Lifelong engagement is the lifeblood of the academy

Academics approaching retirement carry decades of experience and insight that are vital to preserving institutional memory and ensuring continuity in research and teaching. Their mentorship can guide early career scholars and foster the resilience needed to navigate a challenging industry. Once retired, they are well positioned to contribute to public-facing scholarship, through working on high-impact initiatives and legacy projects. Valuing their continued engagement affirms their lifelong contributions and promotes a culture of respect, inclusion and well-being within academic communities. 

However, academia often prizes novelty and youth, sometimes at the expense of institutional memory and long-term mentorship. We advocate for a cultural and structural shift in how academic institutions value and support senior and retired staff. This means moving beyond emeritus titles to more meaningful engagement, recognition and inclusion across the university. We need to see retirement not as an exit but as a transition into a new phase of contribution.

Post-retirement arrangements across the sector currently fall into two main groups: 

• Retired staff associations, principally for social events and occasional lectures; 

• Individual emeritus professor roles within specific departments, and take on a full range of duties, such as the role of a principal investigator (albeit unpaid), or a lighter-touch role with minimal engagement. There are examples of “emeriti colleges” in North America, which provide a highly supportive structure – usually through endowment.

• Resources on leadership and strategy in higher education
• When should universities speak up – or shut up?
• What innovation needs to thrive in higher education

How can we support lifelong academic engagement?

What is missing in the provisions above is a clear, coherent, structured support mechanism for individuals approaching retirement who wish to remain meaningfully engaged. Such a mechanism should begin before retirement planning, offering opportunities for continued involvement and making these transparent. Participation must be voluntary through an opt-in rather than opt-out approach. This process must be structured, with defined timescales and clearly identified steps agreed in advance. This would ensure clarity, consistency and fairness for all parties involved. 

We propose the following:

• A structured programme of transition from paid employment to engaged retirement – this should be agreed at least two years before the planned retirement date, with periods of three to five years with full-time equivalent salary reduced at an agreed pace and pension ramped up before final retirement;

• Establishment of an engagement programme, supported with staff and resources by the host institution. This programme would facilitate engagement through in-person and online meetings as well as a regular seminar and research series;

• Access to physical institutional spaces such as libraries, meeting and working spaces and administrative areas; 

• Continued access to online resources including Microsoft Teams groups, email and research databases, alongside other staff members;

• Record maintenance of retired colleagues to keep track of the alumni network. This would be a function of a central academic alumni team or emeritus college; 

• Clearly identified activities for retired academics, such as mentoring, introducing early career researchers to their networks, archival work, public engagement, contributing to committees, advisory panels or work with interdisciplinary thinktanks;

• Support for the development of communities of practice in cognate areas while encouraging and facilitating interdisciplinary and systems thinking. This facilitates engagement between retired staff, full-time colleagues and early career scholars.

These strategies would facilitate intergenerational dialogue, creating formal spaces for genuine engagement between early career and retired academics. They could also be combined with a structured visiting professorship programme or academic alumni programme that offers various levels of engagement options. 

A properly structured and supported programme could include lecture delivery, project design and development, paper publication, outreach and networking. Rather than severing ties with senior colleagues at retirement, a structured transition ensures their time is accounted for and their continued contributions are formally recognised. 

From an institutional perspective, this type of arrangement also makes financial sense because it offers clear economic and strategic benefits. It is cost-effective, thanks to phased salary reductions combined with pension drawdown, while unpaid roles supported by institutional resources can develop more junior staff and protect institutional memory without significant overheads.

Supporting senior and retired academics is not just a gesture of goodwill, it’s a strategic investment in the continuity, depth and humanity of academic life. Let us move from symbolic recognition to meaningful inclusion while enriching the academy.

Theresa Mercer is senior lecturer in environmental sustainability and sustainability and environmental management programme director, and Jim Harris is chair of environmental technology, both at Cranfield University.

If you would like advice and insight from academics and university staff delivered direct to your inbox each week, sign up for the Campus newsletter.