# data[].attributes.headline
That skills and not just knowledge are required

# data[].attributes.subject
That skills and not just knowledge are required

# data[].attributes.body
A focus on practitioner skills and not just knowledge

# data[].attributes.body
What can we learn from the way in which the T&S pathways were established

# data[].attributes.body
What titles would be given? Is it important to adopt traditional academic titles or not?

# data[].attributes.body
Are there existing mini-progression routes that can be crafted in?

# data[].attributes.body
If we create the correct pathways for progression and recognition we will retain valuable staff.  Currently we can grow staff we bring in on a particular grade, but they then hit a barrier to further progression and we lose them if we do not find a creative solution.

# data[].attributes.body
Rather than reverse engineer and seek absolute alignment. Is there merit in developing a distinct pathways with gateways to access other traditional pathways

# data[].attributes.body
Existing structures are too cumbersome and drives good people away. You need to be able to help people see the path for their career!

# data[].attributes.body
The KEF should drive practice and what excellence looks like

# data[].attributes.body
Not a red line as such but a real issue for consideration

Is there an equivalency route?

# data[].attributes.body
Excellent work has been progressing on the technician commitment and pathway, how does this dovetail with academic pathways

# data[].attributes.headline
What would be the indicators for success?

# data[].attributes.subject
What would be the indicators for success?

# data[].attributes.body
Can we codify what could engagement and KE activity looks like and how will these indicator calibrate?

# data[].attributes.headline
Categories of staff who may want access a pathway

# data[].attributes.subject
Categories of staff who may want access a pathway

# data[].attributes.body
Not just technical staff, methodologists and others

# data[].attributes.body
The "currency" and is there acceptance that there is equivalence between Prof in Practice and a traditional Professor

# data[].attributes.body
Is there cultural acceptance of industry engagement and impact as being equivalent to research when looking at equitable pathways

# data[].attributes.body
Research associates - engaging with industry - not publishing papers etc. More analogous to a working engineer.

Current workaround - all moved on to technician pathway

Could learn from Strathclyde's KE Fellow framework