Mapping disciplinary differences and equity of academic control to create a space for collaboration

Abstract

Academics are collaborating more as their research questions are becoming more complex, often reaching beyond the capacity of any one person. However, in many parts of the campus, teamwork is not a traditional work pattern, and team members may not understand the best ways to work together to the benefit of the project. Challenges are particularly possible when there are differences among the disciplines represented on a team and when there are variations in academic control over decision making and research direction setting. Disparities in these two dimensions create potential for miscommunication, conflict, and other negative consequences, which may mean that a collaboration is not successful. This paper explores these dimensions and suggests a space for collaboration; it also describes some benefits and challenges associated within various positions within the framework. Academic teams can use this tool to determine the place they would like to occupy within the collaboration space and structure themselves accordingly before undertaking research.

Early career researchers and their quest to find space amongst the Professoriate to facilitate research collaboration: A qualitative case study

“…The significance of understanding how to navigate ECR and Professoriate relationships in research collaboration is further discussed by Gibbert, Leibold and Probst (2002), who discovered that knowledge-sharing practices led to improved understanding of future research opportunities, streamlined working processes, and increased institutional value through a broader reach. This notion aligns with Siemens, Liu and Smith's (2014) findings, highlighting that successful collaboration hinges on the team's ability to find common ground in terms of methodologies, research approaches, language, and more. However, achieving this requires adaptability and a shared commitment from all involved.…”

“…ECRs during the research, was the lack of autonomy and hierarchical influences felt between ECRs and senior researchers. This discrepancy can be attributed to the fact that ECRs tend to experience the negative aspects of this dynamic, while more seasoned staff may have reached a career stage where these concerns are less relevant on an individual basis (Millar, 2013;Siemens, Liu and Smith, 2014). Hofstede (1991) characterises this as:…”

The power of collaboration as practice-based learning for student, tutor, and researcher.

“…The significance of understanding how to navigate ECR and Professoriate relationships in research collaboration is further discussed by Gibbert, Leibold and Probst (2002), who discovered that knowledge-sharing practices led to improved understanding of future research opportunities, streamlined working processes, and increased institutional value through a broader reach. This notion aligns with Siemens, Liu and Smith's (2014) findings, highlighting that successful collaboration hinges on the team's ability to find common ground in terms of methodologies, research approaches, language, and more. However, achieving this requires adaptability and a shared commitment from all involved.…”

“…ECRs during the research, was the lack of autonomy and hierarchical influences felt between ECRs and senior researchers. This discrepancy can be attributed to the fact that ECRs tend to experience the negative aspects of this dynamic, while more seasoned staff may have reached a career stage where these concerns are less relevant on an individual basis (Millar, 2013;Siemens, Liu and Smith, 2014). Hofstede (1991) characterises this as:…”

Nonviolence Pedagogy As Participatory Action: Shifting Paradigms On Classroom Violence And Power Relations

“…The significance of understanding how to navigate ECR and Professoriate relationships in research collaboration is further discussed by Gibbert, Leibold and Probst (2002), who discovered that knowledge-sharing practices led to improved understanding of future research opportunities, streamlined working processes, and increased institutional value through a broader reach. This notion aligns with Siemens, Liu and Smith's (2014) findings, highlighting that successful collaboration hinges on the team's ability to find common ground in terms of methodologies, research approaches, language, and more. However, achieving this requires adaptability and a shared commitment from all involved.…”