy.

What You Need Instead

You don’t need to start writing right away.

You need:

• Time and space to test your idea at the book level

• A structured process to refine your argument before writing

• A way to understand how your chapters build and relate to one another

• Feedback from people who can challenge and strengthen your thinking

This is not “wasted time.” This is the work that makes your monograph possible.

Writing a Book Isn’t Just About Writing. It’s About Building Something That’s Built to Last.

Think of your monograph like an architectural structure. You wouldn’t start pouring concrete before you’ve drawn up plans. Why should your book be any different?

When your idea is structurally sound, the writing flows. Chapters make sense. Arguments deepen. And you’re no longer constantly revising because you’re no longer guessing.

The idea is the book.

📬 Want to Learn How to Build a Monograph from a Strong Foundation?

My Monograph Programme is designed specifically to help academics stop spinning their wheels and finally develop a compelling, publishable idea that anchors their book. We don’t just write. We build your book the right way, from the ground up.

👉 Join my mailing list [in the footer ⬇️ ] for more on developing your monograph idea — and to be first to hear when the programme opens next or head over to my FREE guide to pressure testing your monograph ideation.

When Writing Success Becomes a Source of Shame

There’s a particular problem I hear from mid-career academics. It doesn’t show up in grant metrics or performance reviews, but it gnaws away quietly. It sounds like this:

“I used to love writing. Now I avoid it.”

“I’ve got ideas, but I can’t seem to start/finish anything.”

“I feel like a fraud—and I’m supposed to know what I’m doing by now.”

If you’re a mid-career academic feeling this way, you’re not alone. In fact, you’re in excellent company. Because somewhere between promotion, tenure, and mounting responsibilities, something unexpected happens:

Writing stops feeling like an expression of your scholarship, and starts to feel like a liability. The thing that built your career, becomes a burden you feel you can’t reproduce.

When the Writing You Aren’t Doing Becomes Heavy

At this stage, most academics have internalised that publishing is essential for their career. But many no longer feel in control of when—or if—it happens.

I work with clients who supervise PhDs, sit on editorial boards, and hold leadership roles, yet are haunted by a single Word document they can’t bring themselves to open. What starts as the latest draft quietly becomes a point of shame. The longer it sits, the heavier it gets.

Over time, this avoidance becomes identity-shaping. They stop calling themselves “a writer.” They defer leadership opportunities or focus on becoming the best module leader they can be. They lose confidence. Their once-vibrant scholarly identity shrinks. And the world rarely sees any of this, because on the surface, they look successful. They still have a decent list of long publications.

The Myth of “I Should Know Better by Now”

One of the most damaging beliefs I see among mid-career scholars is this: “I should be able to manage this by now.” It’s not just about writing: it’s about self-trust.

The belief that writing should come easily by mid-career adds a layer of shame when it doesn’t. You hesitate to ask for help because it feels like an admission of failure. You keep quiet because you think you're the only one struggling. But the truth is, academia doesn’t prepare you for the volume and complexity of writing that mid-career demands. Nor does it teach you how to balance writing with the leadership, admin, mentoring, and emotional labour you’ve now taken on.

You’re not failing. You’re overloaded. And no one ever taught you what to do with that.

Writing Isn’t Just a Skill—It’s an Identity

This is why it hurts so much. For many academics, writing was once a joy. A calling. A core part of who they were. When it becomes difficult, they don’t just worry about career progression, they mourn a lost part of themselves.

This identity-level erosion is rarely talked about. But I hear it every day. And what I want you to know is: it’s real. And it’s reversible. You don’t need to write 1,000 words a day to come back to your scholarly identity. But you do need to rebuild your writing relationship from the ground up—with strategy, with systems, and with support.

The most dangerous lie you can tell yourself is that this is just how it has to be.

It isn’t.

You’re not broken. You’re buried.

And the right kind of writing support can help you dig your way back out.

If your confidence in writing has slipped, and you’re ready to reclaim your identity as a scholar who writes with purpose, 📨 Subscribe to my mailing list and receive real talk, research-backed support, and expert advice to help you write again—on your terms.

👉 Join the list below [in the footer ⬇️ ] and reconnect with the writer you know you are.

The mid-career malaise: The Hidden Cost of Binge-and-Bust Writing

Mid-career academics are masters of adaptation. They’ve learned to survive the post-PhD years, navigate job precarity (sometimes), and grow into positions of greater responsibility. But when it comes to academic writing, many still rely on methods that no longer serve them—none more so than the binge-and-bust cycle. It’s the writing strategy that got many scholars through their PhD: long, intense sprints of writing driven by deadlines, panic, or temporary relief from teaching. But what begins as a functional short-term solution often becomes a long-term liability.

The Myth of “I Work Better Under Pressure”

Mid-career academics often tell me they work best in bursts—that structure stifles them, or that inspiration only comes under pressure. But here’s the truth: what they’re actually good at is responding to crisis. And that’s not the same as producing excellent scholarship consistently.

In practice, binge writing often means long stretches of guilt, avoidance, or non-production followed by frantic writing binges—usually at the cost of weekends, holidays, or sleep. And while it may yield occasional wins, it rarely results in a sustainable writing life or career momentum. It is very hard to step out of this way of thinking because it has been a comfort blanket for so long.

What the Binge Cycle Costs You

On the surface, binge-and-bust writing can seem productive. After all, papers do eventually get submitted. But dig deeper and the real costs start to emerge:

• Lost time: Between each burst, there are often weeks (or months) of little progress. Rebuilding momentum is mentally taxing.

• Lower quality: Writing in rushed sprints leads to uneven work that needs significant reworking, if it makes it to submission at all.

• Emotional burnout: The stress of constantly “catching up” drains cognitive energy and corrodes self-trust.

• Career stagnation: Without a sustainable pipeline, mid-career scholars risk slowing their publication output at precisely the point where consistency is most crucial for promotion, leadership roles, or funding.

Worse, the longer this pattern persists, the more entrenched it becomes and the harder it feels to break.

Why Mid-Career Is the Danger Zone

Binge writing may have worked in early career when pressure was external: thesis deadlines, postdoc applications, or annual reviews. But mid-career presents a paradox: the stakes are higher, but the structure often vanishes. Autonomy grows. So does workload. Leadership, supervision, editorial duties, endless admin. Writing becomes the thing you squeeze into the cracks. With no one checking in, it’s easy to let weeks pass without touching the work that matters most.

What I see again and again is this: mid-career academics who once identified as strong, even prolific, writers begin to question if they can do it at all anymore.

They haven’t lost skill, the truth is they never had a sustainable system of writing. They haven’t lost interest: they’ve lost access to the kind of structure and support that enables consistent progress.

The Real Risk: Quietly Falling Behind

When your writing is unpredictable, so is your output. And in academia, output is currency. If your work isn’t moving, you don’t get invited to join collaborations. You don’t win grants. You’re passed over for promotion. Your voice becomes quieter, not because your ideas aren’t valuable, but because they never make it to print.

This is the slow erosion I see with binge writers in mid-career: not a dramatic collapse, but a slow slide into invisibility.

The First Step Is Naming It

Here’s the hard truth: you cannot build a long-term research career on short-term panic.

The good news? This is a fixable problem.

But the first step isn’t buying a new planner or downloading another pomodoro app. It’s realising that your writing isn’t just a time problem, it’s a systems problem. And that begins with confronting the habits and beliefs that keep you locked in the binge cycle.

This isn’t a call to write every day. It’s a call to build trust in your writing process again—a process that works with your life, not against it.

You’re not bad at writing. You’ve just outgrown the writing life that once got you through.

Ready to break free from the binge-and-bust cycle and build a writing practice you can actually trust?

📨 Join my mailing list to get expert insights, practical tools, and behind-the-scenes strategy for writing consistently— without burning out.

👉 Sign up below ⬇️ in the footer to start building the writing life your career deserves.

The Habit That Builds (or Breaks) Your Academic Career

Getting a writing habit isn’t just helpful — it’s foundational. Without it, your academic career can stall, or even collapse. Because without consistent output, you lose momentum. And without momentum, everything slows: your ideas, your publications, your confidence. Instead of sustainable progress, you fall into boom-and-bust writing cycles: a few good weeks followed by months of avoidance. It feels like chaos. And over time, it becomes exhausting. Unsustainable. That’s where burnout sets in.

Burnout is everywhere in academia. We point the finger at workload, toxic systems, and the culture of overwork. And all of that is real. Workloads are wild. You’re not imagining that. But here’s the hard truth: burnout doesn’t just come from having too much work. It comes from working in a way that drains you.

It comes from the story you tell yourself when you can’t keep up — the story that says you’re failing, that you’re the problem. That story is what empties the tank. And that story can change.

Your academic career doesn’t need to feel like a slow-motion collapse. There’s a better narrative — and better techniques.

A strong writing habit, paired with smart drafting systems, is the most powerful intervention I’ve seen in overworked academics’ lives. It’s not about adding more hours to your week. It’s about building a repeatable, sustainable process that fits the reality of your life.

I’ve coached hundreds of academics — from postdocs to full professors and Deans of Research, with and without learning differences, neurodivergence, caregiving demands, or heavy admin or teaching loads. And the pattern is always the same: once they have the right technique, writing becomes manageable. Even energising. The old way doesn’t work anymore. Writing notes in the margins, rereading piles of articles, highlighting until your pens run dry; those PhD-era habits are no match for today’s higher ed reality. You need methods built for speed, clarity, and confidence.

And yes, it’s hard to admit that your current system isn’t working or even that there might be another way. You’re a smart person, surely, you would have figured this out by now…and if you havn’t what is wrong with you? That can feel threatening. But it’s also liberating — because it means you’re not stuck. You’re not doomed. You just need to shift your approach.

You don’t need more time. You need better tools. Better habits. Better thinking. Ideation training.

It’s simple, but not easy. And in a moment like this — with promotions frozen, funding cuts, and colleagues leaving — it’s tempting to give up entirely. You might wonder: What’s the point?

Only you can answer that. But if you want to stay in this profession — and thrive — you need to start building the future you actually want. That starts with reclaiming your writing. Rebuilding your momentum. And remembering that you are not powerless here.

It’s not about time. It’s about technique.
And it all begins with the habit.

The academic blindspot: the ego gets in the way

There’s a particular kind of discomfort that lives inside many academics — one we rarely talk about, let alone admit. It sounds like this:

“I should know how to do this by now.”

“Other people seem to manage.”

“What if they find out I’m struggling?”

These quiet questions don’t come up in research seminars or writing groups. But they often swirl beneath the surface, especially when it comes to writing. At the heart of this discomfort is something we al know has a profound place in academia: ego.

Not necessarily always ‘ego’ in the arrogant, bombastic sense, but ego in its more subtle, more dangerous form: as a defence mechanism against perceived professional weakness. And this kind of ego creates a blindspot, and one that can seriously hinder your career.

The Rumsfeld Problem: What We Don’t Know We Don’t Know

It’s the unknown unknowns that causes the trouble. Especially for academics who assume that, by the time they’ve earned a PhD, they should know how to write. The more senior they become, the more dangerous this is.

They should be productive. That asking for help or admitting struggle is a kind of failure we cannot admit to in a highly competitive environment. Professional athletes are loathe to admit they have any kind of injury niggle before races, because they don’t want to give the psychological edge to their competition. Academics can fall into this similar mindset. But here’s the rub: writing is a craft. A technical, genre-bound, and structurally complex craft. And it’s one most of us were never actually taught, and are certainly not comfortable performing inside a time pressed environment where we have substituted technique with time.

The gap in our skillset is an unknown unknown: as such we don’t recognise it as a fixable problem. We internalise it as a personal flaw.

And then the ego kicks in.

The Academic Ego: What It Protects (and Prevents)

The academic ego protects us from the embarrassment of not knowing. It tells us things like:

• “Everyone else is fine. You just need to focus more.”

• “This isn’t a skills issue — you’re just lazy or disorganised.”

• “If you ask for help, you’ll lose credibility.”

This mindset is understandable. Academia is structured around performance — and performance demands polish. We are rewarded for what looks effortless, not what required rebuilding our entire process behind the scenes.

But the cost of this ego-protection is high. It keeps us stuck. It erodes our confidence. And it prevents us from getting the targeted help that would allow us to flourish.

Writing Is Not Supposed to Be Easy — But It Is Learnable

Here’s the truth I wish more scholars could hear early in their careers:

Struggling to write consistently is not a reflection of your intelligence, talent, or commitment. It’s a sign that something in your process needs to change . But to get there, you have to move past the ego. You have to be willing to say:

“There’s something here I don’t yet know how to do or I could do it better.”

That small admission opens the door to exponential growth. Because when you approach writing as a craft — one that can be broken down, studied, and rebuilt — you shift from seeing yourself as the problem to seeing your system as the problem. And systems can be fixed.

The Real Professionalism: Admitting and Addressing the Gaps

Ironically, the most professionally mature thing an academic can do is admit what they don’t know and take deliberate steps to close that gap.

That’s not weakness. That’s mastery in the making.

What makes a journal article transformative?

Last week I talked about how to create a 4* REF journal article and what the component parts were. This week I want to unpack in a little more detail the idea of originality, which is usually the thing thats scuppers many ECR and mid-career academics from claiming the 4* status.

First it sounds undoable the way it is framed in the REF: to remind you, the REF fashions 4* works as:

"4* = Quality that is world-leading in terms of originality, significance, and rigour."

We read “world-leading in originality” and immediately think:

Well that’s not me. I’m not Einstein. I’m not rewriting the field.

And you know what? You're right, you’re probably not. But here’s the thing: you don’t have to be. The REF language sounds like it's calling for revolutionary, once-in-a-generation research. But if we’re being practical - and we must be - we know that kind of paradigm-shifting work doesn't emerge on tidy 4-year cycles. Not unless someone’s hiding their time machine.

So what does REF actually mean by originality? Let’s break it down.

1. Originality Isn’t Invention — It’s Contribution

You don’t have to invent a new method or theory out of thin air. You do have to do something useful and new with what’s already there.

That could mean:

• Applying a theory in a novel context

• Synthesising existing debates in a way that unlocks fresh insight

• Proposing a new conceptual model that helps others see the issue more clearly

The key word here is contribution. You’re helping the field evolve. That’s original.

2. Originality Is About Position

You don’t need to be on a pedestal looking down at your field. You need to be in it, showing that you understand the current conversation — and that your work shifts it meaningfully.

Ask yourself:

• What debates is my article entering?

• What does it move forward?

• What can no one say again once they’ve read it?

If you can answer that last one confidently — you’re likely in 4* territory.

3. Originality Has to Be identifiable

Here’s where many scholars unintentionally undercut themselves: they do original work, but they bury the lede. REF panels are not detectives. They won’t hunt for your originality buried on page 17. Neither will the article reviewer. So:

• Don’t be coy about your contribution.

• Don’t save the “so what?” for the final paragraph (DISASTER).

• Say early, clearly, and confidently: Here’s the original move this paper makes.

It doesn’t have to be arrogant. But it does have to be visible.

4. Originality Looks Different in Different Disciplines

In some fields, originality means a new dataset or analytical technique, but not just the presentation of it. The ‘so what’ still counts. In others, it’s a fresh conceptual lens, or a reframing of long-standing problems so we can solve them differently. The point is: REF does not expect one uniform definition of originality. But it does expect that your work pushes the conversation forward.

So instead of asking “Is this ground-breaking?” Ask: “Who is this useful to, and how does it move their thinking?”

You Are Already Doing Original Work, You’re Just Not Framing It That Way

I see this all the time in my programme, Master Journal Article Writing. Brilliant researchers doing powerful work — but not naming their contribution, not positioning it, not claiming the originality already embedded in their thinking. Being afraid to claim their contribution, own the intellectual space they have created. They will go so far: build a new model, build a new theoretical insight and then - forgive the analogy - present it like my Cat brings a dead mouse to me - as an unsolicited gift, a bit mangled, and not something I can use.

Don’t just present the new thing but tell me what this enables us to do, solve, think differently about and why.

You don’t need better ideas — you need to learn how to write your ideas better.

That means clarity. Structure. Knowing how to frame your work for REF-recognised journals. And yes, that can be learned. I help individuals and universities push staff contributions to the top level, by helping scholars know what it looks like inside their own particular publication. If you’re ready to go from quiet, hidden originality to REF-ready contribution, that’s exactly what we do inside Master Journal Article Writing.

You bring the research. I’ll teach you how to shape it, write it, and publish it at the level your career deserves.

→ Applications are open now.
Let’s make your next article a 4*.

What makes a 4* journal paper?

What Makes a 4* Journal Article in the UK REF?

And How You Can Start Writing Them Now

Yes. I am going here because I am getting all the questions! If you're working in UK academia, you've likely heard the phrase “We need 4* outputs for REF” more times than you can count. Whether you're an early career researcher or a seasoned professor, the pressure to produce REF-worthy journal articles is constant and often, confusing. So what exactly is a 4* article?
What distinguishes it from a solid 2* or 3* paper? And more importantly, how can you learn to write one?

Let’s demystify the expectations — and unpack what excellence really looks like.

First, What Does REF Say a 4* Output Is?

According to the official REF guidance:

"4* = Quality that is world-leading in terms of originality, significance, and rigour."

But what does that mean in practice? Let's break it down into components that you can actually work with as a writer.

1. Originality: Not Just New, But Transformative

A 4* article doesn’t just present new data, indeed no new data is necessary. Instead a paper reshapes how a question is asked, introduces a new conceptual framework, or pushes a field forward in unexpected ways. So, some good ways to test which of your papers meet this criteria is to ask the following questions:

• Am I contributing more than a small increment?

• Does this paper offer new ways of thinking or doing?

• Would this shift how someone else approaches this topic?

Common mistake: Many academics confuse ‘original’ with new data, or just a tiny add-on to the received wisdom on a topic. They confuse it with ‘unusual’ or ‘different’. In REF terms, originality is about intellectual leadership — not novelty for novelty’s sake. So always ask yourself the so what question - here’s a new framework or typology, but so what? What can someone else do with this? What is its purpose?

2. Significance: Will It Matter in 5–10 Years?

Significance refers to the impact your article has on the field (not just citations, although those may follow). REF panels are looking for scholarship that becomes foundational, reframes debates, or sets the terms for future research.

Ask yourself:

• Who will build on this work?

• Does it change how a problem is understood?

• Would peers in adjacent fields care?

3. Rigour: Not Just Strong Methods, But Convincing Logic

Rigour means your claims are well-supported, your structure is clear, and your evidence is marshalled with precision.

Ask yourself:

• Are my methods appropriate, and well explained?

• Do I make a compelling case for my conclusions?

• Is the writing disciplined, or full of hedging? Remember this is a problem that will not only scupper your 4*ness, but also, the probability of being published in the top venues.

Too many potentially 4* ideas are let down by muddy expression, unfocused argument, or sloppy structure. Rigour must be visible not just in what you did — but in how you wrote it.

The Hidden Fourth Ingredient: Positioning

Here’s what REF won’t explicitly say but what you must understand:

A 4* article is positioned as a 4* article.

That means:

• It appears in a journal recognised for field-leading work.

• It situates itself in the centre of live disciplinary debates.

• It writes with authority, not hesitation or apology.

You cannot leave quality to be "discovered" by the reader. It has to be staged. This is a skill and one that most researchers were never taught.

So, Can You Learn to Write 4* Articles?

Absolutely.
But you need to be deliberate. Producing 4* work isn’t about "trying harder": it’s about understanding the craft of scholarly writing at the highest level.

Coaching isn’t remedial, it’s a strategic investment

In recent years, universities have invested heavily in metrics: publication targets, grant income goals, and research impact strategies. These are the institutional currencies of success — legible, reportable, and aligned with global rankings. But beneath the spreadsheets, something quieter is happening.

Many of your most talented researchers are struggling. Not because they lack skill or ambition, but because they are exhausted by a system that demands constant output while offering little support for how to sustain that output meaningfully. How to deliver quality. No-one is investing in their craft.

This is where coaching and training comes in. And why more universities are realising that coaching isn’t remedial — it’s strategic.

As an academic coach, I work with early-career, mid-career and senior researchers across disciplines. What I see time and again is that the core problems slowing research down are not about the individual’s capacity. They are a systemic lack of workload management compounded by writing habits shaped by overwork and perfectionism exacerbated by pseudo-productivity work environments.

Universities are full of brilliant people. But brilliance alone isn’t enough. To thrive, researchers need:

• Structures to support deep thinking and training in writing craft that can thrive in the real - not imagined - environment of HE

• Permission to work smarter, not just harder and abandon pseudo-productivity

• Tools to move through stuckness and self-doubt

These are not “soft skills.” They are the engines of high-quality research.

Without them, researchers burn out. Or opt out. Or quietly disappear from your REF portfolio while teaching more, producing less, and doubting whether academia still has room for them. When institutions bring me in, the goal is not just productivity. It’s retention. It’s repair. It’s building the kind of academic culture where people can flourish — and where flourishing leads to outcomes that metrics alone can’t deliver.

If you want your metrics delivered, this is exactly the kind of intervention you need.

Here’s what changes when researchers are coached:

• They build resilient, repeatable writing habits

• They reconnect with the joy and meaning of their research, delivering high quality outputs

• They produce more — but with less distress, and burnout, less HR issues, less teaching gaps

• They model healthier practices to peers and mentees

And most importantly, they stay.

Hiring a coach isn’t a luxury. It’s one of the few interventions that addresses the actual conditions under which research is produced. Because while targets measure outputs, coaching strengthens the infrastructure of how those outputs are made — and by whom.

If you’re a Dean, Head of Department, Director of Research, or Staff Development lead, consider this: what would be possible if your researchers felt not just pressure to deliver, but real support to grow?

Let’s not just count the work. Let’s support the people doing it.

Why Academic Writers Get Stuck - and how to move again

In academic life, writing is both the engine and the expression of our scholarly identity. It is how we clarify our thinking, share our findings, and contribute to our fields. And yet, many accomplished academics — at all stages of career — find themselves stuck.

Not blocked entirely, perhaps. But slowed, stalled, or spiralling in avoidance.

Stuckness rarely announces itself all at once. It accumulates. At first, it’s a few overdue revisions. Then an outline that never becomes a draft. Eventually, it becomes a quiet sense of shame. We stop mentioning the book proposal we meant to submit. We defer conference abstracts because we “need more time.” We spend our writing hours editing administrative emails instead.

The causes of writing stuckness are complex, but the most common explanations academics reach for— lack of motivation, competing demands, time pressure — are incomplete, and yes, mostly inaccurate. Time, in particular, is the false culprit we most often reach for. Motivation is completely misunderstood.

We tell ourselves that a sabbatical will fix it. Or that we’ll get back on track over the summer. Or after marking season. Or once this new role settles down.

The problem, of course, is that the “perfect time” never arrives. And even when it does, the writing doesn’t flow. Because the real issue isn’t time or motivation— it’s lies in 4 particular domains of writing.

Many of us developed our writing habits under the intense conditions of a PhD, where binge-and-bust cycles were normalised, perfectionism was expected, and we often wrote in isolation, without models or support. Those patterns don’t vanish with graduation. Instead, they come with us into full academic posts, where expectations only increase and time only contracts.

Getting unstuck, then, requires more than setting a word count goal or blocking out Friday mornings. It requires stepping back to examine the architecture of your writing practice — the habits, beliefs, and strategies, the practices, and craft that underpin (or undermine) it.

In my work with academic writers, I’ve seen again and again that progress begins not with productivity tools, but first with diagnosis. What kind of stuck are you? Do you reach for motivation or time as your standard explanation? Structural? Emotional? Cognitive? Each has different roots — and different remedies.

That’s why I’ve developed a short, live training focused specifically on this question: How do we get unstuck?

The session provides you with a personal writing action plan where I give you my 4 part diagnostic tool and how to tackle stuckness. It’s practical, evidence-informed, and intentionally low-cost — because I believe this kind of clarity should be accessible to all academics, not just those with institutional coaching budgets.

Stuckness thrives in silence. But once named, it can be shifted.

If you’re ready to shift it, too — the training might be a good place to begin.

What every Dean needs to know about academic burnout

A Publication Target Won’t Fix Burnout — But Coaching Can Prevent It from Derailing Your Top Talent

Academia has a retention problem — and it’s not just about funding or job security.

It's about burnout.

Every week, I speak to high-performing academics who are rethinking their place in the profession. These are talented researchers with promising trajectories — the ones who win grants, publish well, mentor students, and carry the weight of departmental leadership. They're exactly the kind of people institutions should be investing in. And yet, they’re sliding quietly toward the exit.

Why?

Because they’re exhausted. Overstretched. Disillusioned. And in too many cases, completely unsupported in the work that matters most to their career — their research.

Institutions often respond to this problem with well-intended but misaligned measures.

More workshops.
More writing retreats.
More ambitious publication targets.

But here’s the truth: you cannot spreadsheet your way out of burnout.

You don’t fix disengagement with tighter metrics.
You don’t retain people by increasing pressure without changing support.

✅ What Really Works

I work with universities that are serious about developing and retaining research talent — not just monitoring it. The institutions that succeed in this space don’t just ask for more outputs. They ask better questions:

• What’s getting in the way of this researcher’s writing?

• What support structures are missing [these are not difficult to put in place]?

• How do we create time, safety, and clarity for deep thinking and creativity?

• How do we invest in their growth — not just their productivity?

In my work with early-, mid-, and senior-career academics across the UK and Europe, I’ve seen a few key interventions that actually move the dial. They’re not flashy. But they’re powerful.

Let’s break them down.

1. Strategic Workload RETHINKING

A 40-40-20 model in theory does not translate to 40-40-20 in practice.

Research time is often the most vulnerable part of the academic workload. It’s the part that gets eaten by teaching prep, student crises, admin, committee work, and increasingly complex internal systems. When institutions fail to protect research time, they create a slow bleed — and researchers pay the price.

The solution is not simply for individuals to ring-fence hours in a diary. It’s to work differently - and think differently - about how work is executed with a clear, values-aligned vision of what kind of academic the institution wants to support.

That includes:

• Conducting honest workload audits

• Reducing low-value service expectations and the pseudo productivity garbage that drowns out actual value work

• Empowering researchers to create a writing focused environment (and be backed when they do)

A researcher with time to think is a researcher who can write. It’s that simple — and that hard.

2. High-Trust Coaching Relationships

Many academics are reluctant to disclose how lost or blocked they feel around their writing. They’ve spent years building expertise and fear that admitting struggle will make them appear incompetent or weak.

This is why coaching is so effective.

In a confidential, non-judgmental space, researchers can reflect, reframe, and rebuild their practice. They can be honest about what’s not working — and receive expert support to change it.

Writing coaching, in particular, provides:

• Structured accountability

• Tailored strategies for writing under pressure

• Techniques to overcome perfectionism, fear, and procrastination

When done well, coaching doesn’t just help researchers write more. It helps them write better — and feel more grounded, confident, and in control.

3. Safe, Structured Research Development Spaces

Too many research environments operate on passive silence or punitive critique. That’s a recipe for creative paralysis.

Researchers thrive when they can test ideas, receive constructive feedback, and be encouraged to think ambitiously. Structured spaces — such as facilitated research groups, accountability circles, or writing sprints — offer exactly that.

The key word here is safe.

A space where someone can say “I don’t know where to start” or “I’m stuck” without fear of judgment is a space where real progress can happen. Creating that environment isn’t about tone-policing. It’s about leadership — modelling trust, curiosity, and collective support.

4. Tailored Writing Support for Real Outputs

Generic writing advice doesn’t work for complex research outputs.

Academics don’t need another webinar telling them to write daily (though I stand by this basic advice). They need help diagnosing what’s going wrong in their process, addressing longstanding writing baggage, and developing methods that work under pressure. Better technique, better processes, better workload management: just better.

This is exactly why I develop my Coaching Programmes and work closely with institutions to embed them as a live, high-impact intervention. They enable researchers to:

• Build a sustainable writing habit

• Identify and overcome internal writing blocks

• Learn powerful techniques that improve quality and quantity

• Leave with tangible progress — not just good intentions

It’s fast. It’s strategic. And it meets researchers where they are — overwhelmed, overworked, but still ambitious.

👥 Institutional Change Starts with Human Insight

If you’re a Dean, Head of Research, or Director of Staff Development — and you’re watching talented researchers burn out or disengage — the time to intervene is now.

Not when the REF looms.
Not after a resignation letter.
Now.

Your researchers don’t need more pressure.
They need more support. You need their outputs, and they desperately want to be world class researchers delivering them. Your needs align beautifully, but you are not putting in place the catalysts for productive writing.

You need more insight into their barriers.
More strategies that work in the real world.
And they need more belief that the institution values their intellectual labour — not just its outputs.

When you provide that?
You don’t just protect your publication pipeline.
You protect your people.

And ultimately, that’s what sustains excellence.

📩 I work with universities across the UK, Ireland, and Europe to design custom academic writing interventions and coaching support for staff. If you’re looking to retain top talent and improve research culture, I’d love to talk.

Let’s build institutions where researchers can — and want to — stay.

The squeezed middle of academia: where careers die if you don't take control

You’re not new anymore. You’re not coasting toward retirement either. You’re in the middle — and it feels like everything is pressing in. Welcome to mid-career in academia: the squeezed middle. It’s a stage marked by rising expectations, layers of responsibility, and the uneasy realisation that early career strategies no longer work — but no one ever taught you what to replace them with.

As an academic coach who has worked with hundreds of scholars, I’ve seen this pattern play out over and over again. Talented, committed academics reach the midpoint of their careers and find themselves stuck: overwhelmed, under-supported, and secretly wondering, Is this it? Do I really want this for the next x years of my life? If this is resonating with you, know this: you're not alone, and you're not the problem. The system is built to squeeze the middle — and it’s time we talked about it.

The Hidden Pressures of Mid-Career

Mid-career is often romanticised from the outside — you’ve got a title, tenure, a research portfolio, maybe some funding wins under your belt. But inside, it often feels very different.

Here’s what I hear from mid-career academics almost every day:

• “I have no time to think.”
  Your calendar is an endless string of meetings, committees, student issues, admin, and ‘urgent’ tasks. Deep work? Strategic thinking? That feels like a luxury.

• “I’m doing so much — but I’m not moving forward.”
  You’re busy, but not always productive. And certainly not fulfilled. The papers, grant proposals, and research ideas that matter most to you keep getting pushed aside.

• “I’m exhausted — and I can’t remember the last time I enjoyed writing.”
  What was once intellectually exciting now feels transactional. The spark is gone, and burnout is creeping in.

• “Everyone needs something from me — but who’s looking out for me?”
  You’re mentoring others, leading teams, and holding things together. But your own growth? That’s fallen off the radar.

Why This Happens

The mid-career squeeze is not a personal failing. It’s structural. Here’s what’s often at play:

1. You’re still operating with early-career habits.
   What got you through the PhD and early postdoc — saying yes to everything, working long hours, over-preparing, people pleasing, afraid to say no — is now unsustainable. But no one trained you to work differently. And you keep on thinking, well its worked so far, surely there is something wrong with me, rather than the systems and tools and my way of being at work

2. You’ve taken on leadership roles without dropping anything else.
   Rather than stepping back to step up, you’re just piling on. The result? Role overload, diluted focus, and chronic exhaustion.

3. There’s no roadmap for what comes next.
   The next promotion may feel ambiguous. You’ve achieved a lot, but you’re unsure how to design a career that feels meaningful — and achievable — from here.

4. Your writing is stuck in survival mode.
   It’s reactive, last-minute, and increasingly demoralising. You’ve lost the rhythm, and possibly the reason.

What Mid-Career Academics Actually Need

What I’ve found in my work is that mid-career scholars need three things above all:

1. A strategic reset

Mid-career is the perfect time to pause, reassess, and design the next chapter of your academic life. What do you actually want to be known for? What kind of work energises you now? What do you need be let go of? This requires space — and the courage to say no — so you can realign your work with your expertise and values.

2. A new system for working

You can’t work harder — you’ve already maxed that out. The answer is working differently. That means optimising your writing systems, protecting time for deep work, and rethinking what productivity looks like for a senior scholar. You also need permission (and tools) to stop being everyone else’s safety net and start putting your own projects first.

3. Support from people who get it

Mid-career can be deeply isolating. Everyone assumes you’ve got it figured out. But what you really need is a space where you can be real, be supported, and be challenged — by peers and mentors who understand.

The Path Forward

The good news? Mid-career doesn’t have to be a holding pattern. It can be a launchpad.

When I work with mid-career academics inside the Academic Writer’s Collective, we don’t just focus on writing more — we work on writing smarter, leading strategically, and building sustainable academic careers. It’s about reclaiming your voice, your time, and your vision.

It’s about reimagining what success looks like — and creating the systems, support, and habits to make it real.

And it’s about remembering why you started this work in the first place — and actually enjoying it again.

If You’re Feeling Squeezed…

You don’t have to stay stuck. You don’t have to keep doing more with less. And you certainly don’t have to go it alone. Mid-career can be one of the most powerful chapters in your academic journey — if you give yourself the space to reset, refocus, and recommit to work that truly matters.

If you’re ready for that kind of shift, I’m here to help. Book a consultation, or simply start by asking: What would it look like if this next chapter felt lighter, clearer, and more fulfilling than the last?

Because that’s not just possible — it’s what mid-career should be.

If you are ready to get out of the squeezed middle, decide today that its not going to be this way for the rest of your academic career. Book a call with me here to see where I can help.

How to thrive in your academic career

What Kind of Academic Are You — and What’s Standing Between You and the Career You Want?

After over 17 years in academia and 6 years coaching scholars across the career spectrum, I've seen patterns. The same barriers show up again and again — not just in early career researchers but also in seasoned professors, department chairs, and ambitious academics with big visions.

Here’s what I know for sure:
Success in academia doesn’t just come from hard work or passion. It comes from having the right systems, mindset, and support to execute your ideas consistently — without burning out or getting buried in pseudo-productivity.

Here’s how I categorise the scholars I work with, and what they need to thrive:

👩‍🎓 Early Career Scholars

You’re in your first post or just starting the tenure track. It’s sink or swim, and you’re expected to juggle teaching, research, admin, mentoring, publishing, and carving out your academic identity — fast.
What you need: a proven writing habit, smart project execution, work management strategies, and a mentor to help you focus on what actually moves the needle (aka: tenure-critical outputs).

🧑‍🏫 Mid-Career Academics

The "squeezed middle." You're no longer new, but you're not senior either. You've collected admin duties and grown into roles without shedding anything. The PhD-era systems you relied on have broken down.
What you need: to stop defaulting to busywork, restructure your writing practice, and redefine success on your terms — without burnout or guilt.

🧓 Senior Scholars

You’ve been managing departments, research centres, maybe even faculties. You’ve worn every hat. But your own research? That’s taken a back seat. The writing habits you once had are rusty or lost altogether.
What you need: a full reset. A new way to integrate research, writing, and leadership in a way that reflects your impact — and reclaims your joy.

🌟 The Ambitious Academic

At any career stage, some scholars want to play bigger. Whether it’s publishing your 4th book or creating a research legacy beyond academia, you’re ready to optimise everything with expert guidance and support.
What you need: strategic mentorship, advanced writing development, and a system to create, elevate and leverage your research for real-world impact.

The 6 Non-Negotiables for a Thriving Academic Writing Career

No matter your level, you need:

✅ A rock-solid, drama-free writing habit
✅ Clear project selection, execution, and sustainable focus
✅ A system to do deep work and avoid pseudo-productivity
✅ High-level project ideation before execution
✅ Advanced pre-writing, drafting, and revising techniques
✅ Writing excellence as a non-negotiable skillset

This is the foundation of my SCRIBE Framework — and it’s all inside The Academic Writer’s Collective.

I didn’t design the Collective to be “motivational.” I designed it to transform how you work — with accountability, strategy, and expert-led training that takes you from busy to brilliant.

🧭 Want to know where to start?

Here’s how I recommend working with me based on your career stage:

🔹 Early Career:
Start with The Writing Accelerator or join The Collective. Need journal articles or a monograph for tenure? Try my writing-genre-specific programmes.

🔹 Mid Career:
The Collective will help you restructure your writing system. Add 1:1 coaching or genre programmes if you’re targeting major outputs.

🔹 Senior Scholars:
1:1 coaching or a VIP Day is the deepest, most targeted support. Let’s reboot your writing practice together.

🔹 Ambitious Academics:
Apply for Elevate — access all my programmes, my eyes on your work, and a high-touch coaching programme designed to fast-track your biggest goals.

If you want to stop spinning your wheels and start creating the writing life — and academic career — you actually want… let’s talk.

📩 Book a consult call here

Let’s find out where the real work needs to begin.

Journal article mastery requires a formula

Do you ever wonder why the same people are prolific publishers and other struggle with repeated rejection and take an age to produce a single piece of work?

There are of course many structural reasons, but I am not talking about inequality here or difference in workload, rather the difference of opportunity to be trained into the FORMULA. Being mentored into the craft of writing successfully for journals has all but died out under the increasing pressure felt by everyone in HE. Those in the know have no time to mentor unless you are really exceptionally fortunate.

The real reason some people publish with relative ease and some struggle is that they have learned THE FORMULA on way or another. There is a formula for all journal articles, regardless of discipline. The content may be different, and even within disciplines there are slight variations between journals, but the formula - the underlying rules and expectations - remains exactly the same. Learning this formula is crucial for academic success whether we agree with the metrics of measurement or not, this is our reality.

To help you crack this code I want to share part of this formula with you here. You can find the formula for writing introductions to journal papers here - it is FREE

But there is a formula for everything else too. The link passages, the conclusions, the abstract, how you edit you paper for impactful, non waffle filled text, how you pull your argument to the front, how you maintain your authorial voice, how you substantiate your claims and make a contribution, how you understand reviewer feedback and respond to it successfully, and many other elements are completely formulaic. Together with lots of basic writing advice - like the proper use of grammar, and what constitutes a good paragraph structure - the formula can be learned and reproduced over and over again.

Without the formula, you can of course publish. But it is like throwing darts at a dartboard with a blindfold on - you occasionally hit the mark after alot of misses, but you have no idea how THIS paper was so much different from the other papers you have written that did not get published.

Knowing the formula enables you to hit the target every time.

If you would like to work with me to perfect this craft once and for all, let’s talk! You can book a free consultation call with me here:

Don’t keep struggling alone. Learn it once, keep producing work with ease and mastery for the rest of your career.

Writing in a time scarce environment

It is that time of year. You feel like you are dying with overwhelm. So many administrative imperatives. You feel like you are up against it all the time.

I talk to academics every single day about their writing problems, and by far and away the greatest complaint is not enough time (or reviewer 2, which I will deal with next week!).

Time. It is my FAVOURITE writing topic and my FAVOURITE writing tool. Of all the tools I teach my clients, this one is THE game changer, but naturally, there is a lot of resistance to thinking about time differently.

To get a great writing habit, clients often think they need motivation - to rediscover it somehow, like Columbus.

As I tell everyone that comes in shouting distance, motivation is GARBAGE. Motivation is not it. What you need is momentum because motivation comes when we are already doing really great things. It comes after, not before the action of writing. Getting momentum requires a couple of things:

1. A writing habit where you have diagnosed your barriers CORRECTLY - not the ones on top of your mind, but the one's underneath.

2. A solid drafting process that frees you from the idea that BIG BLOCKS OF TME is a writing process - it is not, it is what you use in the absence of a process

3. Control of your diary: knowing HOW to effectively weaponise time.

Want to know more? Get my free training here:

How To Get a Productive Writing Habit

Crack the Writing Habit with the Live Accelerator! 🚀

Writing is the cornerstone of your academic career, yet it can often feel frustrating, disappointing, and downright depressing. Writing guilt is REAL – it's like a weight that drags you down.

You get stuck in a vicious cycle: not writing, feeling guilty about it, and then hating the pressure of last-minute writing. This dysfunctional relationship with writing affects your productivity and spills over into other parts of your job, leaving you feeling guilty about teaching and other responsibilities.

Some of you feel okay about writing but need to get more done without the drama and last-minute panic. You want to write with ease, meet deadlines effortlessly, and accelerate your writing pace. You need the right tools to make it happen.

If you have thought about taking the Writing Accelerator to build a solid writing habit, but you’ve hesitated or doubted your ability to finish it on your own, I have the solution.

For ONE TIME ONLY, I am offering the Writing Accelerator LIVE! Over 14 days of intensive coaching, you will gain everything you need to create and maintain a brand-new writing habit, supporting you in achieving the career you deserve.

No more procrastination, no more emotional baggage. Say yes to writing with ease and confidence, knowing you have the time and space for your research and writing.

Interested? I’m planning this before the new academic year kicks off. If you’re committed to transforming your writing habit this year, this is your chance to get live daily support from me to ensure you complete the program.

If you want 14 days of LIVE coaching with me on building your writing habit, hit the button below and sign up for the waitlist. The waitlist doesn’t commit you to purchasing the live training but helps me gauge interest and group size. Numbers will be limited to ensure everyone gets ample attention, so register now. First come, first served!

Let’s make this academic year the one where you conquer writing! ✍️

#AcademicWriting #WritingCoach #Productivity #LiveTraining #AcademicSuccess #writingproductivity

Why your articles get rejected and how to solve it

Ever wondered how some people get published over and over without too much trouble and drama? It’s simple, but it is not easy. They have had the mentoring - explicitly or otherwise - that has shown them over and over not just how to write a journal article, but how to MASTER the craft of this particular genre.

Few people are lucky enough to enjoy this mentorship these days.

The result is that journal article writing can feel like an uphill struggle. It can feel too slow, like you are going around in circles, and that it takes too long to get a paper finished to submission. You feel frustrated and avoidant. Moreover, the rejection rates are high and even R&Rs feel like you and the reviewer are reading totally different papers - of course you are. The reviewer is reading the paper your wrote, and you are reading the paper you wrote in your head - not the same. Addressing revisions can feel like you need to do a serious re-think of your paper and its aims, even when the reviewers label it a minor R&R.

When you have mastered the journal technique, you can write papers (I’m talking sole authored papers here) in 8 weeks. You can execute them with confidence and ease, and let go of the circling doubt and inefficiency in producing publishable papers. No more frustration and anxiety about saying what you really want to say - get your argument on top of the detail, not buried into obscurity, and your contribution nailed down. Learn the skills needed to move from creator > writer > editor > reviewer of your own paper.

But it is more than that - mastering this technique is the difference between publishing in top quality journals and being recognised as a leader in your field. It is not just a case of accelerating your production, but the quality of what you produce at the end. Quality and quantity matter in your academic career.

Mastering this technique requires you to know the repeatable formula for success that leads to your papers getting published without rejection and crazy R&Rs. I’ve developed the 7 Step MASTERS Framework for Publishing Success and if you want to move from frustrated and slow, to writing journal articles with ease and confidence you can access a training for free: just hit the button below or my link in bio.

The least talked about, most beneficial aspect of an effective writing habit?

Becoming an effective, efficient academic writer is key to academic success. An academic career is built on your research outputs, largely - but not exclusively - communicated through the medium of writing. Being a good writer matters. But how do we become better, happier writers?

Achieving both a productive writing habit, and being able to execute quality writing, depends on many different ingredients that ultimately coalesce around a symbiotic relationship between prioritising your projects, planning what outputs to do when, and activating that planning to support a bullet proof writing habit. It is these aspects of writing that clients come to me to improve. These things they understand and are happy to engage with. Academics like to improve, they understand the benefits of processes and systems, and the writing craft requires these types of interventions.

What is always missing?

No matter how dedicated the academic writer is to improving their craft, the one practice that academics resist - the one crucial thing to build both an effective habit and an ever improving quality of outputs - is the discipline of review. I don’t mean reviewing articles for other people, or grants and so on. I mean reviewing your own behaviour and emotions around writing, and the execution of writing so that you can improve it, rather than just get faster at doing it. Yes to new processes and systems, yes to more efficiency…but no to thinking about – and measuring - how I spent my time and why things might not have gone as I wanted. It seems obvious and yet…not obvious. It’s not sexy. It is not an easy sell. Yet, without it, all nascent progress on processes and systems will eventually fade away to nothing and old habits and old ‘methods’ will reassert themselves.

Think of athletes executing a race, or throw, or a jump. At the end of every event, they get out the recording of their performance and they review it. They cast a critical eye and ask questions about what could have been done better. Often in throwing or jumping disciplines, the review is instantaneous - immediately after they jump, and before the score comes up. The outcome is not even important at this stage, it is the technique that is being reviewed. Why? Because improving your performance requires REAL TIME review, and this is an integral part of any refining any practice or craft or skill.

Don’t stay in the now

Academics only want to think about the next race, the next jump or the next throw. At best, they might review on submission or publication of something. But it is so long since the performance, they can’t remember the details of what went right or wrong. Academics don’t actually want to remember what went right and wrong, or where they might improve; rather it is a sigh of relief that the job is over. They have no rear-view mirror at all. It is the nature of the academic environment that conditions to be ever more, bigger, faster, publish or perish that contribute to this aversion no doubt, but this is not the whole, or even most of the story. It is also the academic culture. Review is seen as a punitive exercise (grading, judging, reviewer2, appraisal) not something that leads to constructive adjustment.

Don’t think of review as something that happens at the end of a project or article: continuous review is crucial. Athletes face an even bigger pressure to be faster, stronger, better, much more than academics. But the culture is different. And they know the answer is to review - critically and carefully - by asking the right questions of the right people so that they can improve their craft.

If you are looking for a way to better review your work, and your writing practice, then having a solid review mechanism that assesses both your input, your behaviour and your output is a critical ingredient to academic success.