Concepts

Fulfillment, balance and process: Co-active coaching principles for team science

By Joanna Kaniewska and Gemma Jiang.

authors_joanna-kaniewska_gemma-jiang
1. Joanna Kaniewska (biography)
2. Gemma Jiang (biography)

What is Co-Active Coaching and how can it be applied in teams?

Co-Active Coaching (Kimsey-House et al., 2018) is a coaching method built on the premise that people are naturally creative, resourceful, and capable of finding their own answers. Rather than acting as an expert or trainer who gives solutions, the coach partners with coachees in a collaborative process that helps them gain clarity, make intentional choices, and create meaningful change.

In this i2Insights contribution, we focus on the three core principles of Co-Active Coaching—fulfillment, balance, and process—and show how they can be used in teamwork.

Fulfillment: reconnecting people to their purpose

Fulfillment coaching is about connecting work to meaning. It can be particularly useful when team members are disengaged, anxious, or questioning the value of their work.

Read more

How could research ethics governance better support participatory, transdisciplinary, and transformation-oriented research?

By Ying-Syuan (Elaine) Huang and Julia Wittmayer.

authors_ying-syuan-huang_julia-wittmayer
1. Ying-Syuan (Elaine) Huang (biography)
2. Julia Wittmayer (biography)

How can we design an ethics governance system that can better respond when ethical dilemmas emerge after institutional approval has been granted? 

This question is increasingly pressing for researchers engaged in participatory, transdisciplinary, and transformative work. Ethical concerns often arise in-situ where partnerships evolve, power dynamics shift, community expectations change, and research begins to have effects beyond the original project design.

These concerns do not fit neatly into conventional ethics review procedures at universities, which still tend to be organised around upfront review: researchers submit an application, a committee assesses it, and approval is granted before the research begins. This model matters for safeguarding participants, researchers, and institutions. But it is increasingly misaligned with the type of engaged research that emphasises social learning and democratically deliberative process for positive societal change.

Read more

Accountability in two different teamwork environments: The jigsaw puzzle and the collage

By Allison Dalton, Yvonne Pelling and Gaetano R. Lotrecchiano.

authors_dalton_pelling_lotrecchiano
1. Allison Dalton (biography)
2. Yvonne Pelling (biography)
3. Gaetano R. Lotrecchiano (biography)

How can teams demonstrate accountability in two different collaborative environments?

Accountability refers to the ways, both tangible and intangible, of showing up for ourselves and the rest of the team throughout a collaborative project. It gives rise to trust and forward momentum which impacts team functioning and ultimately the outcome of the work.

Here we look at accountability in two different collaborative environments, which we refer to using the metaphors of the jigsaw puzzle and the collage.

A team tasked with assembling a jigsaw puzzle deals with a finite set of clearly distinguished pieces, each to be fitted together in one correct way, and a reference image to demonstrate what the outcome will look like.

Read more

The ontologies of restricted and general complexity

By Jean Boulton.

jean-boulton
Jean Boulton (biography)

What is a useful way to clarify the underpinning ontological ground of complexity? What can we learn from the work of Edgar Morin (2006), who distinguishes between those working within the frames of restricted and general complexity? And how are these frames relevant to practice?

Morin makes a distinction between:

  • a framing of complexity that sits within the ontology of classical science, which he calls ‘restricted complexity’
  • the ‘general complexity’ of the ‘real world,’ where general complexity is more paradoxical, more integrating, more challenging, ambiguous and uncertain – but also ripe with potential.

Restricted complexity emanates from the world of models, maps and mathematics. The aim is to find ways to represent the complexity of the real world, by finding a good map.

General complexity, by contrast, starts further back into the primordial mud, and champions the attainment of knowledge through wandering the ‘territory’.

Read more

Three dimensions of context

gabriele-bammer_nov-2021
Gabriele Bammer (biography)

By Gabriele Bammer.

In research tackling complex societal and environmental problems, what is involved in taking context into account when aiming for more comprehensive understanding of a problem, as well as research support for policy and practice change so that the problem is better dealt with?

As outlined in my work developing Integration and Implementation Sciences (i2S), considering context involves dealing with circumstances at three levels:

  • social or big picture, eg., the historical, political, economic, cultural, geographical and other circumstances
  • organizational, especially the structure and culture of the research and stakeholder organisations involved
  • individual, especially the positionality or identity of researchers and stakeholders.

Each of these dimensions of context has widespread ramifications, affecting:

  • how a problem manifests and is understood, including what is studied and how, as well as the unknowns considered to be pertinent
  • what actions are likely to be considered and to have a chance of being successful.

Read more

Cultivating epistemic humility in research teams

By Faye Miller.

faye-miller_2025
Faye Miller (biography)

What makes it so challenging for research teams to be truly receptive to being wrong? And what can teams do to make doubt expressible and useful?

Being aware that knowledge is always situational, incomplete, and prone to error, as well as the willingness to hold opinions tentatively, be receptive to change, and recognise the boundaries of understanding, are all components of epistemic humility. Humility about what one knows and can know is an intellectual quality in individual researchers. Yet epistemic humility also has a structural dimension: which doubts get expressed, whose knowledge is heard, and how teams handle what they don’t yet know, are challenges that go beyond the individual researcher to shape how research teams function.

This i2Insights contribution is an attempt to highlight two challenges that need to be addressed:

  • the confidence trap, built on the pressure to exude certainty, and
  • the silence trap, arising from the social dynamics that can suppress productive doubt.

Read more

Transdisciplinarity in education: Aligning conceptualisation, configuration and competencies

By Hussein Zeidan.

hussein-zeidan
Hussein Zeidan (biography)

How can we move from broad visions of transdisciplinarity to concrete educational practices that students can meaningfully engage with? What kinds of course designs genuinely support learning in complex, real‑world settings? And how do we ensure clarity, for both students and educators, about what these courses are meant to achieve?

These questions sit at the heart of many conversations among educators seeking to bring transdisciplinarity into their teaching practice. We want students to learn how to navigate complex problems, draw on multiple ways of knowing and develop the mindsets that allow them to work across boundaries with confidence. Yet the very flexibility that makes transdisciplinarity appealing can also make it difficult to design courses that are clear, supportive and aligned.

Read more

The essential conditions for, and characteristics of, complexity

By Jean Boulton.

jean-boulton
Jean Boulton (biography)

What are the underpinning necessities or conditions—the essential ingredients—that lead to and engender the qualities or characteristics of the complex world, especially its processual and emergent nature?

Three conditions for complexity: the essential ingredients

A watch or intricate machine is not complex. Nor is a saucer of water. So, when do we regard something as complex? What are the necessary conditions for complexity fully to be realised?

These are:

  • open boundaries
  • diversity
  • reflexive inter-relationships among constituents.

Let’s look at each of these in more detail.

Read more

Five structural levers to reopen feedback loops that are resistant to external evidence

By Lachlan S. McGill.

lachlan-mcgill
Lachlan S. McGill (biography)

When feedback loops have become resistant to external evidence, what are some potential ways of intervening to reopen them?

This i2Insights contribution builds on my previous post which covers understanding why feedback loops can become resistant to external evidence and how to diagnose such a structural problem.

Here I introduce five structural ways to intervene in such a closed feedback loop. These are structural levers, each targeting a different aspect of how signals flow, how authority is allocated, and how evaluative standards are defined.

One practical note before beginning. Applying the interventions below often requires institutional authority, coalition building, or regulatory support, so that isolated actors may not be able to deploy them fully, leaving the problematic dominant structure intact. The five levers describe what structural intervention looks like but are not a guarantee that it will succeed.

Read more

Understanding and diagnosing when feedback loops become resistant to external evidence

By Lachlan S. McGill.

lachlan-mcgill
Lachlan S. McGill (biography)

Why does better evidence sometimes fail to improve decision making? How can we tell if this is caused by feedback loops becoming resistant to external evidence?

Understanding how structural patterns become problematic

In most organisations, decisions are embedded in feedback loops that connect indicators, incentives, and authority structures. These loops determine what counts as success, which signals influence decisions, and how performance is evaluated over time.

When feedback loops are well aligned with system goals, they support learning. However, feedback loops can also evolve in ways that reinforce a narrow definition of success. This is generally associated with a system relying on a small number of indicators to guide decisions. Common examples include financial return on investment, productivity or output measures, growth targets, publication counts or grant income, and compliance indicators.

Read more

A framework for considering context in evaluation of transdisciplinary research projects

By Julia Schegg, Rea Pärli, Manuel Fischer and Eva Lieberherr.

authors_schegg_parli_fischer_lieberherr
1. Julia Schegg (biography)
2. Rea Pärli (biography)
3. Manuel Fischer (biography)
4. Eva Lieberherr (biography)

How do contextual factors influence the effects of transdisciplinary research projects? How can assessment of transdisciplinary research move from only considering outcome effectiveness to understanding the reasons behind how and why something works?

Our framework considers both context and the effects of transdisciplinary research projects, as summarised in the figure below. Each aspect of the framework is described in more detail.

Context

Read more

The Cultiv8 tool Part 1: Actionable insights for cultivating trust

By Julia E. Moore and Sobia Khan.

authors_julia-moore_sobia-khan
1. Julia E Moore (biography)
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.

Read more