Enhancing the Effectiveness of Team Science (2015) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
8 Institutional and Organizational Support for Team Science
8 Institutional and Organizational Support for Team Science
Pages 177-196
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 177... ...
(2008b) identified several organizational factors as important for motivating members of science teams -- including strong incentives to support collaborative teamwork; non-hierarchical structures to facilitate team autonomy; and a climate of sharing information, credit, and leadership.
|
From page 178... ...
called for applying organizational theory to these new arrangements, to enhance understanding of them, guide science policy, and refine theory. THE ORGANIZATIONAL PERSPECTIVE Conducting a full review of the large literature on organizations in terms of its relevance to team science was not possible within the time frame of the study.
|
From page 179... ...
. For example, the highly participatory structures of particle physics resulted from the very large numbers of scientists who could collect data only by sharing access to a few particle accelerators, and a broad scope of collaborative activities.
|
From page 180... ...
The studies reviewed have explored how to manage task uncertainty in rapidly changing environments, which is characteristic of scientific work, particularly in the early stages of developing a research project. Similarly, the various authors highlighted the need to manage interdependence, which is characteristic of science teams, especially interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary teams (Fiore, 2008)
|
From page 181... ...
University Efforts to Promote Interdisciplinary Team Science Many experts view current university policies and discipline-based organizational structures as an impediment to interdisciplinary team science. For example, Klein et al.
|
From page 182... ...
. Many other examples of efforts to promote interdisciplinary team science can be found at campuses across the United States.
|
From page 183... ...
Thus, an important way universities can support team science is by recognizing and rewarding individuals for their team-based accomplishments when granting tenure. Decisions about promotion and tenure are typically made by faculty committees within disciplinary departments, with review and approval by the dean of the relevant school and higher-level administrators.
|
From page 184... ...
ranked promotion and tenure criteria the highest of the five impediments to interdisciplinary research. Based on a literature review on promotion and tenure policies and practices affecting interdisciplinary team science (Klein et al., 2013)
|
From page 185... ...
The survey asked 60 institutions receiving Clinical and Translational Science Awards from NIH about their tenure and promotion policies. The authors noted that this is a biased sample, because the center awards are specifically designed to support translational team science and grantee institutions are therefore more likely than other institutions to recognize team science in their policies.
|
From page 186... ...
To address this problem, the committee recommends at the end of this chapter that universities and disciplinary associations develop broad principles and more specific criteria for tenure committees' use when allocating individual credit for team-based work, echoing the recommendation of a recent National Research Council (NRC) report on transdisciplinary research, or "convergence" (2014)
|
From page 187... ...
Individual and Team Rewards Awarding tenure is only one component within the larger academic and scientific system of rewards and incentives. The questions surrounding how to recognize individual contributions to team-based research in tenure decisions raise related questions about the possibility of recognizing and rewarding teams.
|
From page 188... ...
. Centers and institutes often house interdisciplinary or transdisciplinary research and university-industry research partnerships.
|
From page 189... ...
found that the program has demonstrated progress in three crosscutting domains that are important to advancing clinical and translational science: training and education, community engagement, and child health research. The IOM committee recommended that the program continue to provide training, mentoring, and education as essential core elements, emphasizing innovative models that include a focus on team science.
|
From page 190... ...
More generally, the authors found that prior acquaintance and trust were key factors for success in university-industry research partnerships, and, where these elements were absent, creating formal structures and authorities helped to manage conflict 3 After submitting this paper to NRC, the authors subsequently published a paper addressing many of the same issues, titled Research Collaboration and Team Science, A State-of-the-Art Review and Agenda; see http://www.springer.com/series/11653 [May 2015]
|
From page 191... ...
Third, although some research suggests that intellectual property disputes are a real source of failures in university-industry research partnerships, there is little empirical research that directly addresses this issue. The limited research available suggests that careful contract monitoring can help to address intellectual property disputes, but such monitoring is sometimes lacking (e.g., Garett-Jones, Turpin, and Diment, 2010)
|
From page 192... ...
Inter-Firm Research Partnerships Research collaborations involving multiple companies may take various forms, including research parks, research and development alliances with formal contracts, and joint ventures. In their literature review, Bozeman and Boardman (2013)
|
From page 193... ...
In addition, the authors identified gaps in the literature on inter-firm research partnerships similar to those in the literature on university-industry research partnerships. Research Networks Formal and informal research networks play an important role in catalyzing and supporting team science.
|
From page 194... ...
Anecdotally, it would appear that physical spaces that encourage interaction among scientists, from regular interchanges to chance encounters, help stimulate collaborative thinking and work. The Santa Fe Institute, for example, provides open spaces with plenty of comfortable chairs, sofas, and white boards; offices with glass windows facing open spaces; offices shared with scholars from different disciplines; abundant glass walls with available markers to encourage scientists to write algorithms they are discussing on the glass and not wait to return to their offices; and lunches and teas shared by everyone in common spaces.
|
From page 195... ...
Some universities have recently sought to promote interdisciplinary team science by, for example, merging disciplinary departments to create interdisciplinary research centers or schools, providing seed grants, and forging partnerships with industry. However, little is known about the impact of these efforts, while the lack of recognition and rewards for team science can deter faculty members from pursuing it.
|
From page 196... ...
Such views highlight the need for more research on the outcomes and impacts of current university efforts to promote team science. Further research is needed to more clearly understand how alternative organizational structures, management approaches, and funding strategies influence the processes and outcomes of research centers and other large groups of scientists.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.