Applications closed Closed on Monday 4 May 2026, 23:59 BST. We're now assessing the 2026 pilot cohort — selection day 13 May.
At the “choose today’s format” step of the session frame, the group picks one of the four formats below based on what people want to bring. The ground rules and the frame stay the same – only the middle changes.
Keep it balancedThree of the four formats are whole-group; only case consultation centres one person's question, and even then roles rotate and everyone learns from working someone else's challenge. The moderator keeps a light tally of who has had time, so attention is shared fairly across the programme and no one is overlooked.
Use it when one person has a specific, current leadership challenge they want the group to help them think through. One case runs in six short phases; you can fit one case comfortably, or two shorter ones if the group is experienced.1
| Phase | What happens | ~time |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Casting | If several want time, choose whose case is heard; assign moderator, timekeeper and (optionally) scribe and process observer | 5 min |
| 2. The story | Case-giver presents the real situation and distils one precise question for the group – no solutions yet. Name what they want: to solve it, see it from new angles, get ideas, or just encouragement | 10 min |
| 3. Clarifying questions | Consultants ask clarifying or yes/no questions only – to understand the case, not to suggest solutions | 5 min |
| 4. Choose a method | How consultants will respond: open brainstorm, an “if it were me…” round, a deliberate perspective switch, or a cross-domain round | 5 min |
| 5. Consultation | Consultants offer ideas; the case-giver listens and takes notes (or the scribe does) only – no response to the advice until the close | 15–20 min |
| 6. Close | Case-giver responds, picks one or two things to actually try, and names a concrete next step | 5 min |
Use it when the group wants to compare how a shared challenge is handled across domains. There is no single case-giver – the value is in the contrast between research software, data stewardship, bioinformatics, HPC and the rest.2
| Step | What happens | ~time |
|---|---|---|
| Name the topic | The group picks one shared theme (e.g. influence without authority, getting credit, leading change) | 5 min |
| Round-robin | Each person: “how is this handled in my domain or team?” | 3–4 min each |
| Synthesis | Moderator gathers the patterns and the surprises | 10 min |
| Close | Each person names one idea worth borrowing | 5 min |
Use it when people mainly need to be heard and encouraged rather than solved – a valid need in its own right, and often where the sense of “I’m not alone in this” comes from.
| Step | What happens | ~time |
|---|---|---|
| Open round | Each person shares what is currently at the top of their mind, uninterrupted | 4–5 min each |
| Resonance | Others reflect back what they heard and where they relate – no advice | 10–15 min |
| Close | Each person names what they are carrying away | 5 min |
Use it when the group wants to set and track leadership goals over a series of sessions, returning to them each time the group meets.
| Step | What happens | ~time |
|---|---|---|
| Review | Revisit the goals from last time – what moved, what got stuck? | 10 min |
| Set / refine | Each person sets or sharpens one concrete leadership goal, with feedback and review from peers | 15 min |
| Commit | Each names a next step and who will check in on it | 10 min |
We'd like to use Google Analytics to understand how the site is used. With your consent, we'll set non-essential analytics cookies (anonymised IPs). See the ELIXIR-UK privacy policy.