Latest contribution
The Cultiv8 tool Part 1: Actionable insights for cultivating trust
By Julia E. Moore and Sobia Khan.
2. Sobia Khan (biography)
What are some useful ways of thinking about trust when developing plans to implement your research or strengthen your team? More importantly, what are some practical ways to build trust both as an individual and as an organisation?
Indeed, when asked about some of the most challenging parts of implementing changes and taking part in research collaborations, people often talk about trust. Trust is essential for equity and for working with people in effective ways, but so few of us are trained in how to build trust.
This i2Insights contribution provides a practical approach to thinking about trust, along with actionable steps to cultivate trust to help you achieve your goals, whether you are working with others to implement evidence or looking to strengthen your team dynamics.
Recent contributions
From slogan to practice: Restoring transdisciplinarity as a serious way of working
By Hussein Zeidan.
Do you sense a growing gap between the promise of transdisciplinarity and the way it is often practised? Have you recognised instances where a paper praises integration, yet treats it as little more than a symbolic gesture, instead of a serious intellectual and ethical commitment?
How did we get here, and how can we reclaim transdiscipinarity from superficial habits that weaken its potential?
How did we get here?
The rise of transdisciplinarity has been remarkable. Funding agencies promote it. Universities showcase it. New centres and programmes are built around it. This visibility has helped many people experiment with new forms of collaboration.
But it has also created a new problem: the more transdisciplinarity is celebrated, the more its core ideas risk becoming diluted.
A framework for navigating the impact of using artificial intelligence on collaborative research communication
By Faye Miller.
How can research teams recognise when their use of artificial intelligence is affecting their ability to integrate different knowledge and perspectives? How can they navigate the impact of artificial intelligence on their collaborative processes?
When research teams use artificial intelligence in collaborative work, new complexities emerge, especially subtle shifts in communication patterns that can fundamentally alter how teams integrate different perspectives and knowledge forms. Consider an environmental team relying on artificial intelligence summaries across hydrology, ecology, and policy. They might miss crucial disciplinary nuances, or follow its “evidence-based” recommendations that may clash with community priorities. Such changes in communication rhythms can compromise decision-making quality and the integration of different viewpoints.
Three lessons for designing serious games for educational settings
By Alice H. Aubert.
What is Triadic Game Design and what lessons does it provide for designing and analysing serious games in an educational setting?
Triadic Game Design
The Triadic Game Design is a design framework for serious games that defines three essential, interrelated elements—Reality, Meaning, and Play—that need to be integrated and balanced (Harteveld 2011).
Reality ensures the game represents the real world sufficiently (ie., in a valid and reliable way that can be understood by the target players). Subject-matter experts model the Reality in the game focusing on the problem, its influencing factors, and relationships.
Meaning pertains to the game’s purpose and its transference to the real world, to create added value through playing the game.
Moving from epistemic paternalism to transformative transdisciplinarity
By David Ludwig and Charbel N. El-Hani.
2. Charbel N. El-Hani (biography)
How can we overcome the epistemic paternalism that has long shaped relations between science and society? How can a transformative vision of transdisciplinarity emerge from the interplay between epistemic diversity and epistemic decolonization?
Demands for transdisciplinary research reflect an intricate politics of knowledge that can be described through a triad of paternalism, diversity, and decolonization. Epistemic paternalism has become widely criticized in many debates about development and modernization. For example, international development projects are often deeply paternalistic by assuming that science and technology of the “developed world” should be simply exported into the “underdeveloped world,” where they are imagined as generating economic growth and societal progress.
Highlighted contributions
Storytelling and systems change
An i2Insights story based on one originally told by Thea Snow, David Murikumthara, Teya Dusseldorp, Rachel Fyfe, Lila Wolff and Jane McCracken
How is storytelling important in driving systems change? What does good storytelling look like? What makes it hard to tell stories about systems change work? We address these three questions.
But first, what do we mean by systems change? We use the definition developed by New Philanthropy Capital (Abercrombie et al. 2015): “Systems change aims to bring about lasting change by altering underlying structures and supporting mechanisms which make the system operate in a particular way. These can include policies, routines, relationships, resources, power structures and values.”
How is storytelling important in driving systems change?
Public participation geographical information systems
By Nora Fagerholm, María García-Martín, Mario Torralba, Claudia Bieling and Tobias Plieninger
What is encompassed by public participation geographical information systems? What resources are required? What are the strengths and weaknesses of involving stakeholders?
Participatory mapping combines cartography with participatory approaches to put the knowledge, experiences, and aspirations of people on a map. Under this umbrella term, public participation geographical information systems refers to the use of geographical information systems (GIS) and modern communication technologies to engage the general public and stakeholders in participatory planning and decision-making.
Viable System Model: A theory for designing more responsive organisations
By Angela Espinosa
How can communities, businesses, regions, and nations – which can all be thought of as organisations – be designed to be capable of dealing quickly and effectively with environmental fluidity and complexity?
The Viable System Model, often referred to as VSM, is a theory that posits that a complex organisation is more capable of responding to a changing and unpredictable environment, if it is:
- composed of autonomous, effective, and agile subsidiary organisations,
- highly connected to each other, and
- cohesively operating with shared ethos, purpose, processes, and technologies.
A complex organisation therefore has multiple levels of nested organisations, each adhering to these principles.
Externalizing implicit expectations and assumptions in transdisciplinary research
By Verena Radinger-Peer, Katharina Gugerell and Marianne Penker
2. Katharina Gugerell (biography)
3. Marianne Penker (biography
How can implicit expectations and assumptions of team members in transdisciplinary research collaborations be identified?
We used Q-methodology as a tool to make diverse expectations and perceptions of transdisciplinary research collaborations tangible and thus negotiable.
Q-methodology is an established explorative, semi-quantitative method for investigating distinctive viewpoints of a given population based on inverted factor analysis. While we do not explain Q methodology here, it is increasingly used and we refer those who want to find out more to Watts and Stenner (2012).