Summary
Academic consulting is full of promise and pitfalls. While it connects research with real-world problems, it’s surrounded by dilemmas around credibility, integrity, and purpose. Our essay published in the Journal of Management Studies shines a light on the benefits and dilemmas of consulting and calls for more openness and support so its value isn’t lost in academia’s shadows.
What is Academic Consulting?
Academic consulting, at its core, involves scholars offering their expertise to organizations, typically in return for some kind of compensation. It means stepping out of the university to work directly with organizations. Sometimes it’s a quick expert opinion; other times, it’s a longer collaboration that blends research and client needs. Yet, even as organizations look to academics for guidance, consulting often remains in the shadows, talked about behind closed doors rather than seen as a meaningful way to bridge theory and practice.
For many, academic consulting is a source of unease. Does it compromise scholarly integrity? Does it turn expertise funded by public institutions into private gain? There’s a concern that consulting distracts from “serious” academic work. Some colleagues keep their consulting activities quiet, worried that engaging openly might raise doubts about their legitimacy as researchers and commitment to research.
Yet, the reality is more nuanced. Consulting can enhance research by opening doors to robust fieldwork and richer data usually off-limits to outsiders. Practical engagements expose gaps in academic understanding and push researchers to ask better questions. On the other hand, compensation remains a sensitive issue, especially at publicly funded universities. The boundary between serving the public interest and advancing personal career or financial goals becomes blurred.
There’s also the matter of impact. Academics often say they want their research to matter. Consulting offers a way to see ideas in action, to witness immediate effects on organizational decisions. But the reward systems in academia are slow to catch up. Consulting seldom counts for promotions, leaving its value invisible even when the results have impact.
And then comes the personal side. For some, consulting refreshes the sense of purpose that can fade in the grind of publishing and teaching. For others, it only adds new layers of obligation. The decision to engage—or not—is deeply personal and tied to values that go beyond job descriptions. Rather than recommending or pushing for a one-size-fits-all approach, we call for pluralism to allow for different approaches to find space in the university light.
Rethinking How Academia Engages with Consulting
What might change look like? Instead of treating consulting as a topic in the shadows behind closed doors, universities could offer guidance, support, and recognition. This means having open conversations about how consulting fits with academic roles, and providing policies that encourage transparent engagement.
Importantly, consulting shouldn’t be reserved for senior insiders or those bold enough to act without a blueprint. Peer support and honest mentorship can help early-career scholars navigate the dilemmas without feeling isolated or penalized. This can also level the playing field and make academic consulting less risky for those more likely to risk their credibility.
The bigger shift is about moving away from either/or thinking. Consulting doesn’t have to threaten academic identity. Done with care and transparency, it can deepen scholarship and connect it to the world. Universities that already support consulting through dedicated programs and third-space initiatives show what’s possible when consulting is brought into the light.
Imagine a university where consulting is viewed not as a sideline hustle, but as one of many ways to contribute. And this raises a forward-looking question that feels increasingly relevant in today’s challenging financial climate for universities: What if academic consulting were not just tolerated, but recognized as a source of value and even funding for the university?
How can universities make consulting a visible and valued part of academic life?
Some institutions have taken promising steps by creating consulting labs or “third spaces” where scholars and organizations collaborate on practical challenges in structured ways. Others are redesigning workload models to recognize time spent on policy advising or industry partnerships. These initiatives illustrate what’s possible. Building on them, we suggest two concrete actions.
First, universities can introduce transparent disclosure and review systems—tools that allow faculty to register consulting activities not as a form of surveillance, but as a way to legitimize and normalize them. Second, they can offer institutional support—legal, financial, and ethical—along with flexible time or project allowances that acknowledge both the effort and the value of this engagement.
With these supports in place, consulting can move from the margins to the mainstream of academic work; not as a rival to scholarship, but as an integral way of linking research with societal impact.
