Strengthening the Doctoral Pipeline: Building a Sustainable Academic Workforce in Nursing

In the coming decade, thousands of senior nurse academics are set to retire, yet few are ready to replace them. This looming shortfall reflects a broader crisis: the nursing profession experiences an unprecedented challenge in sustaining its academic workforce. Despite mounting societal expectations for nursing faculty and health leaders, the number of doctorally prepared nurses remains critically inadequate (McNelis et al. 2019; Watson et al. 2025). This shortage is both quantitative and qualitative, threatening the discipline's capacity to prepare the next generation of nurses and drive scholarly innovation. The extent of the problem is sobering. For example, in the United States, nursing faculty vacancy rates hover around 7.9%, with over 90% of those positions requiring doctoral qualifications (McNelis et al. 2019). More than a decade after the Institute of Medicine's (2011) call to double the number of doctorally prepared nurses by 2020, fewer than 3% of the nursing workforce hold a PhD or Doctor of Nursing Practice (DNP). Although DNP enrolments have increased rapidly, PhD enrolments have continued to decline, with US programs reporting a 2% decrease between 2015 and 2016 (Ea et al. 2021). Faculty attrition, estimated at approximately 12%, further exacerbates this workforce instability (McNelis et al. 2019). When considered together, these figures reveal a widening gap between educational and professional aspirations and the workforce realities of nursing. Yet beneath these statistics lies a deeper concern: a crisis of quality and professional preparedness. Many doctoral students report inconsistent or inadequate mentorship, describing isolation, uncertainty about academic expectations and lack of preparation for faculty roles (McNelis et al. 2019). These experiences contribute to attrition during doctoral studies and leave graduates underprepared for academic work. Academic workforce sustainability depends not only on graduate numbers but on the quality of doctoral experiences. Isolation among doctoral nursing students represents one of the most significant and under-recognised threats to student success. Although doctoral education is designed to be intellectually transformative, it is too often experienced as isolating and solitary. Prolonged isolation affects students' psychological well-being, academic engagement and program persistence (Janta et al. 2014). Students often internalise feelings of inadequacy and imposter syndrome, which impede progress and reduce the likelihood of doctoral completion or post-graduation academic retention. This isolation stems largely from inadequate mentorship structures. Supervision quality varies widely, with students feeling ill-prepared to transition from clinical practice to academic life (McNelis et al. 2019). For students from underrepresented groups, isolation is magnified by cultural and social barriers that hinder their sense of belonging (Watson et al. 2025). The structure of most doctoral programs compounds these challenges; students spend long periods working independently with minimal interaction or communal support. In such environments, isolation is not a personal failing but an institutional one, a symptom of systems that have not yet evolved to support the scholars they seek to cultivate. Quality mentorship strongly influences research competence, professional identity and student satisfaction (Watson et al. 2025). However, mentorship is currently undervalued in institutional structures. The skills and labour associated with doctoral mentorship are poorly recognised, creating a paradox where institutions desperately need mentorship yet provide little incentive or recognition for those who mentor. This must change. Mentorship needs to be recognised as a specialised scholarly activity requiring institutional investment, embedded within performance evaluation systems to ensure recognition for faculty who excel in developing doctoral talent. A critical vulnerability in the doctoral pipeline occurs at the transition from doctoral graduate to academic faculty. Many graduates, particularly from PhD programs, complete their studies without sufficient preparation for the multifaceted responsibilities of academic life. PhD curricula typically prioritise research training, leaving graduates underprepared for teaching and service, two equally vital pillars of the academic role (McNelis et al. 2019). This mismatch between training and practice creates frustration and disillusionment among new faculty. Doctoral education needs to reconceptualise itself as holistic preparation for the full spectrum of academic responsibilities for students pursuing academic careers. Programs could integrate coursework in higher education pedagogy, curriculum design and assessment, ensuring graduates understand principles of teaching and learning alongside their research competencies. Embedding a graduate certificate in tertiary teaching within doctoral programs could enhance readiness for faculty roles. Academic service, including committee participation, mentoring activities, professional organisation leadership and departmental governance, represents a critical yet often undervalued component of scholarly work. Most doctoral programs concentrate narrowly on individual research productivity while neglecting preparation for the collective responsibilities that sustain academic institutions (McNelis et al. 2019; Watson et al. 2025). Embedding academic service within doctoral training develops competencies in collaboration, leadership and institutional citizenship, skills essential for academic success but seldom formally taught. It also provides students with authentic opportunities to contribute to program functioning and fosters realistic expectations about academic life beyond research. Addressing mentorship and preparedness gaps requires comprehensive institutional reform. First, mentorship structures must be reimagined beyond the traditional dyadic supervisor–student model. Structured programs that include peer, group and cross-institutional mentoring can diversify support and reduce dependence on a single mentor. Training programs for academic mentors should incorporate reflective, evidence-informed and culturally responsive practices that support diverse learners. Clear expectations regarding mentor availability, communication and feedback timelines help ensure consistency and equity. Culturally responsive mentoring is essential to support diversity in doctoral education. Institutions should train mentors to understand and address the unique needs of students from varied cultural and professional backgrounds. Building networks that connect students with diverse role models can enhance belonging and equity outcomes (Watson et al. 2025). Such inclusivity not only improves individual experiences but expands the diversity of thought that enriches nursing scholarship. Second, doctoral education must prioritise collaboration through shared workspaces, peer learning circles and virtual or hybrid supervision models. The success of online mentoring demonstrates that meaningful connection depends not on physical proximity but on deliberate structure and regular engagement (Watson et al. 2025). Establishing dedicated doctoral hubs or writing communities, either on campus or online, can foster accountability, shared momentum and professional identity development. Integrating well-being initiatives, such as facilitated reflection sessions, peer coaching or wellness programs, can further normalise self-care as an academic competency. Third, system-level supports require collaboration between universities and health systems to create clear and attractive career pathways for doctorally prepared nurses. Structured postdoctoral fellowships, protected research time and opportunities for joint academic–clinical appointments enable nurses to contribute to both education and clinical innovation (van Dongen et al. 2024). Structured postdoctoral mentoring, faculty onboarding programs and departmental peer networks facilitate integration into academic life. Pairing new academics with experienced mentors helps them navigate institutional culture, develop sustainable research agendas and build confidence as educators. Finally, research infrastructure must be strengthened. Doctoral graduates require access to research start-up funds, collaborative networks and professional development opportunities to maintain momentum after graduation. Without these supports, even highly capable graduates risk disengagement, leading to attrition from the academic community and erosion of the pipeline. The nursing profession stands at a pivotal moment. While doctoral graduates pursue diverse career trajectories across clinical practice, industry, policy and academia, the sustainability of the academic workforce depends on how effectively we cultivate and support those who will become the next generation of nurse scholars. Strengthening the doctoral education pipeline will require coordinated and strategic reform that addresses student isolation and, for those pursuing academic careers, ensures adequate preparation for faculty roles through institutional investment in mentorship and career development. Universities will need to reimagine doctoral education as a developmental continuum that integrates research excellence with pedagogical competence, mentorship and academic service for students interested in faculty pathways. Through the deliberate adoption of these structural and curricular reforms, the doctoral journey can evolve from an individualised pursuit into a supportive, community-based process that cultivates confident and capable nurse leaders across all career sectors. The stakes are high. Without a robust and well-supported pipeline of doctoral prepared nurses entering academia, the discipline cannot maintain the faculty capacity needed to lead innovation, influence policy and advance the transformation of healthcare systems. Small incremental changes will no longer suffice; comprehensive institutional commitment to strengthening doctoral education and supporting academic career pathways is now imperative. The authors have nothing to report. The authors declare no conflicts of interest. The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to privacy or ethical restrictions.