META: What discourses does the analyst consider/leverage to characterize/theorize collaboration at this research stage? (How) are histories and contextual factors pointed to as shaping the collaborations described here at this research stage?

Enter a comma separated list of user names.
Angela Okune's picture
August 31, 2018
  • AO: The analysts note that the science of team science is currently in its nascent stage and that definitions are being debated. For example, interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary are used interchangeably. They note the plurality of definitions and operationalization of the concepts and argue that greater clarity is needed.

  • AO: Analysts talk about a readiness framework that is nested and looks at the different levels.

    • QUOTE: “which types of readiness factors (e.g., psycho- logical, interpersonal, organizational, societal, techno- logic, scientific) exert the greatest influence on the effectiveness of team science projects and initiatives”

  • AO: The analysts believe that assessments of a network’s productivity are likely to be critical to understanding its value-added contributions (S246). Example being solving complex problems.

Creative Commons Licence