Communication and sustainability science teams as complex systems

McGreavy, Bridie; Lindenfeld, Laura; Bieluch, Karen Hutchins; Silka, Linda; Leahy, Jessica; Zoellick, Bill

doi:10.5751/es-06644-200102

Cited by 41 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Other recent studies have also investigated and identified processes that lead to success in sustainability science collaborations (Fraser and Schalley, 2009), but have taken a systems approach. Research in this tradition has found that success is related to the patterns of communication behavior and the quality of the relationships formed as a product of the teams (Fraser and Schalley, 2009;Thompson, 2009;McGreavy et al, 2015). In a formative, ethnographic study of a large interdisciplinary team, Thompson (2009) reports that interactions described as "collective communication competencies" (CCC) on the team level influence the collaborative endeavor and its movement toward objectives.…”

Section: Systems View Of Collaborative Teamsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Conversely, acts of blatant boredom, intentional challenging of expertise, and sarcasm can compromise CCC (Thompson, 2009). McGreavy et al (2015) take this research a step further to identify important communication dimensions of sustainability science teams, when viewed as complex systems. These researchers explore how communication within sustainability science teams influences the results related to team learning and progress toward group goals.…”

Section: Systems View Of Collaborative Teamsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Scholars in the "science of team science" field, for example, have developed conceptual frameworks, establishing classifications of contextual influences that serve as indicators of the success of collaborative endeavors as well as practical parameters to measure team process and integration (Stokols et al, 2003;Wagner et al, 2011;Armstrong and Jackson-Smith, 2013). Likewise, literature from the field of communication has focused on processes, structures, and outcomes associated with interdisciplinary teams (Thompson, 2007(Thompson, , 2009Fraser and Schalley, 2009;McGreavy et al, 2013McGreavy et al, , 2015. Taking a systems approach, these researchers assess how patterns of interaction can influence the success of these teams, identifying patterns of communication behavior and the quality of interpersonal relationships that affect how group goals are accomplished (Thompson, 2009;McGreavy et al, 2015).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Likewise, literature from the field of communication has focused on processes, structures, and outcomes associated with interdisciplinary teams (Thompson, 2007(Thompson, , 2009Fraser and Schalley, 2009;McGreavy et al, 2013McGreavy et al, , 2015. Taking a systems approach, these researchers assess how patterns of interaction can influence the success of these teams, identifying patterns of communication behavior and the quality of interpersonal relationships that affect how group goals are accomplished (Thompson, 2009;McGreavy et al, 2015). At the same time, however, several scholars studying these teams contend that current definitions of research success are narrowly defined to outputs that are easy to measure (i.e., publications, citation rates) (Sonnenwald, 2007;Stokols et al, 2008a,b;Cheruvelil et al, 2014;Goring et al, 2014;Bark et al, 2016), thus leaving process orientated measures-often assessing interpersonal relationships-out of the conversation (Wagner et al, 2011).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Cocitation or Capacity-Building? Defining Success within an Interdisciplinary, Sustainability Science Team

Roche

Rickard

2017

Front. Commun.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To address gaps in knowledge and to tackle complex social-ecological problems, scientific research is moving toward studies that integrate multiple disciplines and ways of knowing to explore all parts of a system. Yet, how these efforts are being measured and how they are deemed successful is an up-and-coming and pertinent conversation within interdisciplinary research spheres. Using a grounded theory approach, this study addresses how members of a sustainability science-focused team at a Northeastern U.S. university funded by a large, National Science Foundation (NSF) grant contend with deeply normative dimensions of interdisciplinary research team success. Based on semi-structured interviews (N = 24) with researchers (e.g., faculty and graduate students) involved in this expansive, interdisciplinary team, this study uses participants' narrative accounts to progress our understanding of success on sustainability science teams and addresses the tensions arising between differing visions of success present within the current literature, and perpetuated by U.S. funding agencies like NSF. Study findings reveal that team members are forming definitions of interdisciplinary success that both align with, and depart from, those appearing in the literature. More specifically, some respondents' notions of team success appear to mirror currently recognized outcomes in traditional academic settings (i.e., purpose driven outcomes-citations, receipt of grant funding, etc.). At the same time, just as many other respondents describe success as involving elements of collaborative research not traditionally acknowledged as a forms of "success" in their own right (i.e., capacity building processes and outcomesrelationship formation, deep understandings of distinct epistemologies, etc.). Study results contribute to more open and informed discussions about how we gauge success within sustainability science collaborations, forming a foundation for appreciation and exploration of the disciplinary and normative dimensions of this work.

show abstract

Section: Systems View Of Collaborative Teamsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Systems View Of Collaborative Teamsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Cocitation or Capacity-Building? Defining Success within an Interdisciplinary, Sustainability Science Team

Roche

Rickard

2017

Front. Commun.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This exchange results in social learning [25]. That is, individuals, whether they are scientists or stakeholders, do not innovate in isolation but as a result of interaction and communication with one another [26,27]. In the context of adapting to climate uncertainty both scientists and local water managers have high stakes in participatory research outcomes.…”

Section: Collaborative Modeling As a Participatory Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

Collaborative Modeling to Assess Drought Resiliency of Snow‐Fed River Dependent Communities in the Western United States: A Case Study in the Truckee‐Carson River System

Singletary

Sterle

2017

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Assessing the drought resilience of snow-fed river dependent communities in the arid Western United States has taken on critical importance in response to changing climatic conditions. The process of assessing drought resiliency involves understanding the extent to which snow-fed dependent communities can absorb the effects of uncertain and variable water supplies while acknowledging and encouraging their capacity for adaptation. Participatory research approaches are particularly well suited to assess resiliency in this context because they rely upon local water managers' knowledge and perspectives. The research presented here provides measured insight into local water managers' perceptions of drought resiliency in the Truckee-Carson River System in northwestern Nevada. These findings are reported in the context of the collaborative modeling research design developed for this case study. The objectives of this study are: (1) to define resiliency and present a rationale for a participatory approach to assess drought resiliency in snow-fed arid river basins in the Western United States; (2) to outline collaborative modeling as a participatory research design developed for the Truckee-Carson River System case study area; (3) to describe the development and implementation of a resiliency assessment undertaken to implement this research design; (4) to highlight selected results of the assessment, summarizing interviews with 66 water managers in the case study area; (5) to discuss the use of assessment findings to inform collaborative modeling toward adaptation strategies; and (6) to review lessons learned to date from the collaborative modeling case study and note opportunities for further exploration. According to water managers surveyed, climate change is very important and is mobilizing adaptation strategies that include improvements in communication and coordination with other water managers, monitoring and data collection, and planning. The majority of water managers indicate that future adaptation requires modifying institutionalized water management regimes to allow for temporary water leasing programs, water right stacking on the most productive agricultural lands while fallowing marginal lands, incentivizing water conservation, reducing or eliminating residential landscaping, and recruiting less water intensive industry to the region.

show abstract

Why rhetoric matters for ecology

Druschke

McGreavy

2016

Frontiers in Ecol & Environ

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Increasingly, scientists and funding agencies such as the US National Science Foundation are recognizing the need for better science communication and more effective broader impacts activities. Compelled to make research more relevant to public stakeholders and policy makers, researchers look for ways to gain the necessary skillset to move their science from the field and laboratory into public forums. We suggest that the ancient discipline of rhetoric provides a useful – and underutilized – path forward. Building from the fundamental connections between ecology and rhetoric and drawing from practical examples at the intersection of these two fields, we demonstrate how rhetoric can inform training in science communication for better academic writing and broader impacts, and can promote interdisciplinary and cross‐institutional collaborations that support sustainability science. Integrating rhetoric and ecology helps to address complex and pressing sustainability problems through improved understanding, cooperation, and science and policy actions.

show abstract

Communication and sustainability science teams as complex systems

Cited by 41 publications

References 13 publications

Cocitation or Capacity-Building? Defining Success within an Interdisciplinary, Sustainability Science Team

Cocitation or Capacity-Building? Defining Success within an Interdisciplinary, Sustainability Science Team

Collaborative Modeling to Assess Drought Resiliency of Snow‐Fed River Dependent Communities in the Western United States: A Case Study in the Truckee‐Carson River System

Why rhetoric matters for ecology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About