Guiding principles for a successful multidisciplinary research collaboration

7/24/2019 Guiding principles for a successful multidisciplinary research collaboration

1/4

Future Sci. OA(2015) FSO7 eISSN 2056-562310.4155/FSO.15.1 This work is licensed under

CC0 1.0 Universal (CC0 1.0)

Keywords: grant funding guidelines mentorship multidisciplinary collaboration productivity

Solving the most critically important sci-entific problems or engineering ground-breaking technologies often requires teamsof researchers from different backgroundsto work together. One might need to makenew materials (chemistry), characterize andunderstand the properties of the material(physics), assemble the material into a usefuldevice (engineering), address the biologicalproblem to be solved (biology) and demon-strate utility in patients (medicine). A singlelaboratory is unlikely to have all of the exper-tise necessary to address complex problems

that can make a significant impact on society.The merging of fields also makes other-

wise impossible goals achievable, often in atimelier manner. This has led many grantingagencies, academic and commercial institu-tions to encourage the development of inter-disciplinary teams [13]. As a result, there hasbeen an increase in the quantity and quality ofpublications combining the work of authorswith diverse backgrounds. In the collabora-tive setting, trainees and principal investiga-tors (PIs) alike become immersed in dif ferent

areas of study, research styles and how fieldsbeyond their own familiar worlds operate.These aspects introduce challenges to ensur-ing a team is productive and moving towardtheir research objectives. However, when theteam is working well, this can be a particu-larly useful learning experience, leading toexceptionally well-rounded trainees that willlearn from a variety of experts. While theidea of assembling the best-of-the-best scien-tists and engineers to address an importantproblem in society is of merit, the practical

aspects of working together can be challeng-ing. Ensuring success hinges on effectivecommunication knowing what and howbest to convey thoughts and opinions.

Our three research laboratories have dif-ferent research experience, interests andbackgrounds: we have merged together ona project that involves the identification,delivery and assessment of small peptidecancer drugs. Over the last 4 years, we haveworked together to characterize and evaluatethese drugs through shared funding from theCollaborative Health Research Program in

Canada. Through this joint project, we havelearned to be effective collaborators with oneanother, started to publish our results [4], andthrough the years, we have shared with oneanother experiences of good and bad collabo-rations. While there are a number of excel-lent commentaries to describe how teams inresearch work together [5,6], we thought anarticle that specifically focuses on practicaltips that are important in building strongteam dynamics and ensuring that the mul-tidisciplinary research project is conducted

in an efficient and productive manner in anacademic setting would be useful for guid-ing other academic collaborators. Addition-ally, some of these principles may be fur-ther extended to include networking andacademic-industrial collaborations.

Learn the language

One of the biggest challenges in workingtogether is building a communication strat-egy that is a ligned with all researchers. Eachresearch discipline, and often each labora-

Lindsay C Lustig1,2,Romina Ponzielli1,Peter S Tang3, SarmithaSathiamoorthy4, IchiroInamoto4, Jumi A Shin4,Linda Z Penn1,2& WarrenCW Chan*3,51Princess Margaret Cancer Centre,

University Health Network, 101 College

Street, Toronto, ON, M5G 1L7, Canada2Department of Medical Biophysics,

University of Toronto, 101 College Street,

Toronto, ON, M5G 1L7, Canada3Institute of Biomaterials & Biomedical

Engineering, Donnelly Centre for Cellular

& Biomolecular Research, University of

Toronto, 160 College St., Toronto, ON,

M5S 3G9, Canada4Department of Chemistry, University

of Toronto, 3359 Mississauga Road,

Mississauga, ON, L5L 1C6, Canada5

Department of Chemistry, ChemicalEngineering, Materials Science &

Engineering, University of Toronto,

160 College St., Toronto, ON, M5S 3G9,

Canada

*Author for correspondence:

[email protected]

Guiding principles for a successfulmultidisciplinary research collaboration

The value of a collaborative project extends to training highly qualifiedpersonnel and expanding the breadth of knowledge of even the most seasoned

expert involved

Commentary


2/4


3/4

www.future-science.com 10.4155/FSO.15.1www.future-science.comfuture science groupfuture science group

Guiding principles for a successful multidisciplinary research collaboration Commentary

can propagate. All parties should develop a financialplan that is beneficial to the project as a whole suchthat the lead investigator cannot and should not usefinance as a way to manipulate authorship on patents,talks and papers. A budget plan should be written to

indicate which laboratory does what and how muchmoney is required to get each part of the project done.Everybody should learn to be reasonable as the fundingis not bottomless.

Discuss project plans & time management

At the beginning of any collaboration, it is important todevelop a project plan. Researchers should indicate theobjectives of each facet of the project, the long- and short-term goals, procedures and activities, as well as who willbe needed to perform each of the activities. Each projectshould have tangible milestones and deliverables that

are clearly identified and written. This plan will identifyeach researchers activities, allow subprojects to be evalu-ated during the course of the bigger project, and allowthe team to modify goals as the project evolves over thecourse of the experiments. It also removes any ambigu-ity regarding who did the work. Related to this is theimportance of understanding the amount of time thatis needed to complete different experiments. Dependingon the field of study or the specific experiment, moreor less time might be required to achieve results thanresearchers outside of the field would expect. Taking thetime to explain what is involved in performing each taskhelps to keep everyone on the same page and encourages

realistic expectations.

This is also important when assessing, for instance,the appropriate times for trainees to complete theirgraduate degrees or postdoctoral studies. In manycollaborations, the work completed by one individual

relies on the results of another. To avoid situationswhere the progress of one trainees course of study isstalled due to the completion of anothers task, anypotential setbacks should be considered in advancewith feasible timelines devised and backup plans inplace. It may be wise for a trainee to work concur-rently on an additional, unrelated project in case thecollaborative project does not go as expected.

Hold frequent meetings

It is highly recommended for groups to hold routinemeetings, for example, once a month. It is useful for

each laboratory to submit a short activity report elec-tronically for all team members to view beforehand.These activity reports allow the team to follow theprogress of each project, evaluate the data and offersuggestions to help plan downstream experiments.

Having more eyes and ears present, particularly fromdifferent disciplines, can bring to the forefront variousassumptions that are being made in planning experi-ments, and stimulate conversations regarding how bestto establish criteria for moving forward or interpret-ing datasets. Regrouping on a regular basis serves asa continuous reminder of the teams end goal beyondan individual experiment, because several persons areinvolved to offer input and help maintain focus. This inturn translates to greater research productivity. Activ-ity reports also provide a regular platform for traineesto present their work and, in doing so, accelerates their

ability to effectively communicate their research topersons of different scientific backgrounds and levels ofunderstanding. The monthly meetings can also be anopportunity for trainees to participate in discussionsregarding strategies for drafting grant applications, andthe planning and considerations therein. As an integralpart of the research process, it can be of great benefitfor the trainees to actively participate in the planningand execution of securing funding. In addition, hold-ing one or two meetings per year in person reinforcesthe connections between the team. This familiaritywill continue to be informally driven by trainees, asthey feel comfortable picking up the phone and calling

teammates in the other laboratories.

Encourage open communication: be fair

& respectful

It is very important that every aspect of the project bedealt with fairly. A failed collaboration often resultsfrom a researcher not being given proper credit orenough money to do the project. Should one of thecollaborative members feel that there is inequality inthe project, it must be addressed immediately. As men-tioned, we suggest that the partitioning of funding andassignment of credit be discussed early and ideally, be

mapped to the project plan. It is imperative for everyoneto be open and honest within the team, and it is equallyimportant for this to be done tactfully. For instance, ifa project is not working, the researchers should discussit. If there are issues with funding or problems withthe personnel, the PIs should discuss it. This may seemobvious, but often team members choose not to initi-ate these critical conversations. When certain issuesthat are sensitive arise, it is important for the PIs tocome together and talk privately prior to discussingtheir decisions with the team. The same should besaid about the trainees who are on the project. Lastly,

While the idea of assembling thebest-of-the-best scientists and engineers to

address an important problem in society is of

merit, the practical aspects of working together

can be challenging.


4/4

10.4155/FSO.15.1 Future Sci. OA(2015) FSO7 future science groupfuture science group

Commentary Lustig, Ponzielli, Tang et al.

the relationship between a PI and his or her traineewho is participating in a collaboration must always berespected. Working alongside several PIs can providean abundance of invaluable opportunities to learn andenhance the trainee experience. However, it also means

managing the needs of more than one supervisor, andunfortunately the potential for conflict should anotherPI overstep his/her authority. Such issues can beavoided if all parties involved appreciate that althoughgroup discussion with respect to a trainees direction ina project is imperative, it is ultimately the trainee alongwith the PI who make the final decision. Having a PIdirectly demand tasks from another PIs personnel willinevitably create strife that could easily be avoided.

ConclusionThe benefits of collaboration are vast [3,6]. Some will

be obvious from the onset of the project, while oth-ers may go unrealized until months and years later.In a collaboration, the researchers should work insynergy, complementing one another to complete theessential toolset necessary to achieve the end goal.The merging of diverse fields can yield breakthroughsin a speed unachievable if those contributors wereto work independently. The value of a collaborativeproject extends to training highly qua lified personnel

and expanding the breadth of knowledge of even themost seasoned expert involved, which can spill overand enhance other research endeavors underway or inthe future. Like many undertakings with great poten-tial, collaboration in science can be one of high risk

in addition to high reward. Effective team manage-ment and open communication from the very firstdiscussion will maximize the likelihood of successand productivity.

Financial & competing interests disclosure

The authors thank the Canadian Institute of Health Research,

Natural Sciences Engineering Research Council of Canada,

Canadian Research Chairs Program, and Collaborative Health

Research Program for nancial support of their research ac-

tivities. The authors have no other relevant afliations or -

nancial involvement with any organization or entity with a

nancial interest in or nancial conict with the subject mat-

ter or materials discussed in the manuscript apart from those

disclosed.

No writing assistance was utilized in the production of this

manuscript.

Open Access

This work is licensed under CC0 1.0 Universal (CC0 1.0):

http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/

References

1 Adams J. The rise of research networks. Nature490(7420),

335336 (2012).

2 Carpenter JF. Value that industrial collaborations bring to

research and education efforts in universities: perspective of a

professor working in the field of development of therapeutic

proteins. Hum. Genomics7(7), 13 (2013).

3 Dozier AM, Martina CA, ODell NL et al.Identifying

emerging research collaborations and networks: method

development. Eval. Health Prof.37(1), 1932 (2014).

4 Tang PS, Sathiamoorthy S, Lustig LC et al.The role of

ligand density and size in mediating quantum dot nuclear

transport. Small10(20) , 41824192 (2014).5 Vincens Q, Bourne PE. Ten simple rules for a successful

collaboration. PLoS Comput. Biol.3(3), e44 (2007).

6 Hanawalt PC. Research collaborations: trial, trust, and

truth. Cell126(5), 823825 (2006).

7 Abu-Zaid A, Alnajjar A, Anwer LA. Authorship disintegr ity

in research collaborations: ends do not justify means in

science.Med. Educ. Online19, 24930 (2014).

Documents

Guiding principles for a successful multidisciplinary research collaboration