An assistant professor of history will be considered for promotion and the awarding of tenure next year. Consequently, she has been focusing on strengthening her professional portfolio. She has a doctoral student who has been working with her for several years. The assistant professor recently returned from a professional meeting where she met an individual who shares her research interests. This person is a tenured faculty member at another institution who has been working in the same area as the assistant professor for a number of years. In fact, this faculty member had established a consortium of investigators, each from a different institution, and she asked the assistant professor to join in this collaborative study. The assistant professor felt that being a participant in this collaborative study would benefit her professionally, especially for her promotion and tenure review, and readily agreed to join. In follow-up correspondence, she asked for details about the arrangements for this group, and was told that it is a loose arrangement without any formal agreements. The assistant professor sensed that the faculty member who invited her to join in the collaborative study has a leadership role in this consortium but other aspects of this collaborative arrangement remained unclearCollaborative research has a number of benefits but requires clear delineation of the roles of the respective participants. Since such collaborations often occur among individuals at different institutions, it is especially important that each member have a clear understanding of the guidelines by which the collaboration operates. Participants in collaborative studies should consider creating a written statement that documents their respective roles in this arrangement. This is particularly important as the membership in the collaborative study or the role of the participants changes over time.
Before joining a collaborative effort, researchers should consider seeking the advice and counsel of a mentor, grant/contract officer, colleague who has been in such an arrangement or other resource. This may help to determine if such an arrangement is appropriate and, if so, the preferred way to enter into the collaboration. Open, candid, ongoing communication is vital to the success of collaborative research. This includes discussions that involve establishment of a formal collaboration and ongoing activities of the participating parties.
.During the academic year the doctoral student indicated that he would like to attend a national meeting and present some of his research findings. This would also give him an opportunity to meet with prospective employers, since he hoped to complete his graduate studies soon. The assistant professor knew he had sufficient material for this presentation but worried about what the other consortium members might think about this. Although most of the doctoral student’s studies were carried out before the assistant professor was asked to join the group, the subject matter was very similar. In the meantime the assistant professor was developing her portfolio for her upcoming promotion and tenure review. In describing her involvement in the consortium she felt that her case would be strengthened if she described herself as the initiator of this consortium effort
Obviously misrepresenting your professional accomplishments is unethical. Additionally, the potential benefit of representing herself as the consortium leader can become a significant liability if members of the collaborative group become aware of this misrepresentation. Rather than rewriting the past, the assistant professor should consider describing professional accomplishments she hopes to achieve as a member of this group. To be effective, collaborative studies require clear expectations of the participants, a level of accountability for each, and good communication among the members. Characteristics of successful research collaborations include clearly defined responsibilities of each group as a whole and of each individual with the group that are articulated to all collaboration participants at the beginning help avoid confusion and to ensure smooth coordination of activities
. After all, she argued, it is a very informal arrangement and she could have easily been the person responsible for establishing it. Sometime later the assistant professor received a curt message from her contact in the consortium asking why she had agreed to have her graduate student present material without seeking authorization from the consortiumBeing a member of a collaborative research group comes with a set of responsibilities to that group. Being a faculty mentor to a graduate student also comes with responsibilities. In this case study these sets of responsibilities were in apparent conflict. A major contributor to this dilemma is the lack of a formal agreement among the members of this collaboration concerning the specifics of this arrangement. Additionally, the assistant professor had a responsibility to share with her doctoral student information about the consortium, since his research was directly affected by this arrangement.
A related issue here is that of ownership of the data and access to it. Many universities, including the UNH, have policies in place or under consideration on the ownership and management of research data. When multiple institutions are involved, the issue becomes more complex. Individuals involved in research should be familiar with the policies or guidelines in effect at their institution on this issue. Discussion of authorship issues during the establishment of a collaboration and periodically throughout the formal association helps to prevent misunderstanding and disagreement later in the study.
. Her contact indicated that the group may consider asking her to "resign" from the collaboration. She begins to see her professional life in serious jeopardyParticipating in collaborative research has potential benefits that include bringing the expertise and talents of different researchers to a shared project. However, without the establishment of clear guidelines and strong lines of communication such arrangements can be potentially disastrous. The assistant professor experienced this directly. She does have the potential to overcome the immediate problems by explaining her dilemma both to her contact at the consortium, regarding the collaborative arrangement, and to her graduate student. She might suggest that the consortium could benefit from a set of working guidelines and even offer to create a draft. She can indicate that much of her doctoral student’s work was completed prior to her involvement in the consortium. Finally, in her role as a mentor she can share with her doctoral student her experiences with this collaborative arrangement to prepare him for such a possibility in his future.
.