In conversation with Dr. Beronda Montgomery

@BerondaM

Professor Beronda Montgomery is Professor of Biology at Grinnell College, USA. Her work integrates plant biology with leadership, mentoring, and institutional change. Trained as a plant biologist, she has advanced the understanding of photosynthetic organisms and ecological principles to inform community-building in academic life. Her career exemplifies how disciplinary expertise can serve as a foundation for broader reflections on equity, growth, and the redefinition of success in science.

In this interview, Professor Montgomery offers insights that challenge traditional models of success and invite a more relational, inclusive, and sustainable vision for scientific practice. Professor Montgomery emphasizes that thriving – whether for plants or people – cannot be explained by narrow productivity metrics. Instead, she highlights the importance of environments that provide access to resources, foster authentic growth, and value diverse pathways to success. For her, mentoring is distinct from advising: rather than simply guiding individuals toward institutional milestones, mentoring requires intentional listening and recognition of the full humanity of mentees while leveraging one's resources to support their personal goals. Her vision extends to the institutional level, where she calls for a critical reassessment of entrenched practices and policies that limit inclusion.

1. Your work bridges the worlds of science, mentorship, and personal growth. What first inspired you to explore these intersections?

Shortly after starting my own research group as an Assistant Professor, I realized that while I had been successfully mentored during my PhD and postdoctoral years, the mentoring I received from my two advisors was very different. I wanted to explore effective mentoring styles, and – as most scientists do when trying a new protocol – I turned to the literature. This led me to identify many peer-reviewed articles on mentoring in the sciences, most published in education and psychology. I began incorporating those insights into my own practices and into the communities of practice in which I was engaged.

2. How has your training as a plant biologist shaped the way you approach leadership, mentorship, and community-building in science?

Because my work with plants and photosynthetic bacteria often centers on ecosystem-based interactions – including individual–environment and individual–individual relationships – I have carried this systems-based perspective into my efforts as a mentor and leader.

3. You often speak of learning from plants. Can you share an early moment when you realized that your scientific observations could also inform your thinking about people?

One of the earliest moments I recall in a professional setting was during a discussion early in my time as an Assistant Professor. A steering committee for an interdepartmental graduate program was considering several students who were struggling, and most faculty attributed these struggles to individual deficits or failures to transition from prior educational environments. In the midst of this discussion – among many colleagues who themselves studied plants – I asked what we would do if we saw a plant struggling to thrive. This shifted our conversation toward considering the importance of external environments and access to critical resources to support growth, whether for individual plants or communities. That reframing allowed us to focus less on deficits and more on what support students needed to thrive.

4. Much of your writing challenges traditional notions of success and productivity. How do you define a “thriving” scientist or leader?

More than anything, I encourage us to embrace the idea that thriving or success can take many forms. Institutions often rely on narrow, quantitative metrics. While it is important to be aware of how you will be judged, true thriving often lies at the intersection of personal goals and vision with institutional expectations. Thus, while I was effective at obtaining grants, publishing peer-reviewed papers, and supporting students through graduation – metrics valued institutionally – I felt I was truly thriving only when I mentored and supported junior colleagues in ways that honored their personal goals and full humanity.

5. In a world that often prizes output over reflection, how do you maintain space for deep thinking in your own life and work?

I schedule time for reflection. It does not always require substantial amounts of time. Sometimes it is just 5 min at the end of the day to jot down what went well and what did not. After a few months, I may dedicate an hour or two to reviewing these notes and looking for recurring trends to guide future planning or adjust commitments. Like many beneficial practices, it requires consistency.

6. What advice would you give to senior scientists who want to support younger colleagues more thoughtfully – especially those navigating institutions not designed with them in mind?

The most important thing is to listen often and intentionally. Then ask how you can bring your experiences, capital, and resources to support what you hear. This may involve helping refine a vision so that it accounts for context while still prioritizing younger colleagues' personal goals and aspirations.

7. You've spoken about the importance of institutions not just recruiting diverse voices but truly valuing them. What would meaningful change look like to you in academic and scientific cultures?

Meaningful change requires assessing environments, practices, and policies to determine whether they narrowly support traditional models of success or recognize multiple pathways toward achievement. Our failure to question “the way things have always been done” limits who we see as part of our cultures and diminishes the benefits we might gain from diverse perspectives and voices.

8. What does impact mean to you at this stage in your career – and how has your idea of impact changed over time?

For me, impact is about asking regularly how I am using the platforms and privileges I have gained to benefit the broader community.

9. If you could redesign a graduate program in the life sciences from the ground up, what would it prioritize?

Depending on the goals of participants, I believe programs should incorporate training in areas that scientists will likely engage in professionally – such as mentorship, leadership, human resource management, and financial training – alongside research.

10. What do you hope your readers and mentees carry forward from your work, long after the book is closed or the mentorship ends?

That we succeed not as isolated individuals, but through relational interactions with others and the environments in which we exist. With this recognition comes a responsibility to care for, commit to, and celebrate the collective whole – not just the individual.