Reconnecting Faculty and Leadership

Practice Overview

Practice Name	Reconnecting Faculty and Leadership
Description	The UC Davis School of Medicine initiated a campaign to help faculty reengage with school leadership through a series of offerings including refreshed newsletters, town hall events, and opportunities to meet with leadership in small group or one-on-one settings.
Participants	Faculty
Frequency	Continuous throughout the year
Modality	Varies across program components, with options to engage via email newsletters, virtual town halls, and in-person and virtual meetings
Resources	Dean’s Office staff time, minimal financial resources required

Introduction

Following the COVID 19 pandemic, faculty at the University of California, Davis, School of Medicine (SOM) expressed feeling disconnected from the school’s leadership, a desire for greater understanding of how leadership decisions were made, and clearer pathways to raise concerns or seek guidance. To inform a strategic response to the perceived divide between faculty and leadership, the Dean’s Office administered a survey to all SOM faculty in 2024 to assess preferred modes of engagement with leadership, including format, timing, and delivery. Survey results indicated that faculty had a wide range of preferences and needs for engaging with leadership. In response, the Dean’s Office launched a multifaceted reengagement effort that offered multiple pathways for communication and interaction, ranging from one on one meetings and small group discussions to town halls and regular email communications. The intention was to create consistent, accessible forums for dialogue between faculty and institutional leadership. The program is led by Sara Lin, MPH, project team manager, Edie Ernst, senior communications manager, and Brooke Banks, PhD, assistant dean and chief of staff, with support from staff with expertise in project management, employee relations, and communications.

Goals and Objectives

The program was developed to:

Strengthen the connection between faculty and SOM leadership.
Promote transparency by creating reliable channels for information sharing, as well as opportunities for faculty to connect directly with senior leaders.
Provide a variety of ways for faculty to engage and communicate with leadership, allowing faculty to engage with leadership in the manner that best aligns with their needs, preferences, and schedules.

Promising Practice Overview

The campaign to strengthen connections between faculty and leadership includes a coordinated set of communication and engagement efforts designed to address faculty desires for more consistent, transparent, and accessible interaction with SOM leadership. The components of the program range from broad communication to one-on-one meetings between faculty and leadership so that faculty can engage and access information in the way that best suits their individual needs. The program includes the following components:

Newsletter Refresh

Email newsletters serve as the broadest engagement communication mechanism reaching all faculty. Prior to the reconnection campaign, faculty communications had taken multiple forms with varying cadences, contributing to inconsistency and message fatigue. Informed by guidance from faculty focus groups, the Dean’s Office staff refreshed existing newsletters and written communications to increase the reliability, clarity, relevance, and consistency of communications. As part of this effort, the Dean’s Office revived the What’s Up Doc? newsletter, which is distributed to all physicians in the health system as well as all SOM faculty, including PhD faculty, residents, and fellows. Standalone emails were minimized in favor of this consistent biweekly newsletter that faculty recognize as a dependable source of information. Content includes leadership perspectives and news, activities, updates, and grant funding opportunities occurring across both the school and the health system, reinforcing alignment and transparency.

Town Halls

Town halls also provide an opportunity to communicate and engage with a broad range of faculty. Held at least twice per year, with additional sessions convened on an ad hoc basis, town halls are offered via Zoom to maximize reach and accessibility. Each 90‑minute session follows a standardized agenda that includes:

Opening remarks from the dean focused on SOM priorities, financial updates, and recognition of recent accomplishments.
Presentations or comments from key leaders such as school vice deans and health system leaders.
A moderated question‑and‑answer period.

Questions are collected through the Zoom Q&A feature, monitored by Dean’s Office staff, and relayed to a facilitator to ensure an organized flow of discussion. Town halls are promoted through school and health system newsletters, schoolwide email announcements, and meetings. Participants register in advance through an online form that also allows them to submit questions or topics for discussion. While open to the entire school community, including staff, students, residents, and fellows, the agenda is mindful of addressing faculty needs and interests. Following each town hall, attendees receive a post-event survey to collect feedback and identify opportunities to refine future sessions.

Dean’s Office Hours

Dean’s Office Hours provide faculty with the opportunity for one-on-one time with the dean. These sessions occur monthly and participants can choose to meet virtually or in person. Meetings were initially scheduled in 10‑minute increments and later extended to 20 minutes to allow for more substantive discussion. Faculty sign up using an online scheduling application, which automatically triggers a pre‑engagement survey. This survey collects identifying information and the topics faculty wish to discuss. Dean’s Office staff compile this information into a faculty profile that is provided to the dean in advance of the session to support preparation and guide the conversation. Participation in office hours is limited to faculty.

All engagement opportunities are promoted through the refreshed newsletters. Following each event, participants receive a post‑engagement evaluation survey to provide feedback and inform ongoing refinement of the program.

"We tried really hard to diversify the different methods in which people could engage … giving one-on-one opportunities, small group opportunities, ways to read information via e-mail, ways to hear the information via a meeting, and the town halls."

– Sara Lin, MPH

Results and Impact

Throughout the two years of implementation, the UC Davis School of Medicine collected participation data and post‑engagement feedback to evaluate the effectiveness of and to make improvements to its faculty-leadership engagement efforts. The team weighed engagement outcomes against the level of effort required to sustain each format, enabling leadership to assess return on investment and determine which approaches should be continued:

Newsletters. Newsletter open and click rates were above industry benchmarks, providing evidence that the refreshed newsletter strategy has been effective in supporting more consistent, transparent communication across the SOM.
Town Halls. Attendance ranged from approximately 300 to nearly 500 participants at each event, with post‑event surveys consistently indicating high satisfaction. Across the post-event surveys for the three most recent town halls, more than 80% of respondents agreed that the content was clear, relevant, and delivered at the right level of detail, and over 85% reported that attendance was a productive use of their time.
Dean’s Office Hours. The office hours generated uniformly positive feedback regarding meeting logistics (e.g., ease of scheduling, pre-event communication). All respondents indicated that the sessions were a productive use of time and that they were “extremely satisfied” with the overall experience. The dean also expressed appreciation for the dedicated one-on-one time with individual faculty members.

While results varied across engagement modalities, the overall strategy strengthened leadership visibility and promoted communication and connection between faculty and leadership.

“Sometimes the simplest strategies and tactics really are the best and I think that's what we saw here.”

— Edie Ernst

Resources Needed

The program is largely supported by staff within the Dean’s Office, with the primary resource being time rather than direct financial costs. Staff time is required to coordinate activities, including scheduling, publicity, preparation of materials, and logistical support, as well as leadership and participant time to engage in the various formats. The program leverages existing institutional technology, such as survey and scheduling software, rather than requiring new platforms or tools. During early implementation, the coordination effort was significant; however, as processes became standardized and workflows were refined, the ongoing administrative burden decreased substantially.

Challenges and Lessons Learned

Throughout their two-year journey in reengaging with the faculty, the staff leading the program have continually assessed and refined their efforts and, in doing so, learned several important lessons that can inform those undertaking similar efforts:

Stated preferences do not always translate into participation. Although faculty expressed interest in small‑group offerings, attendance did not align with expectations once the format was implemented. The original program included a Dine with Leadership series— a small‑group engagement option for faculty seeking more direct interaction with senior leaders. The intent was for these to be one-hour sessions, offered monthly, alternating between breakfast and lunch to accommodate different schedules. Participation was limited to ten faculty members to allow for informal discussion with leadership, including the dean and other leaders such as the vice dean for research or the vice dean for education. Due to low sign‑up rates, only one session was ultimately held, and the series was discontinued.
Use data to adapt and iterate. Participation and evaluation data were critical in identifying which efforts were effective and which were not. Initiatives that did not achieve sufficient engagement were reassessed or discontinued, reinforcing the value of learning from experience and adjusting strategy rather than persisting with low‑impact activities.
Effective engagement does not require significant financial investment. While resources such as food or incentives can support participation, feedback suggested that faculty place greater value on authentic engagement, meaningful dialogue, and the opportunity and venues to be heard and appreciated.
Be intentional when soliciting feedback. Survey questions should be designed to elicit actionable input and set clear expectations about how feedback will be used. While not all suggestions can be implemented, welcoming all perspectives is essential to maintaining trust and aligning engagement efforts with institutional priorities.
Authenticity is critical to success. These types of efforts are most effective when leaders are genuinely committed to listening, engaging thoughtfully, and responding transparently to faculty input; without this authenticity, engagement activities are unlikely to achieve their intended impact.

Moving Forward

Moving forward, the UC Davis School of Medicine will continue its current faculty-leadership engagement efforts, focusing on the approaches found to be most effective and sustainable. Additional attention will be directed towards strengthening engagement with faculty emeriti and establishing a schoolwide committee that will engage faculty routinely on operational and administrative issues. The school also plans to continue efforts to understand how faculty want to be recognized. Findings from this work, along with results from a completed campuswide climate survey, will inform future refinements to the program and help ensure engagement strategies continue to reflect the evolving needs of the faculty community.

Acknowledgements

This case study is based on an interview conducted with Sara Lin, MPH, project team manager, and Edie Ernst, senior communications manager, University of California, Davis, School of Medicine on March 10, 2026.

Medical School Statistics

Name of Institution	University of California, Davis, School of Medicine
Location	Sacramento, CA
School Size as of 2025: Number of medical students Number of full-time faculty	606¹ 1,100²
Public/Private	Public

¹Source: 2025 AAMC FACTS Table B-5. Enrollment includes the number of students in medical school, including students on a leave of absence, on Oct. 31 of each year shown. Enrollment does not include students with graduated, dismissed, withdrawn, deceased, never enrolled, completed fifth pathway, did not complete fifth pathway, or degree revoked statuses. https://www.aamc.org/data-reports/students-residents/data/facts-applicants-and-matriculants. Accessed April, 6, 2026.

²Source: AAMC. Faculty Roster: U.S. Medical School Faculty, 2025. https://www.aamc.org/data-reports/faculty-institutions/report/faculty-roster-us-medical-school-faculty. Accessed April 4, 2026.

For more information, contact Amy Smith or Carolyn Brayko.