Coordination in the Science System: Theoretical Framework and a Case Study of an Intermediary Organization

Abstract

Many science systems are witnessing the rise of intermediary organizations with a coordinating mission, but to date a systematic understanding of their function and effects is lacking. The aim of this paper is to contribute to the understanding of the coordinating efforts of intermediary organizations. Starting from the definition of coordination as the establishment or strengthening of a relationship among the activities in a system, with the aim to enhance their common effectiveness, I develop a heuristic framework that facilitates the systematic analysis of coordination in science. I illustrate and substantiate my framework with the empirical case study of a Dutch coordination task force in the area of chemical technologies. Thanks to the framework I could disentangle a number of functions that this task force fulfils concerning research programming, funding allocation and supporting interactions and collaborations. This approach enabled me to systematically analyse a very heterogeneous set of processes that each deserve to be called coordination. The analysis yields a clear overview of eight coordination processes that are each described in terms of activities, intervention, relationships, mechanisms and performance. I conclude my paper with suggestions for further research on coordination in the science system.

‘Aligning activities’: coordination, boundary activities, and agenda setting in interdisciplinary research

“…But what exactly does the term "coordination" refer to? Here the framework developed by Hessels may prove useful (Hessels 2013). Hessels defines coordination as the establishment or strengthening of a relationship among the activities in a system, with the aim to enhance their common effectiveness (p. 322).…”

“…It is commonly accepted that one of the advantages of coordinating a transversal research programme is to be able to provide common centralised management of resources. This is supposed to make management more efficient, in particular because it increases each party's bargaining power (Hessels 2013). Or alternatively, in imposing a centralised allocation of resources, it allows research programmes to be harmonised.…”

New Science Institutions for Global Sustainability

“…It is a common assumption that global research coordination can and should improve the performance of global change and sustainability research (Berkhout, 2014;Future Earth, 2013;Holm et al, 2013;Rice, 2013;Withycombe Keeler et al, 2015). However, global coordination also comes at a cost, as it requires substantial investments of both financial as well as intellectual and human resources (Cummings & Kiesler, 2007;Hessels, 2013). Given the major promises as well as costs involved, it is surprising that the influence of global research programmes, platforms and networks has received little critical scrutiny.…”

“…The promise of global science to address 'grand challenges' such as climate change, resource depletion, food security or health provides an important justification for the allocation of resources to global collaborative research programmes, including Future Earth (Keenan et al, 2012). Such research programmes have been characterised as coordination mechanisms that mediate between global trends and demands of science in society and the everyday practices of scientific knowledge production (D. Braun, 2003;Hessels, 2013;Wardenaar, Jong, & Hessels, 2014). Elizabeth Shove's (2003) analysis of research programmes in action reveals the complex relationship between research programmes and the research community operating under its umbrella.…”

“…Studies of existing research programmes and formal research networks have pointed out that, to support the engagement of extra-scientific actors in scientific knowledge production, it is important to "purposefully put into place structures and process" (Klenk & Hickey, 2012, p. 370). Engagement of extrascientific actors in the early stages of programme design is considered particularly promising (Garrett-Jones, Turpin, Burns, & Diment, 2005;Hessels, 2013;Klenk & Hickey, 2013), since these early stages provide the opportunity to engage multiple actors in shaping the research programme and structure, and tend to give an indication of the way in which these actors participate in the coordination of research during later stages of the programme's development (Hessels, Wardenaar, Boon, & Ploeg, 2014). Moreover, funding agencies are identified as important actors in stimulating and supporting research programmes based on new modes of knowledge production (Lyall et al, 2013).…”