Recognising Leadership in Science: A Q&A with Professor Anita Ho-Baillie

As one of the longest continuous sponsors of the Eureka Prizes, the University of Sydney continues to champion research excellence and leadership in science.

We spoke with the John Hooke Chair of Nanoscience from the University of Sydney, Professor Anita Ho-Baillie, about what leadership in science really means – and why more researchers should consider putting themselves, or their colleagues, forward for recognition.

The University of Sydney is one of the longest continuous sponsors of the Eureka Prizes. You've seen the Eureka Prizes evolve over time and have been recognised for leadership as well as research excellence. From your perspective, why is there growing emphasis on leadership in science right now?

Science contributes enormously to society. It has helped us live longer, move from point A to point B faster, and connect socially in ways that were unimaginable a generation ago. Science underpins so many advances in our daily lives that it is absolutely right to acknowledge those contributions – and the people behind them.

Leadership recognition is important because science isn’t just about results or equations. When we highlight leadership, we put the human story into science. We show that real people – passionate, committed people – are working hard to solve meaningful problems. That makes science more accessible and inspiring. It shifts it from something that might feel abstract or dry into something deeply connected to society.

For many of us, working in science is purposeful. I walk into the office feeling like I’m contributing to something important. Recognising leadership celebrates not only research excellence, but also the vision, courage and commitment required to drive that excellence forward.

The Eureka Prize for Leadership in Science is awarded to an individual scientist who has successfully integrated their scientific expertise with the management skills necessary to nurture, inspire and mobilise their peers. When you think about leadership in science, what kinds of people come to mind, and what would you say to researchers who might not immediately see themselves as leaders, but are already supporting, guiding and inspiring others?

When I think about leadership in science, I think about people who are deeply passionate about their work – people who get excited when they talk about their research and who understand why the problem they are solving matters.

Leaders can communicate complex ideas clearly. They can articulate not only what they are doing, but why it is significant. In science, you don’t always know the outcome – you are testing hypotheses. But strong leaders can explain the potential and why it is worth pursuing.

Leadership is also about bringing people with you. I often use the analogy of being on a boat. You have a crew or a team, and you all need to get somewhere. Someone has to help set the direction, but everyone on the boat plays a role. Some people steer. Some bail out water. Some are very good at generating quick preliminary results. Others disappear for weeks and come back with deep, detailed analysis. A good leader recognises those different strengths and brings them together to multiply the outcome.

Leadership also requires humility. A confident leader is comfortable working with people who may be smarter than them in certain areas. I see my students absorbing new knowledge faster than I can – and that makes me proud. Leadership is about building a team that is collectively stronger than any individual.

To researchers who don’t see themselves as leaders, I would say: leadership takes many forms. Some people lead from the front; others lead from behind. You’re not necessarily born a leader. Sometimes leadership emerges because you were given an opportunity and stepped up. Sometimes it’s simply choosing to take responsibility.

If you are mentoring students, fostering collaboration or motivating others towards a shared goal, you are already demonstrating leadership, whether you use that word or not.

Over the past 10 years, the Eureka Prize for Leadership in Science has been awarded to a female scientist only three times. From your experience, what barriers in science persist for women, and what would you say to women who might hesitate to put themselves or their female colleagues forward?

I do think many women tend to step back. We often prioritise others before ourselves: our families, our teams, our students. There are always valid reasons – children, caring responsibilities, competing demands – and it becomes easy not to put yourself forward for an award because something else feels more urgent.

If we want a truly level playing field, we need to normalise that career paths include pauses, and that those pauses do not diminish leadership capacity.

Women may internalise a sense of disadvantage and feel they are already “behind”, so they hesitate to apply for leadership opportunities and awards. My message would be: don’t disqualify yourself. Leadership is not about perfection or continuous acceleration. It is about impact, vision, mentorship, collaboration and courage.

And if you see leadership in a female colleague, tell her. Nominate her. Sometimes others see our leadership qualities before we recognise them in ourselves.

Good leadership is crucial to putting Australia on the world stage across the science, technology and engineering sectors. Why do you think recognising leadership in science, technology and engineering matters so much, not just for individual researchers, but for Australia's ability to lead, collaborate and innovate on the global stage?

Australia consistently punches above its weight. We are a relatively small country, geographically distant, yet we compete internationally with groups that have far greater funding and scale. In many areas, we are in the top tier globally.

Recognition helps amplify that impact.

When leadership is visible, it attracts strong students and collaborators. In a connected world, recognition travels quickly – through media, social platforms and international networks. Visibility builds reputation. Reputation attracts talent. Talent strengthens collaboration.

We are a small country doing extraordinary things. Recognising leadership ensures that excellence does not go unnoticed, and it reinforces Australia’s ability to lead, collaborate and innovate globally.

As a final word, I’d like to say that leadership in science doesn’t always announce itself loudly. Often, it looks like mentoring a student, building a team, fostering collaboration, setting a bold direction, or creating an environment where others can thrive.

If you recognise those qualities in yourself, don’t wait to be invited, put yourself forward.

If you see them in a colleague, take the time to nominate them. Your nomination could be the encouragement they need – and the recognition they deserve.

Leadership grows when it is seen, supported and celebrated.

The Australian Museum Eureka Prizes are the country’s most comprehensive national science awards, honouring excellence across the areas of research & innovation, leadership, science engagement, and school science.