Promoting Team Science Participation Stephen Kritchevsky, PhD Department of Internal Medicine Associate Dean for Research Development

Team-authored papers cited MUCH more frequently than single/main authors A = science and engineering Wuchty, et al. Science, 2007

Group’s Collective Intelligence correlated with: 1.Group cohesion, motivation, satisfaction? – NO 2.Individual IQ’s or IQ of highest performing member? – Moderate 3.Average social sensitivity – YES! – “turn-taking” was strongly correlated with CI 4.Number of women? – YES!! – better turn-takers

Two Questions What are the attributes of a person who works well in a team setting? What aspects of the culture promote or stifle an individual’s willingness to participate and contribute to a team?

Attributes of Good Research Team Members Openness & vulnerability Willing to disagree vigorously (but respectfully) Listening to understand, speaking to be understood Reliable, willing to commit Responsible for the mastery of one’s area of expertise

What does a culture that promotes team science look like? Teams are recognized for results Leaders model team behaviors Individuals are rewarded for their contributions to teams Participation does not compromise chances for promotion and tenure

From the Tenure and Promotion Policy “Wake Forest University School of Medicine recognizes and values the participation of faculty in collaborative research. “ “... the personal narrative may..., identify[ing] the particular role the faculty member played and the impact of the work.” New NIH biosketch format is moving in this direction

From the Tenure and Promotions Policy “…the following elements are required for a faculty member’s research... to be considered... for the awarding of tenure.  Original  Independent, or, if the faculty member is engaged in collaborative work, of such a nature that the faculty member’s contribution to the scholarly work is significant in the design, analysis, context and dissemination of the research  Important in developing new knowledge  Recognized by peers “

Are we doing enough? Performance Evaluations? Hiring, Tenure and Promotions? Training team leaders and team members in the behaviors that maximize team productivity?