Search by phases

This section comprises challenges you may encounter in specific stages of knowledge co-production. It is not necessary to go through all stages or to address them in the current order.

Note: Listed methods offer first options and are not meant to be exclusive. We will add more methods over time.

Jointly envisage a transdisciplinary project

Develop a rough project idea

In a loose group of interested experts from science and practice and based on a shared concern, we would like to agree on a concrete societal problem situation to work on.

(no tool at this stage)

We would like to clarify what various interested experts from science and practice could contribute to and benefit from a joint project. Furthermore, it could be useful to know whether important topics are missing.

We have identified the relevant actors for our project. We would like to bring them together to put on the table desired goals, expectations and interests; and to develop pathways to impact and a strategy for the project.

Clarify who to involve

We want to discuss our rough project idea with various experts from science and practice and are unsure about who to involve.

Develop a rough procedure for co-producing knowledge

We would like to jointly develop a procedure for our knowledge co-production process and don't know how to do that.

(no tool at this stage)

We have identified the relevant actors for our project. We need to define a) the role and tasks of our transdisciplinary group, b) rules of decision making and confidentiality, and c) intellectual property rights agreements.

We have identified relevant actors for our project. We need to define who to involve in which stage of the process, in which form and how intense.

(no tool at this stage)

Jointly frame goals, problems and research

Identify relevant understandings of the problem situation

We would like to discuss a problem situation more in-depth from the perspective of different fields from science and practice.

We would like to learn what the problem is, for whom it is a problem and how strongly we or other people agree on its framing. We want the various perspectives to become explicit.

Step 1 of:

We realize we have to better understand the societal problem our research deals with, i.e. the problem’s actual dynamics, how it is being perceived or discussed by whom and in which context.

(no tool at this stage)

Identify societal knowledge demand

We want to make sure our project asks relevant research questions from the point of view of societal priorities. We want to identify the respective demand for the knowledge .

Agree on problem framing and normative conception of a project

We would like to develop a joint problem framing by making use of the collective knowledge of the group. To start we would like to summarize the knowledge on the topic and gain an overview. We would like to use a means of expression that removes potential hierarchies between participants.

Step 1 of:

We would like to make different problem framings explicit in order to agree on with which framing(s) to work in our project.

(no tool at this stage)

We have the feeling that there are hidden normative positions in our project. We don't know how to identify them and how to deal with them to meet scientific standards.

Define achievable project goals

Participants’ expectations regarding the project’s outcomes are unclear or differ. We need to clarify these expectations in order to agree on realistic project goals.

Develop subtopics and a concept for integration

Within a bigger project, we are several actors working at the interface areas of several topics. We want to find out which individuals work on similar intersections of topics.

We would like to clarify what each of the involved partners (or subprojects) could contribute to and benefit from the overall project. Furthermore, it could be useful to know whether important topics are missing.

We want to initiate a more in-depth exchange among (sub-) projects so that they start swapping ideas.

We would like to develop a bridging concept and boundary objects that are tangible to all actors involved.

(no tool at this stage)

Jointly conduct research

Jointly generate knowledge

We want to generate a set of possible future development scenarios to allow developing a shared vision for the future.

We have a question to which there is no study, but there are some experts that, as a collective, have the knowledge and can provide relevant arguments to answer the question.

We want to collaboratively develop an experiment or an intervention, repectively, in a test setting (or as a real world experiment) and evaluate the outcomes.

(no tool at this stage)

Integrate knowledge

We feel the various parts of our co-production project have lost their interconnections or have developed in different directions. We would like to find out whether and which (new) links can be made.

Our collaboration doesn’t work as anticipated. We think we need to clarify whether some subprojects deal with overlapping questions or issues.

We would like to discuss an issue more in-depth from the perspective of different fields in order to increase understanding.

We want to jointly advance the work of various (sub-) projects or project parts. We hope that, by doing so, we get a better and more comprehensive picture of the project as a whole.

Being part of a bigger project, I would like to get feedback from other subprojects on my research idea, research questions and approach.

We would like to collect and interrelate our group’s knowledge on a certain topic. We would like to use a means of expression that removes potential hierarchies between participants.

Step 1 of:

Different group members disagree about which facts are relevant, which interpretations (of facts) are adequate, and which strategies are useful for solving a problem. We would like to collect, weigh and decide on underlying arguments and rationales.

We want to develop a set of possible future development scenarios with respect to a societal issue. For coherence, we would like to describe the different scenarios with the same variables.

Jointly assess quality with respect to scientific rigour, social robustness and practical relevance

As laypersons in a certain field, we would like to examine priorities, framings and models set by experts. We would like to uncover respective assumptions (e.g. system boundaries that were set when creating a model; aspects that are stressed or neglected in describing an issue).

Jointly explore ways to impact in science and society

Jointly reconsider ways to impact

We would like to test or evaluate the assumptions and hypotheses about how our research would lead or contribute to a process of (societal) change.

Jointly develop and test ideas, measures and solutions

We want to produce concrete transformation options taking actors and stakeholders' needs into account.

We are a heterogeneous group of experts and would like to collectively publish the insights gained in our project.

Jointly evaluate impact

Our envisaged project outcomes are clear. However, we are not sure about intended and unintended effect the project had. Therefore, we would like to identify them from the perspective of the various involved actors.

Powered by:

td-net logo

td-net – Network for Transdisciplinarity Research

Contribute to this methods collection and share your experiences