Interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research and practice: Balancing expectations of the ‘old’ academy with the future model of universities as ‘problem solvers’

Abstract

Academics are increasingly required to balance the expectations of the ‘old’ academy with a future model of universities as interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary ‘problem solvers’. This paper highlights changing expectations of academics in producing alternative research outcomes in collaborative, practice‐based research. Through a series of workshops with 20 researchers, preferred research outcomes and tensions in achieving these outcomes were identified. The tensions identified are presented as three dichotomies comprising the tension between: (a) ‘I versus We’ ‐ individual versus team expectations & outcomes. (b) Disciplinary outcomes versus inter‐/transdisciplinary outcomes. (c) Learning versus research objectives for the students and academics involved. These tensions reflect the authors' experiences of working in three international sustainability projects, drawing on lessons learned from these projects, with recommendations for universities seeking to implement interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary doctoral and postdoctoral programmes. Recommendations include the need for formal and informal leadership models, strong communication skills, empathy and willingness to learn from each other. A need for more systemic changes within university administration to better reward and value the breadth and depth of collaborative work, while facilitating open learning cultures and practice‐oriented learning opportunities and curricula across faculties was also identified.

Towards a caring transdisciplinary research practice: navigating science, society and self

“…setting up communities of practice, reflexivity and training) require additional time and resources compared to disciplinary research. Transdisciplinary early-career researchers are therefore likely to run into the same barriers and risks described previously, which are linked to the current dominant structures, culture and success metrics in academia (Fam et al 2019). Echoing the need brought up by more senior researchers in the field of sustainability science (e.g.…”

Learning processes for interpersonal competence development in project-based sustainability courses – insights from a comparative international study

“…Konrad et al (2020) empirically confirm that project-based learning courses develop interpersonal competence, identifying conflicts to be a trigger for learning processes. For learning success, however, there needs to be time, space and willingness to constructively engage with these conflicts (Fam et al , 2019; Konrad et al , 2020; Walker and Daniels, 2019). Oxenswärdh and Persson-Fischier (2020) also mention the common occurrence of conflicts in group collaboration, while highlighting the creative potential such settings offer.…”

“…The abilities to collaborate with people from different cultural and disciplinary backgrounds; to engage, motivate and learn from others; to understand others’ perspectives and find compromises; to establish and maintain trust in teams; to resolve conflicts among diverse stakeholders; etc. – are all important for solving sustainability problems and advancing sustainability worldwide (Bickford and Wright, 2006; Činčera et al , 2019; Di Giulio and Defila, 2017; Evans, 2015; Fam et al , 2019; Freeth and Caniglia, 2020; Giangrande et al , 2019; Gulikers and Oonk, 2019). Universities play a key role in equipping students with such interpersonal attitudes, knowledge and skills (Gulikers and Oonk, 2019; Hernández-Barco et al , 2020; Thomas, 2009; Wiek et al , 2011).…”

Preparing interdisciplinary leadership for a sustainable future

“…Traditional departmental training will not be sufficient to succeed in ITD scholarship without strong mentoring, explicit incentives to engage, and guidance on best practices. Graduate students and post-doctoral fellows should be given opportunities to share leadership, especially when their ITD training can facilitate multiinvestigator and stakeholder projects that involve individuals with traditional, disciplinary training or single-issue agendas (Fam et al 2020).…”