A systemic approach to interdisciplinary collaboration for academic research teams

International Journal of Applied Systemic Studies

Volumn 1, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 82-112

  Assimakopoulos, Nikitas A ^a   Theocharopoulos, Ioannis C ^a   Dimitriou, Nikolaos K ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PIRAEUS   (Greece)

Author keywords

academic research teams; DCSYM; interdisciplinary collaboration; knowledge mapping; ontologies; process modelling; SSM

Indexed keywords

EID: 78651564338     PISSN: 17510589     EISSN: 17510597     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1504/IJASS.2007.013818     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Alves, J., Marques, M. and Saur, I. (2004) Role of Networking in Innovation Promotion and Cluster Modernisation: “House of the Future” Case, paper presented at the 44th European Congress of the European Regional Science Association: Regions and Fiscal Federalism, August 25–29, Porto, Portugal.
2. Assimakopoulos, N.A. (2000) ‘Structured total systems intervention systemic multi-methodology of viable systems and metasystems (STIMEVIS)’, Human Systems Management, Vol. 19, No. 1, pp.61–69.
3. Bourke, P. and Butler, L. (1998) ‘Institutions and the map of science: matching university departments and fields of research’, Research Policy, Vol. 26, pp.711–718.
4. Bowen, K. (1981) ‘A conflict approach to the modelling of problems of and in organisations’, in Brans, J.P. (Ed.): Operational Research’81, North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp.79–90.
5. Checkland, P. (1981) Systems Thinking, Systems Practice, John Wiley and Sons, Chichester.
6. Chin, G., Myers, J. and Hoyt, D. (2002) ‘Social networks in the virtual science laboratory’, Communications of the ACM, Vol. 45, No. 8, pp.87–92.
7. Cramton, C.D. (2001) ‘The mutual knowledge problem and its consequences in dispersed collaboration’, Organisation Science, Vol. 12, No. 3, pp.346–371.
8. Finholt, T.A. and Olson, G.M. (1997) ‘From laboratories to collaboratories: a new organisational form for scientific collaboration’, Psychological Science, Vol. 8, No. 1, pp.28–36.
9. Flood, R. and Jackson, M. (1991) Creative Problem Solving, Wiley, England.
10. Grinter, R.E., Herbsleb, J.D. and Perry, D.E. (1999) The Geography of Coordination: Dealing with Distance in R&D Work, GROUP, ACM, Phoenix, AZ.
11. Ivanitskaya, L., Clark, D., Montgomery, G. and Primeau, R. (2002) ‘Interdisciplinary learning: process and outcomes’, Innovative Higher Education, Vol. 27, No. 2, pp.95–111.
12. Panayotopoulos, A. and Assimakopoulos, N. (1987) ‘Problem structuring in a hospital’, European J. Operational Research, Vol. 29, pp.135–143.
13. Por, G. and Molloy, J. (2000) ‘Nurturing systemic wisdom through knowledge ecology’, The Systems Thinker, Vol. 11, No. 8, pp.1–5.
14. Schmoch, U., Breiner, S., Cuhls, K., Hinze, S. and Munt, G. (1998) Interdisciplinary Cooperation of Research Teams in Science-Intensive Areas of Technology, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research, Karlsruhe.
15. Teasley, S. and Wolinsky, S. (2001) ‘Scientific collaborations at a distance’, Science, Vol. 292, pp.2254, 2255.
16. The Knowledge Module (KM) can be defined as a self-existent, autonomous, acknowledged knowledge area in regard to some subject or a process concerning the cognitive fields of a specific science and/or its disciplines. For example, a KM could be the cognitive field of Queuing Theory, which can be considered as a separate research trend in the broad area of Statistical Sciences.