IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v268y2018i3p1168-1177.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Strengthening community operational research through exchange of tools and strategic alliances

Author

Listed:
  • Bammer, Gabriele

Abstract

Community operational research (COR) would benefit from forming strategic alliances with other areas of scholarly endeavor involved in tackling complex social and environmental problems. Intellectually this would strengthen COR as a community of practice, expanding its repertoire of tools and increasing uptake of COR concepts and methods by researchers outside COR. Banding together would also increase influence in research and higher education policy making to promote widespread uptake of the best ways of tackling complex problems and ensuring there is adequate funding and institutional support. A new discipline of Integration and Implementation Sciences (I2S), which aims to be a conduit between COR and others tackling complex social and environmental issues, is described, along with its origins. The role of I2S as a conduit is illustrated by presenting six tools and toolkits, which have been developed outside COR, but which may enhance its practice. They are: (1) knowledge co-production toolbox, (2) change management toolbook, (3) collaboration and team science field guide, (4) engaging and influencing policy toolkit, (5) ethical matrix and (6) matrix for distinguishing three different kinds of unknowns.

Suggested Citation

  • Bammer, Gabriele, 2018. "Strengthening community operational research through exchange of tools and strategic alliances," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(3), pages 1168-1177.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:268:y:2018:i:3:p:1168-1177
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2017.09.041
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377221717308883
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ejor.2017.09.041?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bammer, Gabriele, 2008. "Enhancing research collaborations: Three key management challenges," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 875-887, June.
    2. Midgley, Gerald & Cavana, Robert Y. & Brocklesby, John & Foote, Jeff L. & Wood, David R.R. & Ahuriri-Driscoll, Annabel, 2013. "Towards a new framework for evaluating systemic problem structuring methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 229(1), pages 143-154.
    3. Lindell Bromham & Russell Dinnage & Xia Hua, 2016. "Interdisciplinary research has consistently lower funding success," Nature, Nature, vol. 534(7609), pages 684-687, June.
    4. repec:pal:palcom:v:2016:y:2016:i:palcomms201617:p:16017- is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Gabriele Bammer, 2016. "What constitutes appropriate peer review for interdisciplinary research?," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 2(1), pages 1-5, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bai, Bingfeng, 2022. "Strategic business management for airport alliance: A complex network approach to simulation robustness analysis," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 606(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bianca Vienni-Baptista & Isabel Fletcher & Catherine Lyall & Christian Pohl, 2022. "Embracing heterogeneity: Why plural understandings strengthen interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity [Defining Interdisciplinary Research: Conclusions from a Critical Review of the Literature]," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 49(6), pages 865-877.
    2. Gabriele Bammer, 2017. "Should we discipline interdisciplinarity?," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 3(1), pages 1-4, December.
    3. Lin Zhang & Ziyi Tu & Yifei Yu & Yuanyuan Shang & Ying Huang, 2024. "Spotting potential reviewers for interdisciplinary research: insights on active reviewers from Publons," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(9), pages 5533-5556, September.
    4. Roberto Iorio & Sandrine Labory & Francesco Rentocchini, 2014. "Academics’ Motivations and Depth and Breadth of Knowledge Transfer Activities," Working Papers 1401, c.MET-05 - Centro Interuniversitario di Economia Applicata alle Politiche per L'industria, lo Sviluppo locale e l'Internazionalizzazione.
    5. Smith, Chris M. & Shaw, Duncan, 2019. "The characteristics of problem structuring methods: A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 274(2), pages 403-416.
    6. Jürgen Janger & Nicole Schmidt-Padickakudy & Anna Strauss-Kollin, 2019. "International Differences in Basic Research Grant Funding. A Systematic Comparison," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 61664.
    7. Fabio Silva & Fiona Coward & Kimberley Davies & Sarah Elliott & Emma Jenkins & Adrian C. Newton & Philip Riris & Marc Vander Linden & Jennifer Bates & Elena Cantarello & Daniel A. Contreras & Stefani , 2022. "Developing Transdisciplinary Approaches to Sustainability Challenges: The Need to Model Socio-Environmental Systems in the Longue Durée," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-20, August.
    8. Lami, Isabella M. & Tavella, Elena, 2019. "On the usefulness of soft OR models in decision making: A comparison of Problem Structuring Methods supported and self-organized workshops," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 275(3), pages 1020-1036.
    9. Lina Xu & Steven Dellaportas & Zhiqiang Yang & Jin Wang, 2023. "More on the relationship between interdisciplinary accounting research and citation impact," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 63(4), pages 4779-4803, December.
    10. Luoma, Jukka, 2016. "Model-based organizational decision making: A behavioral lens," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 816-826.
    11. Barry Bozeman & Monica Gaughan & Jan Youtie & Catherine P. Slade & Heather Rimes, 2016. "Research collaboration experiences, good and bad: Dispatches from the front lines," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 43(2), pages 226-244.
    12. Li, Heyang & Wu, Meijun & Wang, Yougui & Zeng, An, 2022. "Bibliographic coupling networks reveal the advantage of diversification in scientific projects," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(3).
    13. Yu, Xiaoyao & Szymanski, Boleslaw K. & Jia, Tao, 2021. "Become a better you: Correlation between the change of research direction and the change of scientific performance," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(3).
    14. Jianxiu Gu, 2024. "Insufficient Academic Experience or Excessive Family Responsibility: Why do Female Faculty in Chinese Research Universities Publish Less than Male Faculty?," Research in Higher Education, Springer;Association for Institutional Research, vol. 65(6), pages 1340-1366, September.
    15. Lawson, Cornelia & Salter, Ammon, 2023. "Exploring the effect of overlapping institutional applications on panel decision-making," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(9).
    16. Xiaolan Wu & Chengzhi Zhang, 2019. "Finding high-impact interdisciplinary users based on friend discipline distribution in academic social networking sites," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(2), pages 1017-1035, May.
    17. White, Leroy, 2018. "A Cook's tour: Towards a framework for measuring the social impact of social purpose organisations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(3), pages 784-797.
    18. Laurens K. Hessels & Stefan P.L. De Jong & Stijn Brouwer, 2018. "Collaboration between Heterogeneous Practitioners in Sustainability Research: A Comparative Analysis of Three Transdisciplinary Programmes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-16, December.
    19. Kateryna Wowk & Larry McKinney & Frank Muller-Karger & Russell Moll & Susan Avery & Elva Escobar-Briones & David Yoskowitz & Richard McLaughlin, 2017. "Evolving academic culture to meet societal needs," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 3(1), pages 1-7, December.
    20. He, Zi-Lin & Geng, Xue-Song & Campbell-Hunt, Colin, 2009. "Research collaboration and research output: A longitudinal study of 65 biomedical scientists in a New Zealand university," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 306-317, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:268:y:2018:i:3:p:1168-1177. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eor .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.