Intentionality is Not Optional
In Unreasonable Hospitality: The Remarkable Power of Giving People More Than They Expect, Will Guidara describes intentionality as the discipline of ensuring that every decision, from the most significant to the most routine, is made thoughtfully and in service of a defined goal. This concept is not framed as aspirational, but as foundational. Intentionality, in this context, is what separates reactive work from purposeful design. In research administration, where the pace and volume of requests can be relentless, it is easy to default to responsiveness—answering emails, resolving issues, and moving tasks forward as they arise. While this approach maintains workflow, it often results in experiences that are fragmented, inconsistent, and dependent on circumstance rather than design (Guidara, 2022).
Within academic environments, much of research administration operates in a reactive mode. Deadlines drive urgency, compliance requirements dictate processes, and stakeholder needs emerge in real time. Reaction ensures survival; it does not ensure excellence. When interactions are driven solely by immediacy, there is little opportunity to consider how those interactions are experienced by faculty, scholars, and trainees. As a result, even well-executed processes can feel disjointed or unclear. Intentionality disrupts this pattern by asking a different question: What experience are we trying to create, and how should each interaction contribute to that experience?
Designing experiences, rather than reacting to events, requires a shift in orientation from task-based thinking to systems-based thinking. For example, onboarding a new scholar can be approached as a checklist of required steps—forms completed, systems accessed, policies reviewed—or as a deliberately structured experience that reduces uncertainty, builds confidence, and establishes a sense of belonging. The difference lies not in the content, but in the sequencing, communication, and tone of delivery. When intentionality is applied, each component is aligned with a broader objective: to create clarity, ease, and engagement from the outset. In this way, intentionality transforms routine administrative functions into cohesive, meaningful experiences.
Importantly, intentionality also creates consistency. When processes are designed with purpose, they become repeatable without losing quality. This is particularly critical in research administration, where variability in communication and support can lead to confusion or inequity in stakeholder experience. By defining clear goals for how interactions should feel—not just what they should accomplish—administrators can build systems that deliver both accuracy and a consistent level of support. This approach reduces reliance on individual discretion in the moment and instead embeds quality into the structure of the work itself.
Guidara’s emphasis on intentionality also highlights the importance of alignment. Every action should be in service of a clearly articulated purpose. In research administration, that purpose may include supporting investigator success, reducing administrative burden, or enhancing the trainee experience. Without this clarity, processes risk becoming disconnected from their intended outcomes, leading to inefficiencies and missed opportunities for impact. With it, even small decisions—how an email is phrased, how a meeting is structured, how information is presented—become opportunities to reinforce a coherent, values-driven approach.
Ultimately, intentionality reframes the role of the research administrator from one who responds to needs, to one who designs environments in which those needs are met effectively and meaningfully. It is not an added layer of work, but a different way of approaching the work that already exists. Reaction keeps systems moving; intentionality ensures those systems serve people well. In a field defined by complexity, this distinction is what enables administrators to move from managing processes to shaping experiences.
Action Items for Research Administrators
- Identify one recurring process (e.g., onboarding, grant submission support) and define the intended experience, not just the required steps.
- Ask: “What should this feel like?” (e.g., clear, supportive, efficient) and align your communication and sequencing accordingly.
- Audit one workflow for reactivity. Where are you responding in the moment instead of designing in advance?
- Standardize one touchpoint (email, meeting, checklist) to reflect clarity, tone, and purpose consistently.
- Pause before routine actions and consider: Is this aligned with the experience I want to create?
Intentionality is not extra work—it is what makes the work matter.
