Planetary Grand Challenges: A Call for Interdisciplinary Partnerships

Abstract

Universities have traditionally been places where individual scholars work on individual topics, in individual disciplines, with individual funding. Even though large research institutions include all the major disciplines, faculty and students remain in their schools or colleges, rarely crossing the campus to interact. Matters do not improve once knowledge is generated. Each discipline has its own journals, its own conferences, and its own professional organizations. The academy was designed to support unparalleled expertise in specialized knowledge. However, universities are beginning to realize that the greatest challenges we face are systems problems and can only be solved by systems thinking and systems solutions. Climate change, antibiotic resistance, water scarcity, and unsustainable population growth are just a few of the planetary health crises that require interdisciplinary partnerships to solve. Fortunately, we are beginning to see early signs of a shift toward, and even normalization of, interdisciplinary collaboration. In fact, some national grants require team members from different fields as a stipulation for funding. Interdisciplinary research permits cross-field benefits in which the synergy of two or more knowledge sets is greater than the sum of its parts. Innovation increases and previously elusive solutions become possible. The field of partnership studies closely aligns with the vision and mission of interdisciplinarity and offers a philosophical framework to guide teaching and research.

What leadership styles and traits do industry partners need to exhibit to produce positive outcomes from collaborative projects with researchers from other types of organizations?

“…Collaborative leadership is essential to forming and maintaining a collaborative charged with solving complex problems (Sirman, 2008). One of the key roles for the collaboration leader involves team building, which is described by numerous authors (Barbic et al, 2016;Boyer et al, 2018;DeHart, 2017;Gilbertson et al, 2019;Hall et al, 2018;Love et al, 2021;Yu et al 2019). Effective team building develops trust and provides a foundation for a successful project (Gratton & Erickson, 2008).…”

“…Collaboration leadership should involve processes that include establishing and maintaining a viable government, academic, and industry partnership by avoiding culture clashes (Crane, 1998;Gilbertson et al, 2019;Yu et al, 2019). Communications mitigate conflicts by clearly identifying benefits to each organization.…”

An Evaluation of Researcher Motivations and Productivity Outcomes in International Collaboration and Partnerships at a U.S. Research-Intensive University

“…are increasingly becoming a central activity in research. This mutual engagement of participants in a coordinated effort rather than siloed, specialized knowledge-only approaches (Gilbertson, Craft, & Potter, 2019;Corbett & Kardos, 2019) to solve problems or develop opportunities together (Roschelle & Teasley, 1995) can even be considered a necessity for groundbreaking research in the 21 st century. With rising research costs, concerns about financial shocks, rapidly changing technologies, complex research issues, global research trends, and demands for specialized knowledge and new ways of managing innovation, many academic institutions are turning to domestic and international partnerships to address problems and opportunities too complex to deal with on their own.…”

“…The need for and impact of more collaboration in research have been tested theoretically as presented by group theory (Whitfield, 2008;Leite & Pinho, 2016) and social network theory (Dall'Asta, Marsili, & Pin, 2012;Moolenaar, 2012). Recently, Eisler's (1988) cultural transformation theory framework was used by Gilbertson, Craft, and Potter (2019) to help promote systems thinking and to explain the transition from single-discipline (power over) domination toward a more mutualistic partnership model. In this model, these authors suggest that researchers adopt a more long-term, flexible approach, working together with shared goals, values, and results.…”

“…To our knowledge, there has not been a publication of a profile or case study of a research institution's faculty to assess the link between international collaboration and tangible faculty-driven outcomes, and intangible motivation factors. Further, the concepts of collaboration versus partnership based on mutual respect, accountability, and benefit (Gilbertson, Craft, & Potter, 2019;International Development Services, 2016) are generally used interchangeably and lumped under the heading of "collaboration," employing commonly used metrics and proxy metrics (e.g. co-authored publications) without deeper understanding at the individual and institutional levels.…”