Collaboration involves two or more researchers within an institution, or across different institutions, working in either the same or different disciplines but sharing a common goal. While collaborations have always been an intrinsic part of research, in recent years they have emerged as being an essential component of any interdisciplinary project with a grander scope. The nature of collaboration has evolved to encompass not only intra-departmental research but also multi-contextual/multi-departmental and sometimes even multi-continental research. It has definitely changed the way scientists propose their projects, no longer being restricted to their own specialized skills but having access to skills at many institutions.
Various factors have encouraged and fueled collaborations, some of which are discussed briefly here (also see here):
Funding sources: Several federal funding agencies, such as the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation, have recently formulated their request for proposals to encourage and solicit inter-disciplinary projects. The idea is that bringing together research teams with diverse skills and strengths will foster collegiality and provide innovative and creative solutions to problems with a wider scope. The results may then be easily translated to commercial uses and industry-based applications. This trend has encouraged independent researchers to venture out of their departments to seek collaborations when proposing a project (RCR Collaborative Science, 2005). In addition, collaborations can often expedite the completion of a project.
Division of labor and sharing resources: An important justification for collaboration is the ability to share resources and devise plans to divide labor according to skill sets and techniques to complete tasks efficiently and in a timely fashion. In fact, there has been a steady rise in the number of co/multi-authored papers in recent years. For example, although the number of Letters in Nature has not changed over the years, the number of authors in each has gone up almost four fold (Adams J., 2012). The resulting publications are also more diverse and tend to have comprehensive data covering multiple aspects of the research question. This also answers the current demand for expanded capacity that is required to conduct successfully funded research.
Research networks: There has been a steady increase in research networks across institutions and countries, which is reflected in the increase of co-authored publications. The incentive for such co-authorship is that such papers tend to be cited more (Adams J., 2006). The tally of papers with numerous authors has been growing. In 2004 and 2008, papers with 1,000 and 3,000 authors were published; many of these are global collaborations like the Large Hadron Collider (CERN) and the Human Genome project. These are all indications of the rise of research networks with a shared global agenda, although they do not necessarily guarantee a deep or tangible intellectual interaction.
Complementary skills: As funding agencies have become more demanding, researchers have recognized the value of having complementary skills. For example, a chemist developing a molecule for a specific biological function may not have a good idea of its actual impact and use in a biological system and thus a collaboration may be born between a chemist and a cell biologist. This also exposes the individual researchers in each field to a completely different aspect of perhaps the same question, thus broadening their perspectives and building better scientists. The additional input from the collaborators of diverse backgrounds also lends added credibility to the research and improves the overall quality of science.
Ease of communication: With the advent of online databases and secure electronic mail, collaborations have also become easier for researchers to handle. Sharing data and managing a joint publication, even from different parts of the world, is now possible and feasible. This has definitely fueled the rise of co-authored publications. In addition, technology transfer between academia and industry has been made easier by the Bayh-Dole act and the establishment of tech transfer offices on academic campuses, which engender easy communication between scientists and their industrial counterparts.
However, despite having strong justification for collaborative research networks as stated here, this article would be incomplete without acknowledging some disadvantages that may arise in the long term. A few are briefly noted below:
Difference in style of investigators and research: Different labs and research disciplines have different ways of working. It is important to put everything on the table early in the relationship so as to accommodate the varied styles.
Potential problems in sharing of data and research prior to publication: Open and free sharing of preliminary data is the norm in academia; however, most industrial data sharing is more guarded and has rigid regulations. Navigating such differences can be an issue unless discussed early.
Ethical considerations for research conducted across nations: Different laws defining potential financial and intellectual property conflict of interest across nations may be hard to reconcile.
General propensity toward shared bland global agenda versus risky, novel approaches: A rising concern is that collaboration could restrict the topics that are being investigated to those that are considered high impact and are approved by peers. This can be detrimental to the true mission of science, which is to explore and discover. To that end, some individual researcher-driven projects are necessary.
In conclusion, collaboration and research networks have evolved to generally improve the quality of science and allow investigators to ask questions they would not have the means to answer previously. Research collaborations open fresh avenues to collectively address problems in science. If you have had any collaborative experiences in science, feel free to add your thoughts in the comments.
About the Author:
Arunika is a post-doctoral researcher in the labs of Drs. Michael Lampson and Ben Black at the University of Pennsylvania. She is working on the mechanism of centromere inheritance and maintenance in the mammalian germline.
