Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The Problem

The field of human resource development (HRD) is a multidisciplinary field of research and practice requiring collaboration. Unfortunately, the literature on how to conduct collaborative research is incomplete within HRD and other disciplines. Any breakdown in the communication, exchange of ideas, agreed-upon methodologies, or shared credit for dissemination has the potential of preventing research from moving forward. Promotion and tenure policies also hamper collaborative efforts in that these policies often reward individual initiative as opposed to collaborative outcomes. These behavioral patterns provide constraints to the improvement and betterment of efforts to changing of the guard.

The Solution

This article highlights new and improved methods for working in collaborative environments. During an academic’s transition and professional development, these methods will help emerging scholars, new to collaborative research, when facing the team science revolution.

The Stakeholders

Scholars and scholar-practitioners engaged in collaborative research. Emerging scholars who are beginning their journey into collaborative research. Graduate students preparing for a career in academia.

Keywords

collaboration multidisciplinary team science

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Albert

Wager

(2003). How to handle authorship disputes: A guide for new researchers: The COPE report. https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2018.1.1

Bennett

M. L.

Gadlin

(2012). Collaboration and team science: From theory to practice. Journal of Investigative Medicine, 60(5), 768–775. https://doi.org/10.2310/JIM.0b013e318250871d

Bozeman

Youtie

(2017). The strength in numbers: The new science of team science. Princeton University Press.

Cordery

J. L.

Tian

A. W.

(2017). Team design. In Salas

Rico

Passmore

(Eds.), The Wiley Blackwell handbook of the psychology of team working and collaborative processes (pp. 103–128). John Wiley.

DeHart

(2017). Team science: A qualitative study of benefits, challenges, and lessons learned. The Social Science Journal, 54, 458–467. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soscij.2017.07.009

Dihn

J. V.

Salas

(2017). Factors that influence teamwork. In Salas

Rico

Passmore

(Eds.), The Wiley Blackwell handbook of the psychology of team working and collaborative processes (pp. 15–41). John Wiley.

Falk-Krzesinski

H. J.

Borner

Contractor

N. S.

Fiore

S. M.

Hall

K. L.

Keyton

. . . Uzzi

(2010). Advancing the science of team science. Clinical and Translational Science, 3, 263–266. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-8062.2010.00223.x

Fiore

S. M.

(2008). Interdisciplinarity as teamwork: How the science of teams can inform team science. Small Group Research, 39(3), 251–277. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496408317797

Fload Expert. (2010). Research Orientation Scale (ROS). https://www.teamsciencetoolkit.cancer.gov/public/TSResourceMeasure.aspx?tid=2&rid=35

10.

Gleed

Marchant

(2016, May). Interdisciplinarity: Survey report for the Global Research Council 2016 annual meeting. https://www.globalresearchcouncil.org/fileadmin/documents/GRC_Publications/Interdisciplinarity_Report_for_GRC_DJS_Research.pdf

11.

Huang

D.-W.

(2015). Temporal evolution of multi-author papers in basic sciences from 1960 to 2010. Scientrometrics, 105, 2137–2147. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1760-x

12.

Katz

S. J.

Martin

B. R.

(1997). What is research collaboration? Research Policy, 26, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(96)00917-1

13.

Ledford

(2015). How to solve the world’s biggest problems: Interdisciplinarity has become all the rage as scientists tackle climate change and other intractable issues. But there is still strong resistance to crossing borders. Nature, 525(7569), 308–311. https://doi.org/10.1038/525308a

14.

Mirsa

Stokols

Cheng

(2015). The transdisciplinary orientation scale: Factor structure and relation to the integrative quality and scope of scientific publications. Journal of Translational Medicine & Epidemiology, 3(2), 1042.

15.

Mohammed

Dumville

B. C.

(2001). Team mental models in a team knowledge framework: Expanding theory and measurement across disciplinary boundaries. Journal of Organiztional Behavior, 22, 89–106. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.86

16.

Rahman

M. T.

Regenstein

J. M.

Kassim

N. L. A.

Haque

(2017). The need to quantify authors’ relative intellectual contributions in a multi-author paper. Journal of Informatics, 11, 275–281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.01.002

17.

Rylance

(2015). Global funders to focus on interdisciplinarity [Commentary]. Nature, 525(7569), 313–315. https://doi.org/10.1038/525313a

18.

Stokols

(2018). Social ecology in the digital age: Solving complex problems in a globalized world. Elsevier.

19.

Turner

J. R.

Baker

Morris

(2018). Complex adaptive systems: Adapting and managing teams and team conflict. In Boas

A. V.

(Ed.), Organizational conflict (pp. 65–94). INTECH Open Science. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72344

20.

Ynalvez

M. A.

Shrum

W. M.

(2011). Professional networks, scientific collaboration, and publication productivity in resource-constrained research institutions in a developing country. Research Policy, 40, 204–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2010.10.004

21.

Shao

Duan

(2013). World scientific collaboration in coronary heart disease research. International Journal of Cardiology, 167, 631–639. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcard.2012.09.134

22.

Zucker

(2012). Developing your career in an age of team science. Journal of Investigative Medicine, 60, 779–784. https://doi.org/10.231/JIM.0b013e3182508317