To be better leaders, the administration should engage its primary audience: the faculty. Graphic by Miguel Tovar/University of Houston

The world of academic research is tough. As institutional research offices juggle regulatory and financial challenges within a continually strained system, they still have to lead their respective enterprises and serve their research communities.

“Service before leadership,” said Amr Elnashai, vice president/vice chancellor for research and technology transfer at the University of Houston. “We cannot miss this very important fact – we have to serve the needs of our research communities, first, before they will trust us to lead.”

How can we better serve faculty while tackling the many challenges faced by research divisions?

Sara Bible, associate vice provost for research at Stanford University, says the best way is to continually engage faculty in the business of research.

Rule making within research

Let’s be honest – faculty don’t particularly enjoy the administrative overburden dished out by university research offices. Nor should they.

But involving faculty in the process is the quickest way to earn their cooperation.

“You will have good results if you put in the time,” said Bible. “It’s really important to be flexible with faculty and staff on campus.”

One way Bible has successfully engaged her research community is in policy development. Her office at Stanford implemented a research policy working group that spends months testing policy language and effectiveness with university faculty and staff before it is launched.

“We’ve had great results,” she said. “People want to engage and be part of the process, not just be expected to follow a rigid set of rules.”

The pre-deadline deadline

Another way to partner with faculty is to work with them to improve the proposal review cycle, for everyone knows the risks of pushing the magic button mere minutes before the deadline.

Melinda Cotton, assistant vice president for Sponsored Programs at the University of Alabama at Birmingham, recommends creating a pre-deadline deadline.

Her office worked with faculty, schools and departments to establish the submission of proposals a full seven days before their due dates. This gave the office time to strengthen merit of the research project and fix minor details that could disqualify a proposal.

“Within our School of Medicine, more than 80 percent of our proposals came in by our pre-deadline,” she said. “We work hard to communicate and advocate to faculty that we can serve them better by doing it this way, and it’s working for us.”

Ultimately, there are lots of processes university research offices have to put in place to do the business of research. But to be better leaders, the administration should engage its primary audience: the faculty.

Engagement in policy-making, for instance, gives insight into pain points and allows research offices to put the best processes in place to get the job done for everyone.

------

This article originally appeared on the University of Houston's The Big Idea. Lindsay Lewis, the author of this piece, formerly served as the executive director of communications for the UH Division of Research.


Faculty in academia shouldn't be hesitant to follow their entrepreneurial goals just because it may be difficult to balance the two worlds. Graphic by Miguel Tovar/University of Houston

University of Houston: Tips for balancing faculty and founder life

Houston voices

Finding balance in your professional life and your dreams can be hard for anyone. Faculty in academia, hoping to become entrepreneur and start their own companies, find this especially difficult. Finding this balance is essential to having success both professionally and in entrepreneurial endeavors.

Amy J. Ko, a professor at the University of Washington Information School and Co-Founder of AnswerDash, said in a post on her Bits and Behavior blog that she found parallels between being an entrepreneur and being a professor that helped her start her technology company.

Here are four parallels between startup life and faculty life that Ko found striking.

1. Fundraising.

"I spend a significant amount of my time seeking funding, carefully articulating problems with the status quo and how my ideas will solve these problems. The surface features of the work are different—in business, we pitch these ideas in slide decks, elevators, whereas in academia, we pitch them as NSF proposals and DARPA white papers—but the essence of the work is the same: it requires understanding the nature of a problem well enough that you can persuade someone to provide you resources to understand it more deeply and ultimately address it."

2. Experimentation.

"Research requires a high degree of iteration and experimentation, driven by carefully formed hypotheses. Startups are no different. We are constantly generating hypotheses about our customers, our end users, our business plan, our value, and our technology, and conducting experiments to verify whether the choice we've made is a positive or negative one."

3. Learning.

"Both academia and startups require a high degree of learning. As a professor, I'm constantly reading and learning about new discoveries and new technologies that will change the way I do my own research. As a founder, and particularly as a CTO, I find myself engaging in the same degree of constant learning, in an effort to perfect our product and our understanding of the value it provides."

4. Teaching.

"The teaching I do as a CTO is comparable to the teaching I do as a Ph.D. advisor in that the skills I'm teaching are less about specific technologies or processes, and more about ways of thinking about and approaching problems."

Ko also mentions the distinct differences between the two are the pace, the outcomes, and the consequences.

Finding Balance as a Professor and Entrepreneur

Alaina G. Levine, an award-winning entrepreneur, science journalist, and STEM careers consultant said in a Science Mag blog post that the key to success is to find ways to balance the two worlds.

"Issues of intellectual property ownership, human resources protocols, and time management, as well as the challenge of keeping a delineated barrier between professorial and business activities can be difficult to manage, but these concerns shouldn't prevent academics from seeking to create a startup company," Levine said in the blog post.

How to Balance Entrepreneurship and Faculty Responsibilities

According to Levine, these are a few things to consider before perusing entrepreneurship in order to successfully balance professorial and entrepreneurial activities:

1. Know your priorities

"If you are a professor who ponders whether your research can be developed into a technology that can be commercialized, your initial step should be to ponder your priorities. Do you want to stay in academia? Do you desire a career in industry? Deciding these choices early on, even before the lawyers and university representatives get involved, is crucial to forging a balance and a satisfying career."

2. Figuring out what path to take

"To wrangle the options and make it through the multiverse of marketing and manufacturing without sacrificing professorial duties, an academic's initial stop should be their institution's office of technology transfer (OTT). The OTT can assist faculty with understanding how much time they can spend on outside endeavors and how it must be structured. Technology transfer professionals also provide insight into patent law and can help professors navigate intellectual property (IP) issues."

3. Managing potential conflicts of interest

"Once you engage in entrepreneurship, you must create a distinct separation between your university lab and your company's facilities. IP can't flow freely between the two, and neither can labor—your grad students cannot work for you in your group and intern at your company at the same time. Safeguards that prevent mingling are necessary for legal purposes, say experts, as well as to synthesize a balance between being in academia and being in business."

4. Getting a Return on Investment on the faculty side

"Even with a targeted separation of academic and business endeavors, pursuing commercialization can actually enhance your skills in education. The connections that faculty make not only help the students but benefit the department and university as a whole as well."

What's The Big Idea?

Faculty in academia shouldn't be hesitant to follow their entrepreneurial goals just because it may be difficult to balance the two worlds. Take what you already know as a professor and apply it to your new venture as an entrepreneur. Also, know where your priorities lie, what path you're taking, watch out for conflicts of interest and make sure you, your students and university are all getting something out of it.

According to both writers, universities and research go hand in hand and both are "of critical importance" to the advancement of our society. So, is your research impactful? If the answer is yes, go for it.

------

This article originally appeared on the University of Houston's The Big Idea. Cory Thaxton is the communications coordinator for The Division of Research.

Ad Placement 300x100
Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

Rice Business Plan Competition awards $1.4M to 2026 student teams

winner, winners

Editor's note: This article has been updated to correct the total amount of investment and cash prizes awarded at the RBPC.

Another team from the Great Lakes State took home top honors and investments at this year's Rice Business Plan Competition.

BRCĒ, a material-tech startup from Michigan State University, took home the top-place finish and the largest investment total at the annual Houston event. It has developed Lattice-Grip technology to create utility-based polymers that can replace traditional fabric. The materials are stronger, fire-resistant and more stable than traditional textiles, according to the company. Last year, the University of Michigan's Intero Biosystems won first-place finish and the largest investment total of $902,000.

In total, the RBPC doled out more than $1.4 million in investment and cash prizes, according to Rice. Over the three-day event, held April 9-11, the 42 competing startups presented their business plans to 300 angel, venture capital and corporate investors. Seven finalists were selected and each competing startup received at least $950 in prizes for placement in the competition.

Three Texas teams, including one from Houston, were named among the finalists. Here's who won big this year.

BRCĒ, Michigan State University — $571,500

The recent Shark Tank alum finished in first place for its utility-based polymers technology.

  • $200,000 Goose Capital Investment Grand Prize
  • $100,000 The OWL Investment Prize
  • $100,000 Houston Angel Network Investment Prize
  • $75,000 The Indus Entrepreneurs (TiE) Texas Angels Investment Prize
  • $50,000 nCourage Investment Network’s Courageous Women Entrepreneur Investment Prize
  • $25,000 New Climate Ventures Sustainable Investment Prize
  • $20,000 Aramco Innovator Cash Prize
  • $1,000 Anbarci Family Company Showcase Prize
  • $500 Mercury Fund Elevator Pitch Competition Prize – Consumer Hard Tech

Legion Platforms, Arizona State University — $425,500

The startup won second place for its multiplayer gaming platform that can be accessed with slow internet speeds.

  • $100,000 Anderson Family Fund & Finger Interests Second Place Investment Prize
  • $200,000 Goose Capital Investment Prize
  • $100,000 The OWL Investment Prize
  • $25,000 Pearland EDC Spirit of Entrepreneurship Cash Prize
  • $500 Mercury Fund Elevator Pitch Competition Prize – Consumer

Imagine Devices, University of Texas at Austin — $101,000

The pediatric medical device company won third place for its multifunction neonatal feeding tube, known as Trinity Tube

  • $50,000 Anderson Family Fund & Finger Interests Third Place Investment Prize
  • $25,000 Pearland EDC Spirit of Entrepreneurship Cash Prize
  • $25,000 The Eagle Investors Investment Prize
  • $1,000 Anbarci Family Company Showcase Prize

Altaris MedTech, University of Arkansas – $6,000

The startup won fourth place for its pain-free strep test.

  • $5,000 Norton Rose Fulbright Fourth Place Prize
  • $1,000 Mercury Fund Elevator Pitch Competition Prize — Overall Winner

Routora, University of Notre Dame & University of Texas at Austin – $5,500

The team won fifth place for its route optimization app that works to reduce fuel costs, travel time and carbon emissions

  • $5,000 Chevron Fifth Place Prize
  • $500 Mercury Fund Elevator Pitch Competition Prizes — Digital

DialySafe, Rice University — $5,500

The startup won sixth place for its technology that aims to make at-home peritoneal dialysis simpler and safer.

  • $5,000 ExxonMobil Sixth Place Prize
  • $500 Mercury Fund Elevator Pitch Competition Prizes — Life Science

Arrow Analytics, Texas A&M University – $6,000

The startup won seventh place for its AI-powered sizing system for carry-on baggage.

  • $5,000 Shell Ventures Seventh Place Prize
  • $1,000 Anbarci Family Company Showcase Prizes


Other significant prizes included:

BiliRoo, University of Michigan – $26,000

  • $25,000 Southwest National Pediatric Device Consortium Pediatric Device Cash Prize
  • $1,000 Anbarci Family Company Showcase Prizes

BeamFeed, City University of New York – $25,000

  • $25,000 Amentum and WRX Companies Rising Stars Space Technology and Commercial Aerospace Cash Prize

Grapheon, University of Pittsburgh — $20,000

  • $20,000 Aramco Innovator Cash Prize

Last year, the Rice Business Plan Competition facilitated over $2 million in investment and cash prizes. According to Rice, more than 910 startups have raised more than $6.9 billion in capital through the competition over the last 25 years.

See a full list of this year's winners and stream rounds from the competition here.

Here's the income it takes to live comfortably in Houston in 2026

Money Talk

2026 report analyzing how much it costs to live "in sustainable comfort" in the biggest U.S. cities has found Houston residents have the 11th lowest salary requirement to live a comfortable life in 2026.

SmartAsset's annual report found single adult residents in Houston need to make $89,981 a year to qualify as "financially stable." Compared to last year, single Houstonians needed to make $83 more to live comfortably in the city.

Families with two working parents and two children need to make a household income of $204,672 to have a financially stable life in Houston, the report found. That's almost $2,000 less than what families needed to make last year.

To determine the rankings, SmartAsset's analysts examined 100 of the largest U.S. cities and used the latest cost of living data – such as the costs for housing, food, transportation, and income taxes where applicable – from the MIT Living Wage Calculator for childless individuals and for two working adults with two children.

For the purpose of the study, the 50/30/20 budgeting strategy was used to determine "comfortable lifestyle" costs for both individuals and families: 50 percent of income to cover needs and living expenses, 30 percent for "wants," and 20 percent for savings or paying down debt.

Here's breakdown of a Houston resident's comfortable lifestyle based on SmartAsset's findings:

  • $44,991 dedicated to needs and living expenses
  • $26,994 dedicated to wants
  • $17,996 dedicated to savings or debt repayment

This is SmartAsset's interpretation of a comfortable lifestyle for families of four:

  • $102,336 dedicated to needs and living expenses
  • $61,402 dedicated to wants
  • $40,934 dedicated to savings or debt repayment
SmartAsset said single individuals and families should compare the fluctuating local cost of living and their long-term goals to fully "understand the context" of their respective household incomes. But it's worth pointing out that a financially stable life in Houston isn't quite attainable for many residents: The city had a median household income of $64,361 in 2024, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.

Comfortable salaries in other Texas cities

Elsewhere in Texas, the report found that families in the Dallas-Fort Worth suburbs Frisco and McKinney "are closest to a comfortable salary."

"In Frisco, the median household earns $145,444 – substantially higher than the national median of $83,730," the report's author wrote. "This figure also accounts for 63.1 percent of the $230,464 income a family of four in Frisco needs to live comfortably. In McKinney, TX, the $124,177 median household income accounts for 53.9 percent of the $230,464 needed."

Both cities also tied with Plano for the 29th highest salary needed nationally to live comfortably in 2026. Single adults living in these cities need to make $109,242 a year to live a financially stable life this year.


On the opposite end, San Antonio has the lowest salaries needed to live comfortably in the U.S. Single adults only need to make $83,242 a year, and $192,608 for families of four.

Houston medtech startup clears FDA approval for new surgical tool

precision surgery

Houston-based Prana Surgical will soon bring a new electrosurgical tool to operating rooms around the country. The Prana System officially cleared U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval earlier this month.

"Receiving FDA clearance for the Prana System represents a defining milestone for our company," Joanna Nathan, CEO and co-founder of Prana Surgical, said in a news release. "Surgeons today are increasingly focused on achieving precise outcomes while minimizing disruption to healthy tissue. The Prana System was designed to support that shift by integrating targeting and excision into a single, streamlined tool."

Prana Surgical began as Prana Thoracic in 2022. Back then, the company primarily focused on developing screening tools for lung cancer diagnosis. It raised $6 million in series A funding rounds in 2023 and 2024 before transitioning to broader surgical needs in 2025.

The Prana System is a minimally invasive, image-guided, single-use tissue extraction tool designed to retrieve samples without damaging healthy tissue. The tool is still designed with the respiratory system in mind, helping Prana in the fight against lung cancer and other thoracic diseases.

Reducing the impact of tissue extraction via electrosurgery and enhanced image scanning can significantly reduce complications. The Prana System combines localization and tissue-cutting capabilities in one, which keeps surgeons from having to swap out components during a procedure, making for a smoother process. It can core, cut and feel blood vessels on the way toward the intended target, giving surgeons greater control over tissue preservation.

"Electrosurgery is foundational to modern surgery, but there is still opportunity to improve how energy-based tools are applied in minimally invasive settings," Nathan added. "Our goal is to introduce a new class of image-guided surgical tools that enable more precise intervention across a range of procedures."

The company projects sales of $7.5 billion from the Prana System in the United States, estimating that 2.5 million surgical modules will be able to use the new tool. While starting out focused on biopsies, the company plans to evolve the system into other procedures, such as ablation, in the future. It is also planning for a controlled U.S. clinical rollout as it moves toward commercialization