If communication is an integral aspect of science, then many in the pathology community will be called upon to share their knowledge at some point in their career. And, with many larger institutions and companies now hosting their own mini conferences, sharing the knowledge might extend to event management.
Bethany Williams – in her role as Lead for Knowledge and Skills at the UK’s National Pathology Imaging Co-operative (NPIC) – knows a thing or two about putting on scientific events. Reflecting on the first NPIC Summit, held in June 2025, Williams shares her top tips and key learnings on communicating to a crowd.
What were the aims of the NPIC Summit?
The NPIC initiative was originally launched as part of the Research and Innovation Awards process. Now that phase has ended, we're shifting our focus toward the future – thinking about the next steps and how we can build on the fantastic foundation we've laid. We've established a strong legacy in both deployment and research, and now it’s about ensuring we continue to see returns on that initial investment – public funding matched by industry support.
A big part of that is making sure we don’t lose momentum or overlook what we’ve already accomplished. So, the concept for the summit was to bring together a relatively small group – around 70 key stakeholders – to report and reflect on NPIC’s progress over the past five years. It's been a period marked by a tremendous surge in the adoption of digital and computational pathology techniques.
We wanted to showcase NPIC’s key achievements – highlighting milestones across our five core themes and the various work packages. But just as importantly, we aimed to look ahead. We invited collaborators and partners – past, present, and even potential future ones – to join us in thinking about where we go next. How can we best position ourselves to capitalize on the hard work that’s already gone into creating this world-class infrastructure ?
That includes not just the clinical service elements of a national digital pathology system, but also the research infrastructure and educational resources we’ve developed – like the Digital Pathology Education and Training Center and the AI Forge scanning facility. So the day served as both a moment of reflection and a forward-looking discussion, bringing together all the different elements of this collaborative effort – health service, academia, and industry alike.
I was especially pleased with the response from industry. It was heartening to see strong representation – not just from the major vendors, but also from many of the smaller companies we've worked closely with. The connections and conversations that emerged during the event were incredibly rewarding.
What was the most challenging aspect of organizing the summit?
One of the biggest challenges, I think, was finalizing the agenda – especially trying to establish a logical flow to the day. We had a wide range of topics to cover, each appealing to slightly different segments of the audience. The attendees included pathologists, biomedical scientists, laboratory managers, industry representatives, people from National Health Service (NHS) England, and various regulatory bodies. Some of the sessions were very much aligned with specific professional interests, but we also wanted to ensure that everyone could appreciate the broader picture – even those areas that fell outside their usual domains.
Striking the right balance was key. It was important for the attendees to understand the context and pressures different stakeholders face. For example, there are immense challenges in a busy clinical NHS lab, intense demands on already overstretched NHS IT and informatics teams, and strict turnaround times for pathologists dealing with mounting caseloads. Digital pathology is fundamentally a multi-professional endeavor, and it’s pushing all of us slightly out of our comfort zones. We’re each doing something new – and to do that well, we need to bring one another along for the journey.
Open dialog was essential. We wanted people to feel comfortable acknowledging where their own challenges lie. Otherwise, it’s easy to get frustrated – say, when IT isn’t delivering what you expect, or when pathologists don’t respond in the way you’d anticipated. To encourage that dialog, we intentionally designed the agenda to include enough technical depth in the topic-specific sessions, while also ensuring that each talk offered broader takeaways that were relevant and engaging for everyone in the room.
What went better than expected on the day?
One of the most successful aspects of the day, surprisingly, was the unstructured time we built in for networking between sessions. Quite a few attendees stayed on after the formal program had ended, which is always a positive sign. It confirmed for me how valuable those informal moments are – giving people the chance to connect not just with those at their own tables, but also with others across the room. It’s definitely something we’ll prioritize in future events: scheduling plenty of time for those meaningful interactions.
The panel discussions also exceeded expectations. They're always a bit of an unknown – you don’t want to over-prepare participants, as the spontaneity is part of what makes them engaging. But on the day, they went very smoothly. We had excellent interaction, especially with some of the industry representatives.
I was particularly struck by the contributions from the pathologists involved in NPIC’s pediatric network. That part of the discussion was genuinely fascinating. The pediatric arm is one of the newer components of the NPIC program, and it was encouraging to hear how that network is already starting to strengthen collaboration across pediatric pathology services in England.
Other things that went unexpectedly well included our timekeeping – we managed to stay on schedule remarkably well. My colleague Jasmin Kaur Manik did a fantastic job in co-ordinating everything in the run up to the event, and on the day itself. And, much to my surprise, transport issues didn’t disrupt things at all! National Rail really came through; there were very few late arrivals. In fact, most people showed up early.
Did anything go wrong?
We had to make some last minute alterations to accommodate changes in speaker availability. Experience has taught me to always have a backup option for every single agenda item. And a backup to the backup! You never know when a key person is going to be unwell, pulled into another commitment, stuck in stationary traffic, or victim to a spectacular public transport fail.
I would definitely recommend having at least one backup of half an hour's material that you could use to plug an unexpected gap. I personally had two backup presentations that I could have given at the summit if necessary.
Would you do anything differently next time?
There is a great deal of administration involved in putting on this type of event – particularly around chasing confirmation of attendance, because our stakeholders are all busy with other priorities. We kept all the organization in house for this first summit, but we might consider the option of using an external events provider for future meetings.
We did collect feedback on the day, which indicated that the event was very well received, and also gave us some great suggestions for topics for future summits. One idea we will explore next time is to invite our researchers to present some of their fantastic projects. Delegates also wanted to hear about some of the other deployment networks that we’re setting up.
Another consideration for next time is to have a wider range of sessions. If we have more people speaking for less time, we might be able to showcase more of our projects. I quite like the idea of inviting our researchers to present a fast and furious “elevator pitch”-style talk about their work.
And, while we’ll certainly retain the panel discussions in future events, we might build in greater interactivity, such as live polling, to increase audience engagement.
What makes a good presenter, in your opinion?
I think being a good presenter goes beyond just knowing your material – although that’s certainly a must. Ideally, you're not only comfortable with the content you're delivering but also enthusiastic about it. Just as important, though, is your ability to make the entire room feel at ease with you standing up there, guiding them through the topic. That’s something that comes more naturally to some than others.
Authenticity is key. I always think it’s best to be as genuine as possible in your approach. People have different comfort levels when it comes to presenting – some prefer speaking off the cuff, while others like to stick to a prepared script. But either way, it’s great when you can create moments of spontaneity – when the conversation takes an unexpected turn or opens up a bit beyond your original plan.
Adaptability is also a really valuable skill. You need to be able to read the room and respond to how the audience is engaging with you. Sometimes you find that your talk starts to go in a slightly different direction than what you initially intended – and that’s not a bad thing. It can make the session feel more alive and relevant.
That’s why having a well-prepared slide deck can be such a helpful anchor. It allows you to explore the conversation naturally while still keeping the presentation grounded and coherent.
What were your key takeaways from the meeting content and discussions?
One of the most encouraging moments came during the industry panel. There was a clear consensus among the panelists that the idea we’ve been championing – a single national digital pathology system – truly is the way forward. That was really affirming to hear. It reinforces our belief that a unified approach can help avoid unnecessary duplication of effort, cost, and frustration, which often arise when individual institutions or regions try to set up their own separate archives and systems.
It wasn’t just the industry representatives who voiced this view. Our esteemed guest speaker, Paul van Diest from University Medical Center Utrecht, also shared his enthusiasm for the model we’ve developed. He even said that this blueprint is one he would like to see adopted in the Netherlands. That was incredibly validating. It emphasized that, given the budgetary and infrastructure constraints we face – particularly within the NHS – a coordinated, national strategy is the most efficient and effective route to delivering the best outcomes for patients.
Another particularly heartening takeaway was the genuine spirit of collaboration we saw from the industry panelists. Rather than focusing solely on promoting their own products or platforms, they demonstrated a shared commitment to advancing the field of digital pathology and AI more broadly. There was a strong sense that they want to see the whole area of healthcare move forward – even if that means, in the short term, a hospital chooses a competitor’s solution. That kind of sector-wide optimism and maturity is incredibly important if we want to sustain progress.
Both myself and Graham Prestwich, who chairs our Patient and Public Advisory Group (PPAG), were also pleased to take the opportunity to emphasize NPIC’s patient-centered ethos. The advisory group has been instrumental in shaping the program. Their input helps hold us accountable and ensures we remain transparent – whether we’re delivering on our goals as planned or needing to explain delays.
In fact, many of our team members have said that working with the advisory group has been one of the most rewarding parts of the entire project. It can be a bit daunting at times – you never quite know what questions you’ll be asked – but the meetings are always engaging and insightful. We’ve hosted several face-to-face sessions where PPAG members sit down one-on-one with members of the senior management team. Each team member gets five minutes in the “hot seat,” fielding questions, listening to concerns, and hearing first-hand about the hopes and aspirations our patient representatives have for the program.
It’s been an incredibly valuable and grounding experience for all of us, and an important part of our message at the NPIC Summit.
Newsletters
Receive the latest pathologist news, personalities, education, and career development – weekly to your inbox.
