Search results

In today’s digital economy, it is very important to cultivate digital professionals with advanced interdisciplinary skills. The purpose of this paper is that universities play a vital role in this effort, and research teams need to use the synergistic effect of various educational methods to improve the quality and efficiency of personnel training. For these teams, a powerful evaluation mechanism is very important to improve their innovation ability and the overall level of talents they cultivate. The policy of “selecting the best through public bidding” not only meets the multi-dimensional evaluation needs of contemporary research, but also conforms to the current atmosphere of evaluating scientific and technological talents.

Nonetheless, since its adoption, several challenges have emerged, including flawed project management systems, a mismatch between listed needs and actual core technological needs and a low rate of conversion of scientific achievements into practical outcomes. These issues are often traced back to overly simplistic evaluation methods for research teams. This paper reviews the literature on the “Open Bidding for Selecting the Best Candidates” policy and related evaluation mechanisms for research teams, identifying methodological shortcomings, a gap in exploring team collaboration and an oversight in team selection criteria.

It proposes a theoretical framework for the evaluation and selection mechanisms of research teams under the “Open Bidding for Selecting the Best Candidates” model, offering a solid foundation for further in-depth studies in this area.

Research progress on the Evaluation Mechanism of Scientific Research Teams in the Digital Economy Era from the Perspective of “Open Bidding for Selecting the Best Candidates.”

This study aims to examine the connection between scholars' research performance and the multidisciplinary nature of their collaborative research. Furthermore, in response to mixed results regarding the effects of multidisciplinarity on research performance, this study explores how human resource management (HRM) practices may moderate this link.

The authors built a model based on the theoretical arguments and empirical evidence found in the review of diversity and HRM literature. The authors also performed a quantitative study based on a sample of scholars in the field of management. Different econometric estimations were used to test the proposed model.

The results of this empirical analysis suggest that multidisciplinary research has a non-linear effect on research performance. Certain HRM practices, such as development and collaboration, moderated the curvilinear relationship between multidisciplinarity and performance, displacing the optimum to allow higher performance at higher levels of multidisciplinary research.

The paper provides advances on previous works studying the curvilinear relationship between multidisciplinarity and the researchers' performance, confirming that multidisciplinarity is beneficial up to a threshold beyond which these benefits are attenuated. In addition, the findings shed light on important issues related to team-oriented HRM practices associated with the outcomes of multidisciplinary research.

This article considers how the evaluation of research teams can better account for the challenges of transdisciplinarity, including their larger team size and more diverse and permeable membership, as well as the tensions between institutional pressures on individuals to publish and team goals.

An evaluation team was retained from 2015 to 2020 to conduct a comprehensive external evaluation of a five-year EPSCoR-funded program undertaken by a transdisciplinary research team. The formative portion of the evaluation involved monitoring the program’s developmental progress, while the summative portion tracked observable program outputs and outcomes as evidence of progress toward short- and long-term goals. The evaluation team systematically reviewed internal assessments and gathered additional data for an external assessment via periodic participation in team meetings, participant interviews and an online formative team survey (starting in Year 2).

Survey participants had a better understanding of the project’s “Goals and Vision” compared to other aspects. “Work Roles,” and particularly the timeliness of decision-making, were perceived to be a “Big Problem,” specifically in regard to heavy travel by key managers/leadership. For “Communication Channels,” Year 2 tensions included differing views on the extent to which management should be collaborative versus “hierarchical.” These concerns about communication demonstrate that differences in language, culture or status impact the efficiency and working relationship of the team. “Authorship Credit/Intellectual Property” was raised most consistently each year as an area of concern.

The study involves the use of a unique survey approach.

Teamwork has long featured in social science research. Further, with research increasingly “cross-national,” communication becomes more complex, for instance, involving different cultures, languages and modes of communication. Yet, studies examining team communicative processes that can facilitate or constrain collaboration are rare. As a cross-national European team representing varied disciplines, experiences, languages and ethnicities, we undertook to examine our communication processes with the aim to promote better qualitative research practices.

Viewing reflection as a tool for enhancing workplace practices, we undertook a structured reflection. We developed an empirically derived framework about team communication, then used it to analyse our interaction practices and their relative effectiveness.

The results highlighted two under-examined influences, the use of different modes of communication for different purposes and the need for face-to-face communication to address a particularly challenging aspect of research, negotiating a shared coding scheme to analyse diverse cultural and linguistic qualitative data.

The study offers a procedure and concepts that others could use to examine their team communication.

The communicative processes that can constrain and facilitate effective cross-national research team collaboration are rarely examined. The results emphasise the need for careful negotiations around language, epistemologies, cultures and goals from the moment collaboration begins in formulating a project, through applying for grant funds, to when the last paper is published – timely in a context in which such work is increasingly expected.

Increased demand, limited resources, knowledge gaps, and seemingly less time to produce results are the challenges facing researchers and others in higher education today. Working together across disciplines is almost a requirement to stay afloat in the competitive arena most principal investigators are finding themselves in. This study sought to synthesize existing research on leadership behaviors of these investigators in the agricultural discipline. The sections specifically addressed include team science, discipline structure, boundary work, challenges of interdisciplinary research, the direction of research, and leadership in interdisciplinary teams. After analyzing 32 articles, researchers determined that research should continue to investigate the role of leadership behaviors in primary investigators to continue to improve effectiveness.

The purpose of this paper is to assess whether China’s public sector can continue to generate advanced genetically modified (GM) technologies that will be competitive in the market.

The authors investigated all the research teams that have been conducting research projects under the variety development special program. The data collected include detail information on research capacity, research areas, performance, and process of their research projects. Based on the survey data, the authors assessed the innovations and progress of the variety development special program.

Unlike other countries, most GM products in China are developed by public research institutes. There is rising concern on the ability of China’s public sector to continuously generate indigenous GM technology that can compete with multinational companies. The study surveyed 197 research institutes and 487 research teams and found that the GM program in China lacks coordination: researchers do not want to share their research materials with others. Due to the lack of coordination, most of the hundreds of research teams often worked independently in the year 2008-2010. Moreover, the authors found the lack of coordination may be due to the reason that the interests of researchers are not well protected. This paper also provided the recent progress and policy changes of GM program in China, and it found that the efficiency in the later three years improved a lot. In order to establish a competitive national public GM research system, China should continuously consolidate and integrate the upstream, midstream, and downstream activities of the whole GM innovation process. China’s public sector may also need to work more closely with both the domestic and international private sectors.

This paper is a comprehensive analysis on the development of transgenic technology in China. The results of this paper can provide evidence for the dynamic adjustment of the policies in the variety development special program and can also provide reference for the future assessment of the variety development special program.

The debriefing is a procedure based on intra-team feedback, which has frequently been applied in university formation in health but has been less used in business. The aim of this research is to analyse best practices in the actual implementation of debriefing in organisations, based on criteria the guidelines for carrying out each stage established in the procedure.

To achieve these goals, working teams from different organisations carried out 19 group-debriefing sessions on an authentic work problem. These sessions were observed and analysed following a qualitative approach.

After observing a debriefing session in 19 organisations, four categories related to its implementation have been identified: Self-analysis, information, planning and orientation of the development of the team.

It is important to mention some limitations to this work. The major limitation was the lack of published literature related to the debriefing in the area of organisational management. The qualitative and exploratory nature of the study limits the generalisation of the results.

The research has practical implications as the characterisation and description of each phase favours the transfer to implement the debriefing technique adequately in different types of organisations.

It has been observed that all forms of debriefing have a common purpose in learning and, team and employee development, due to the powerful transferability and usefulness of debriefing in different contexts. Therefore, knowing the correct use of debriefing is a breakthrough in this area. In addition, including this type of practice will not just facilitate a better performance, it will also help teams to learn to work in a team from their own experiences.

It has been characterised by the process of debriefing from the correct implementation of each phase through the analysis of the narratives that arise in the debriefing sessions carried out.

匯報是一個基於團隊內部回饋的程序, 它常見於大學組建的醫療衛生方面, 在商業上則較少使用。本研究擬基於匯報程序中所建立的每個階段, 來分析在組織內實際進行匯報的典範實務。

為達至研究目標, 來自不同組織的工作團隊, 就一個真實的工作問題進行了19個匯報會議。研究人員觀察這些會議, 並以定性研究法進行探討和分析。

研究人員觀察於19個組織進行的匯報會議後, 找出了四個進行匯報會議的範疇, 自我分析、資料、計劃和團隊發展的取向。

本研究提供了實務方面的啟示, 因研究結果確認了匯報每個階段的特徵的描述, 以及每個階段的描述, 這會幫助在不同種類的組織內進行匯報會議時, 舉行匯報使用之技巧得以靈活調動, 以發揮各技巧的最佳效果。

研究人員分析有關的匯報會議內的敘述, 並從會議每個階段的正確執行, 找出了匯報程序的各個特徵。

The purpose of this study was to explore how team members identify the social loafers on their teams and how they explain and manage social loafers’ behavior. The participants (n=49) in the study included members of student teams participating in a service project as a part of their coursework. We collected multiple sources of information: in-depth interviews, reflection journals, peer evaluations, and observations of team members interacting. Using attribution theory and status characteristics theory we describe how team members identify social loafer and explain the causes of their behavior. We also explore how those attributions affect team members’ interactions with the social loafers. The status of social loafers in the eyes of their teammates affects teammates’ willingness to accommodate or reject the social loafer. We identify strategies used by team members to manage the behavior of social loafers. We conclude with recommendations for practice and future research on social loafing.

The purpose of this study was to begin exploring the nature of leadership behavior and style, as it relates to team functionality. The extent to which the problems we face grow and become more complex; solutions require multiple perspectives, requiring researchers to be prepared to lead large groups of collaborators from a variety of disciplines. This study sought to explore the self-perceptions of principal investigators related to their leadership style and team functionality. Using the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire developed by Bass and Avolio (1995) and Lencioni's Team Assessment (2002), it was found that transformational leadership was self-perceived to be used the most in contrast to transactional leadership behaviors. With respect to team functionality, absence of trust and inattention to results showed the greatest concern to principal investigators, yet fear of conflict did not.