Search results

Sensemaking is an integral element of human cognition. It is the activity whereby we find answers to questions that arise from experience. It is at the core of collaborative management research as researchers and practitioners work together to build a shared understanding of organizational phenomena and take action based on that understanding, thereby generating actionable knowledge. However, mutual understanding is a complex process which requires a great deal of effort by both researchers and practitioners. While research has described in great detail the consequences of collaborative research endeavors, the challenge of creating a shared sensemaking conducive to these results has been left partially explored. The chapter examines the nature of sensemaking in collaborative management research. A comprehensive framework is proposed and then utilized to examine a collaborative management research effort carried out with an Italian social cooperative.

Drawing on the experience of the Observatories, a set of interconnected research centers in Italy, this chapter explains why academics are in one of the best positions to orchestrate interorganizational initiatives of change and development, and highlights two prerequisites that appear necessary to render salient this orchestrator role of academics: (i) the extensive use of multiple approaches of collaborative research and (ii) the creation and maintenance of a platform allowing the management and diffusion of the network-based learning mechanisms underlying each change and development effort. The contributions extend existing knowledge on organization development and collaborative research.

The purpose of this paper is to develop an existing collaborative research methodology process (Sabri, 2018), contextualise it for application in humanitarian supply chains and test it empirically.

Building on collaborative research methodology and humanitarian supply chain literature, the Sabri’s (2018) collaborative research methodology process is further developed to comprise eight phases of collaborative research contextualised for the humanitarian supply chain domain. The process is applied in a collaborative research case of academia–practitioner knowledge co-creation in a humanitarian supply chain setting, focussing on environmental sustainability improvement. The collaborative case analysis suggests a number of refinements to the elements of the process. This study undertook two cycles of academia–practitioner collaborative research.

In testing the process, a noticeable improvement in the collaboration among different humanitarian stakeholders was observed, leading to improved stakeholder management. The implementation improved the sustainability awareness and social inclusion of the affected population. Rurality, remoteness, security issues and resistance of field staff against change were among the main challenges for supply chain researchers to engage in collaborative research in the humanitarian domain.

The paper addresses the rigour‒relevance‒reflectiveness debate in the humanitarian supply chain domain. A collaborative research methodology process derived from action research is further developed using humanitarian literature, and then it is applied in a humanitarian logistics case focussed on environmental sustainability. The present collaborative research process facilitates engaged scholarship among the humanitarian stakeholders, as the researchers’ roles move from observatory to participatory knowledge broker.

This paper aims to demonstrate the value of a collaborative research culture framework (Gasson and Bruce, 2018a), featuring trust and respect as core elements of healthy collaborations, to support the research success of higher degree research (HDR) students. HDR is a term used in Australia to reference Doctoral and Master by research programmes.

The authors propose that by positioning collaboration as part of a research culture built on trust and respect, discussion about and the development of healthy collaborative research culture will be facilitated. A healthy culture is defined as one that supports sustainable and productive collaborative research.

The applications of the framework demonstrate the role the framework can play in supporting researchers to understand, engage in and manage collaborations.

Reflection on discussions to date has led to the authors’ view that collaborative success requires a unique set of skills (i.e. skills in the development of a collaborative research culture) and that the framework provides a deliberate and overt way of supporting development of those skills.

The framework helps HDRs develop the capacity to build healthy collaborative research cultures vital for their research productivity and longer-term success as researchers.

A scholarly collaborative partnership is a capability that develops over time. Its quality is an outcome of the collaborative context, the alignment of purpose, development of work and learning processes, development of shared language and success stories. In this chapter, the authors engage in a metalogue where their shared reflection on the formation and development of their collaborative scholarship in the field of organization development and change is itself an instance of a process of shared scholarship. By adopting the format of a metalogue, they provide the voices of their individual thinking and their reflective conversation so as to offer an expression of the process of theorizing to scholars who wish to embark upon or study shared scholarship.

The purpose of this paper is to examine how research teams serve as building blocks for collaboration at a field level, and how these building blocks are assembled by a network of interacting organizations. The field setting is a medical sciences consortium in Australia established to encourage collaborative and entrepreneurial research among government, industry, research centers and university units. This consortium is examined as a case study. The analysis demonstrates how collaboration evolved at three interacting levels: research team, organization and interorganizational field.

The main findings are: (1) Intellectual property (IP) acts as the key orienting agent in this field to align the behavior of various stakeholders and leverage collaborative and entrepreneurial activity. (2) Tensions between the different ways that the commercial and public sector actors value IP serve to structure the interfaces among the consortium, the member organizations and the research teams. (3) The consortium is a key infrastructural element in the creation of collaborative capital in the Australian biotechnology field studied. The main contribution of the study is to highlight the nature of collaborative capital at a field level and begin to explore its implications.

The purpose of this paper is to explore users’ learning in the collaborative information search process when they conduct an academic task as a group.

This paper presents a longitudinal study for a three-month period on an actual task. The participants, who were undergraduate students, needed to write a research proposal in three months to apply for funding for a research project, including a three-hour experiment.

The results show that undergraduates’ learning in the collaborative search process for academic group work included knowledge reconstruction, tuning, and assimilation. Their understanding of the topic concepts improved through the process, and their attitudes became more optimistic. Besides, the learning in the collaborative information search process also enhanced participants’ skills in communication, research, information search, and collaboration. To improve learning outcomes, professional and appropriate academic resources are required, as well as effective division of labor, positive sharing behaviors, and use of collaborative systems.

The future development of collaborative information search systems should focus on the needs of academic research and support for elements such as instant communication and knowledge sharing.

This paper contributes to research into searching as learning by understanding undergraduates’ collaborative search behavior for writing a proposal.

The purpose of this paper is twofold. First, to study collaborative research in general and identify its characteristics, advantages and disadvantages by conglomerating various views and ideas from the literature and from expert opinion research. Second, to determine the importance of and attitudes toward the usage of information technology (IT) in collaborative research projects.

Initially, an extensive literature review and ten in‐depth interviews have been conducted to determine the identifying characteristics of collaborative research. Consequently, a questionnaire is used as the major data collection tool to assess academicians' opinions about collaborative research and attitudes toward IT utilization in such studies.

Collaborative research has been most distinctively defined with the concepts of teamwork, knowledge and experience sharing and direct and continuous communication. Increased visibility and recognition of such projects and enhanced access to various resources have also been pinpointed as important advantages. Academicians have shown a highly positive tendency to utilize IT and adopt IT tools that will enhance convenience and communication and contribute to the conduction of various basic and support processes of collaborative research projects.

The major implication of this research is the general need for more collaborative research projects in academia and the necessity to develop and employ various IT tools that can be used in such studies. Similar studies can be done with larger sample sizes or across various contexts, for comparative purposes, to overcome the limitations of the study.

In this paper, the dispersed literature about collaborative research has been assembled and a unified scope has been drawn around the concept. Attitudes toward collaborative research and the potential value of utilizing IT in such projects, which has been studied at an inadequate level in the literature, have been evaluated comprehensively from the perspective of academicians.

The complexities and challenges inherent in research often require collaborative rather than solitary or team‐based forms of working. This paper seeks to open new perspectives onto the nature of collaborative research and onto strategies for developing the capacity of researchers to engage in it.

The paper outlines a speculative model of collaborative working in higher education that is rooted in critical realist perspectives, using it to ground a conceptual analysis of a stage model of expertise for collaborative working taken from the researcher development framework (RDF) developed in the UK by the organisation Vitae.

The paper highlights the contribution that theory can make to the practice of researcher development, drawing out the relevance of personal engagement, professional dialogue and collaborative vehicles to support shared practice in pursuit of mutual goals. In this way, it identifies gaps within the stage model that pertain to relational, disciplinary, situational and other elements. The paper articulates insights for the development of the capacity of researchers for collaborative working that prioritise dialogue that is situated within given contexts for research. The analysis draws out implications for the development of collaborative capacity of such notions as corporate agency and collaborative reach.

This paper articulates a novel approach to conceptualising capacity for collaborative research and offers a theoretical critique of a given descriptor taken from Vitae's RDF. As such it assists in developing the scholarly basis for the field of researcher development.

The purpose of this paper is to explore scenario development (SD) as a method for engaging known challenges in collaborative research projects, i.e. SD is the construct under investigation.

Criticism of the dominant, rational approach to project management (PM) and its underlying hypotheses highlights a considerable PM research gap for research projects (research problem). The authors undertake a six-step constructive research approach to investigate if SD (the construct) constitutes a fruitful method to support the management of collaborative research projects. A two-part literature review summarizes known challenges in collaborative research projects and introduces the history and application of SD methodology. The work includes participatory action research (PAR) in two case studies, constituting a qualitative research method.

The authors found the SD method to be useful for structuring and analyzing intuitive project processes. However, using SD in the management of single projects presents some fundamental challenges. SD, like PM, struggles with issues related to myopic decisions, a “predict and provide” attitude with clear aspects of path dependency in the project front-end as well as inconsistent and/or missing identification of success criteria among different stakeholders.

This paper does not provide any comprehensive, normative account of scenario techniques or compare SD with other foresight and future studies methods. Although PAR is in itself a research method that demands systematic description and execution, the focus of this paper is the overall constructive research approach.

The paper offers a broadened repertoire of methods to describe and analyse project stakeholder situations (collaborative aspects) and to structure and balance the need for both rational and intuitive project processes (research aspects). The SD method also supports development of graphical storylines and facilitates the use of influence diagrams, event trees and cost/benefit analysis.

Although PM literature contains several references to SD, the practical application of SD at single-project level has, to the authors’ knowledge, never been described in the PM literature.