An interview with Nicola Brady, Practitioner in Residence with the School of Policy and Global Affairs.
The interview
What drew you to the Practitioner in Residence scheme at City St George’s, and how does it align with your professional journey so far?
The Practitioner in Residence scheme attracted me both as an opportunity for personal and professional development, and as a strategic investment in the work my team and I were leading. As a senior leader and policy maker, I recognised the need to complement my experience and intuition with academic rigour and independent scrutiny.
I was particularly drawn to the idea of stepping outside of my usual policy-making environment to engage with academic thinking, research methods, and challenge-led innovation. I saw this as a way to enhance the credibility, depth, and data-driven nature of our strategies- especially in areas where policy decisions carry real‑world impact for communities and frontline professionals.
The scheme aligned with my belief that evidence‑based policy should be sustainable, more effective, and more inclusive. The academic partnership has helped add clarity and weight to our direction, and allowed us to explore new approaches to persistent challenges, with a more research-informed lens.
What have you found most rewarding about your time as a Practitioner in Residence?
What I found most rewarding was the sense of collaboration and mutual respect between the policy and academic worlds. Embedding within the City St George’s community enabled me to access a rich environment of shared learning, challenge, and joint problem-solving.
One particular highlight has been the opportunity to co-design and deliver events such as symposiums, lectures, and conferences alongside academic colleagues. These spaces allowed our work to be examined, celebrated, and built upon in ways that felt dynamic and deeply thoughtful.
I also found it incredibly fulfilling to create opportunities for my wider team; many of whom were able to share their insights with academic audiences for the first time. Seeing their work recognised and challenged in a constructive way was a proud and rewarding experience, and helped to broaden our collective confidence and ambition.
Can you share an example of how your residency with us helped to progress your work or your thinking about a particular issue?
A particularly powerful example has been our work on mental health and suicide prevention. Through the residency, I was fortunate to collaborate with an academic expert who introduced me to ethnographic methods as a way of deeply exploring this issue within our organisation.
Rather than taking a traditional, top-down or compliance-driven approach, the ethnographic method allowed us to explore the lived experiences of our staff- through observation, informal dialogue, and immersive inquiry. The academic brought a “fresh pair of eyes and ears” to the workplace, asking questions we may not have thought to ask, and surfacing insights that had been overlooked.
This partnership culminated in a presentation at an international summer school in Tuscany, where students and academics from diverse disciplines challenged our assumptions and offered new perspectives. It was both intellectually rigorous and personally moving.
As a result, we moved from a narrow, internally focused view of suicide prevention to a more holistic, community-led approach that prioritises culture, collaboration, and wider system partnerships. This shift would not have happened without the academic challenge and creative thinking the residency provided.
What surprised you most about working in a university setting, and how has it shaped your perspective on policy or civic engagement?
What surprised me most was the breadth and depth of expertise across the university—and the openness of academics to engage with real-world policy challenges. I found a genuine appetite for interdisciplinary collaboration and contribution to enhance our aims and outcomes.
The ability to connect with people from different academic backgrounds each bringing unique methodologies, frameworks, and ways of thinking, was both humbling and energising. This enriched our approach to policy development and made me more reflective about the power of collaborative knowledge exchange.
It reaffirmed my belief that effective engagement is not about one sector having the answers, but about creating spaces where diverse expertise and experience can come together around a shared goal.
What advice would you give to future applicants considering the Practitioner in Residence scheme?
The Practitioner in Residence scheme is a fantastic opportunity—but its success depends on what you put into it. I would advise future applicants to begin with clear goals, but also remain open to unexpected learning and new ways of working.
Fully immerse yourself in the university environment—particularly early on. Build relationships, have informal conversations, and give ideas space to evolve in partnership with your academic counterparts.
Be mindful of the time needed for governance processes, such as information sharing and ethics, especially if your project involves data or frontline engagement. Getting this right from the start will enable your work to progress smoothly and with credibility.
Finally, be proactive in sharing your work. Whether through internal briefings, public events, or social media, the visibility of your project can amplify impact and inspire others to take part. Most importantly, enjoy it; this is a rare chance to step outside of the day-to-day and think differently, with the support of an academic community.
This initiative is part of the Finsbury Institute’s evolving programme of opportunities which supports collaborative knowledge exchange between academia, policy and the professions, as well as civic engagement in the heart of London.
Date of interview: