<!DOCTYPE html>

<html data-programme="Research Integrity" data-course="Communication, Social Responsibility and Impact">

	<head>
		<title>Working with colleagues</title>
		<meta charset="UTF-8">
		<meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=edge">
		<meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1">

		<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="../css/project.min.css">
		<link id="basic-print" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="../css/print.min.css" disabled>
		<link id="summary-print" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="../css/print_interactive.min.css">
	<script type="text/javascript" src="../scripts_scorm_12/SCORM_12_APIWrapper.js"></script>
<script type="text/javascript" src="../scripts_scorm_12/courseFunctions.js"></script>
</head>

	<body onLoad="javascript:Initialize();" onUnload="javascript:Terminate();">
	  
		<div id="app" v-cloak>
			<base-container
				screen-id="sre_1_40"
				current-module = "Communication, Social Responsibility and Impact"
				page-title = "Working with colleagues"
				screen-time = "4"
				screen-time-period = "mins">

				<page-container>
					
					<page-row>
						<page-content-main>
						
							<p>Working with colleagues is, in many ways, the same as working with research teams or participating in research collaborations.  Honesty, fairness, transparency, objectivity and the other principles of responsible conduct should be followed. If you are serving on a committee that is reviewing grants, the applications you review should be treated in the same way. When serving on an advisory committee, you should take care to listen to what others have to say.</p>
							<p>Even if you do not share specific research interests, when you work with colleagues you nonetheless share a common interest in what is best for research and its impact on society. As with any other relationship, you should treat others in the way that you would wish to be treated.</p>

							<h3>Recognising and responding to problems</h3>
							
							<p>Recognising and responding to the problems arising from poor professional communication and collaboration can be challenging. Research is competitive, and researchers will have unique personalities and communication styles. When you encounter an awkward situation, knowing how to respond is important.</p>
							
							<instructional-text class="non-interactive-swap-out"><p>The activity below features three illustrated scenarios. After each image, you will be asked to identify the problem leading to the concern raised in the scenario. After identifying the problem, click "Check Answer" and then proceed to the next scenario.</p></instructional-text>
							<instructional-text-accessible class="non-interactive-swap-in"><p>The activity below explores three scenarios. After each scenario, you will be asked to identify the problem leading to the concern raised in the scenario. After identifying the problem, find out if you are correct before proceeding to the next scenario.</p></instructional-text-accessible>
							
						</page-content-main>
					</page-row>
					
					<page-row>
						<page-content-wide>
							
							<!-- ACTIVITY START -->
							<process show-in-accessible-version="false" summary="true" variant="mcq-notemaking" match-height="true" class="non-interactive-swap-out">
								<process-page next-btn-always-active="true">
									<img class="img-responsive" src="../images/activity_images/course_specific/sre_1_40_img1.png" alt="A male researcher is sitting on a train reading. He has a concerned look on his face. He is thinking: this journal is becoming useless. The editor is relying on the same research methods they developed decades ago. They clearly don't value new approaches at all..." />
									<comic-transcript>
										<p><strong>Man:</strong> "This journal is becoming useless. The editor is relying on the same research methods they developed decades ago. They clearly don't value new approaches at all..."</p>
									</comic-transcript>
								</process-page>
								<process-page>
									<mcq>
										<mcq-question><p>What lesson does the journal editor who is relying on old research methods need to appreciate?  </p></mcq-question>
										<mcq-options>
											<mcq-option incorrect>
												<mcq-answer><p>It's time for them to retire</p></mcq-answer>
												<mcq-feedback><p>Incorrect. The journal editor has let their personal opinions influence their decisions and the direction of the journal overall. When providing an administrative or advisory service for some component of the research enterprise, <strong>researchers should not let their personal preferences influence their decisions</strong>. Researchers must remain open-minded and be willing to consider different points of view.</p></mcq-feedback>
											</mcq-option>
											<mcq-option incorrect>
												<mcq-answer><p>They should not use older research methods at all</p></mcq-answer>
												<mcq-feedback><p>Incorrect. The journal editor has let their personal opinions influence their decisions and the direction of the journal overall. When providing an administrative or advisory service for some component of the research enterprise, <strong>researchers should not let their personal preferences influence their decisions</strong>. Researchers must remain open-minded and be willing to consider different points of view.</p></mcq-feedback>
											</mcq-option>
											<mcq-option correct>
												<mcq-answer><p>They should not let their personal opinions influence their decisions</p></mcq-answer>
												<mcq-feedback><p><strong>Correct!</strong> The journal editor has let their personal opinions influence their decisions and the direction of the journal overall. When providing an administrative or advisory service for some component of the research enterprise, <strong>researchers should not let their personal preferences influence their decisions</strong>. Researchers must remain open-minded and be willing to consider different points of view.</p></mcq-feedback>
											</mcq-option>
										</mcq-options> 
									</mcq>
								</process-page>
								<process-page next-btn-always-active="true">
									<img class="img-responsive" src="../images/activity_images/course_specific/sre_1_40_img2.png" alt="A male and female researcher are speaking at a networking event. They are smartly dressed. In the background, two researchers, Catherine and Professor Stevens, are networking.  The female researcher says to the male researcher: Did you hear how Catherine acknowledged Professor Stevens at the end of her talk? Professor Stevens did nothing on that project. The male researcher says: You can bet on Catherine getting that grant, though. Look at how friendly they're getting!" />
									<comic-transcript>
										<p><strong>Woman:</strong> "Did you hear how Catherine acknowledged Professor Stevens at the end of her talk? Professor Stevens did <em>nothing</em> on that project."</p>
										<p><strong>Man:</strong> "You can bet on Catherine getting that grant, though. Look at how friendly they're getting!"</p>
									</comic-transcript>
								</process-page>
								<process-page>
									<mcq>
										<mcq-question><p>What is irresponsible about the relationships presented in this scenario?</p></mcq-question>
										<mcq-options>
											<mcq-option incorrect>
												<mcq-answer><p>It is inappropriate for junior researchers to approach senior colleagues in public settings</p></mcq-answer>
												<mcq-feedback><p>Incorrect. Personal relationships should not influence professional decisions. <strong>Research leaders should set personal relationships aside</strong> when they work in an administrative, advisory or service role. Everyone they encounter should have an equal chance of succeeding, regardless of whether or not they are a friend.</p></mcq-feedback>
											</mcq-option>
											<mcq-option correct>
												<mcq-answer><p>Research leaders should set their personal relationships aside when making professional decisions</p></mcq-answer>
												<mcq-feedback><p><strong>Correct!</strong> Personal relationships should not influence professional decisions. <strong>Research leaders should set personal relationships aside</strong> when they work in an administrative, advisory or service role. Everyone they encounter should have an equal chance of succeeding, regardless of whether or not they are a friend.</p></mcq-feedback>
											</mcq-option>
											<mcq-option incorrect>
												<mcq-answer><p>Researchers should not discuss the behaviour of their colleagues</p></mcq-answer>
												<mcq-feedback><p>Incorrect. Personal relationships should not influence professional decisions. <strong>Research leaders should set personal relationships aside</strong> when they work in an administrative, advisory or service role. Everyone they encounter should have an equal chance of succeeding, regardless of whether or not they are a friend.</p></mcq-feedback>
											</mcq-option>
										</mcq-options> 
									</mcq>
								</process-page>
								<process-page next-btn-always-active="true">
									<img class="img-responsive" src="../images/activity_images/course_specific/sre_1_40_img3.png" alt="A female academic is sitting at a desk with papers in front on her. She is speaking on the phone, with an annoyed looked on her face. She is saying: the review committee shouldn't have approved the project &ndash; full stop. Although the principal investigator declared no conflicts of interest, the CV he posted online includes service as a board member and a position as scientific advisor to the company that is funding the research." />
									<comic-transcript>
										<p><strong>Person on phone:</strong> "The review committee shouldn't have approved the project &ndash; full stop. Although the principal investigator declared no conflicts of interest, the CV he posted online includes service as a board member and a position as scientific advisor to the company that is funding the research."</p>
									</comic-transcript>
								</process-page>
								<process-page>
									<mcq>
										<mcq-question><p>How has the review committee fallen short in this scenario?</p></mcq-question>
										<mcq-options>
											<mcq-option correct>
												<mcq-answer><p>It should have asked for and checked the principal investigator's CV to make sure there were no conflicts</p></mcq-answer>
												<mcq-feedback><p><strong>Correct!</strong> Although it is not the review committee's responsibility to conduct an exhaustive investigation into everything presented to them (i.e. a committee would not be expected to contact every company that might be interested in the research), they should at least take reasonable steps to check for conflicts. Therefore,<strong> when researchers serve on committees, they should, within reason, do background research.</strong> If they agree to take on a position that involves service, even if it is not paid, they should put in the time and effort needed to meet the requirements of the position.</p></mcq-feedback>
											</mcq-option>
											<mcq-option incorrect>
												<mcq-answer><p>It should have identified companies that might benefit from the research and asked them whether they were funding or sponsoring the research in any way</p></mcq-answer>
												<mcq-feedback><p>Incorrect. Although it is not the review committee's responsibility to conduct an exhaustive investigation into everything presented to them (i.e. a committee would not be expected to contact every company that might be interested in the research), they should at least take reasonable steps to check for conflicts. Therefore,<strong> when researchers serve on committees, they should, within reason, do background research.</strong> If they agree to take on a position that involves service, even if it is not paid, they should put in the time and effort needed to meet the requirements of the position.</p></mcq-feedback>
											</mcq-option>
											<mcq-option incorrect>
												<mcq-answer><p>There was nothing further they could have done since they must make decisions based on the information the principal investigator provides, no matter whether it seems incomplete</p></mcq-answer>
												<mcq-feedback><p>Incorrect. Although it is not the review committee's responsibility to conduct an exhaustive investigation into everything presented to them (i.e. a committee would not be expected to contact every company that might be interested in the research), they should at least take reasonable steps to check for conflicts. Therefore,<strong> when researchers serve on committees, they should, within reason, do background research.</strong> If they agree to take on a position that involves service, even if it is not paid, they should put in the time and effort needed to meet the requirements of the position.</p></mcq-feedback>
											</mcq-option>
										</mcq-options> 
									</mcq>
								</process-page>
							</process>
							<!-- ACCESSIBLE START -->
							<accessible-block class="non-interactive-swap-in">
								<img class="img-responsive" src="../images/activity_images/course_specific/sre_1_40_img1.png" alt="A male researcher is sitting on a train reading. He has a concerned look on his face. He is thinking: this journal is becoming useless. The editor is relying on the same research methods they developed decades ago. They clearly don't value new approaches at all..." />
								<p><strong>Man:</strong> "This journal is becoming useless. The editor is relying on the same research methods they developed decades ago. They clearly don't value new approaches at all..."</p>
								<hr>
								<h4>Question 1 of 3:</h4>
								<p>What lesson does the journal editor who is relying on old research methods need to appreciate? </p>
								<h4>Answer options:</h4>
								<ul>
									<li>It's time for them to retire</li>
									<li>They should not use older research methods at all</li>
									<li>They should not let their personal opinions influence their decisions</li>
								</ul>
								<h4>The correct answer is:</h4>
								<ul>
									<li>They should not let their personal opinions influence their decisions</li>
								</ul>
								<h4>Feedback:</h4>
								<p>The journal editor has let their personal opinions influence their decisions and the direction of the journal overall. When providing an administrative or advisory service for some component of the research enterprise, <strong>researchers should not let their personal preferences influence their decisions</strong>. Researchers must remain open-minded and be willing to consider different points of view.</p>
								<hr>
								<img class="img-responsive" src="../images/activity_images/course_specific/sre_1_40_img2.png" alt="A male and female researcher are speaking at a networking event. They are smartly dressed. In the background, two researchers, Catherine and Professor Stevens, are networking.  The female researcher says to the male researcher: Did you hear how Catherine acknowledged Professor Stevens at the end of her talk? Professor Stevens did nothing on that project. The male researcher says: You can bet on Catherine getting that grant, though. Look at how friendly they're getting!" />
								<p><strong>Woman:</strong> "Did you hear how Catherine acknowledged Professor Stevens at the end of her talk? Professor Stevens did <em>nothing</em> on that project."</p>
								<p><strong>Man:</strong> "You can bet on Catherine getting that grant, though. Look at how friendly they're getting!"</p>
								<hr>
								<h4>Question 2 of 3:</h4>
								<p>What is irresponsible about the relationships presented in this scenario?</p>
								<h4>Answer options:</h4>
								<ul>
									<li>It is inappropriate for junior researchers to approach senior colleagues in public settings</li>
									<li>Research leaders should set their personal relationships aside when making professional decisions</li>
									<li>Researchers should not discuss the behaviour of their colleagues</li>
								</ul>
								<h4>The correct answer is:</h4>
								<ul>
									<li>Research leaders should set their personal relationships aside when making professional decisions</li>
								</ul>
								<h4>Feedback:</h4>
								<p>Personal relationships should not influence professional decisions. <strong>Research leaders should set personal relationships aside</strong> when they work in an administrative, advisory or service role. Everyone they encounter should have an equal chance of succeeding, regardless of whether or not they are a friend.</p>
								<hr>
								<img class="img-responsive" src="../images/activity_images/course_specific/sre_1_40_img3.png" alt="A female academic is sitting at a desk with papers in front on her. She is speaking on the phone, with an annoyed looked on her face. She is saying: the review committee shouldn't have approved the project &ndash; full stop. Although the principal investigator declared no conflicts of interest, the CV he posted online includes service as a board member and a position as scientific advisor to the company that is funding the research." />
								<p><strong>Person on phone:</strong> "The review committee shouldn't have approved the project &ndash; full stop. Although the principal investigator declared no conflicts of interest, the CV he posted online includes service as a board member and a position as scientific advisor to the company that is funding the research."</p>
								<hr>
								<h4>Question 3 of 3:</h4>
								<p>How has the review committee fallen short in this scenario?</p>
								<h4>Answer options:</h4>
								<ul>
									<li>It should have asked for and checked the principal investigator's CV to make sure there were no conflicts</li>
									<li>It should have identified companies that might benefit from the research and asked them whether they were funding or sponsoring the research in any way</li>
									<li>There was nothing further they could have done since they must make decisions based on the information the principal investigator provides, no matter whether it seems incomplete</li>
								</ul>
								<h4>The correct answer is:</h4>
								<ul>
									<li>It should have asked for and checked the principal investigator's CV to make sure there were no conflicts</li>
								</ul>
								<h4>Feedback:</h4>
								<p>Although it is not the review committee's responsibility to conduct an exhaustive investigation into everything presented to them (i.e. a committee would not be expected to contact every company that might be interested in the research), they should at least take reasonable steps to check for conflicts. Therefore,<strong> when researchers serve on committees, they should, within reason, do background research.</strong> If they agree to take on a position that involves service, even if it is not paid, they should put in the time and effort needed to meet the requirements of the position.</p>
							</accessible-block>
							<!-- ACCESSIBLE END -->
							<!-- ACTIVITY END -->
							
						</page-content-wide>
					</page-row>
					
					<page-row>
						<page-content-main>
						
							<p>For one reason or another, the researchers in these scenarios are not meeting their responsibilities to colleagues, allowing methodological preferences, personal relationships or basic oversights to get in the way. When you work in professional settings beyond your immediate research team or collaborations, it is important to remember that you still have a responsibility to prioritise the interests of your profession and society.</p>
							
							<h3>Your experience</h3>
							
							<p>As you look forward to a career with broadening responsibilities, or if you have already assumed some, it is important to understand why working with colleagues can create tensions and problems. The poll questions below explore some of the factors that can influence how researchers behave when interacting with their colleagues.</p>
							
							<instructional-text><p>Consider each of the questions in the poll below, and in each case choose the response that best reflects your experience. Click "Vote" to register your response and see how others have responded.</p></instructional-text>
							<instructional-text-accessible><p>Consider each of the following questions and in each case choose the response that best reflects your experience.</p></instructional-text-accessible>
							
							<!-- ACTIVITY START -->
							<interactive-text>
								<process>
									<process-page>
										<!-- POLL START -->
										<poll poll-id="10488841" noscript-text="How competitive is the professional world in which you work?"></poll>
										<!-- POLL END -->
									</process-page>
									<process-page>
										<!-- POLL START -->
										<poll poll-id="10488843" noscript-text="Has your career training so far adequately prepared you to take on broader responsibilities?"></poll>
										<!-- POLL END -->
									</process-page>
									<process-page>
										<!-- POLL START -->
										<poll poll-id="10488844" noscript-text="Is the time researchers spend providing broader professional services that extend beyond their own research rewarded at your institution?"></poll>
										<!-- POLL END -->
									</process-page>
								</process>
							</interactive-text>
							<!-- ACCESSIBLE START -->
							<accessible-block>
								<h4>Question 1 of 3:</h4>
								<p>How competitive is the professional world in which you work?</p>
								<ul>
									<li>Very competitive</li>
									<li>Competitive</li>
									<li>Neutral</li>
									<li>Not really competitive</li>
									<li>Not competitive at all</li>
									<li>No opinion/no experience</li>
								</ul>
								<hr>
								<h4>Question 2 of 3:</h4>
								<p>Has your career training so far adequately prepared you to take on broader responsibilities?</p>
								<ul>
									<li>Yes, this has been a major focus</li>
									<li>Yes, but this has not been a major focus</li>
									<li>Neutral</li>
									<li>This comes up from time to time, but is not much of an emphasis</li>
									<li>No, this has not been mentioned</li>
									<li>No opinion/no experience</li>
								</ul>
								<hr>
								<h4>Question 3 of 3:</h4>
								<p>Is the time researchers spend providing broader professional services that extend beyond their own research rewarded at your institution?</p>
								<ul>
									<li>Yes &ndash; this is encouraged</li>
									<li>Yes</li>
									<li>Neutral</li>
									<li>No</li>
									<li>No &ndash; this is discouraged</li>
								</ul>
							</accessible-block>
							<!-- ACCESSIBLE END -->
							<!-- ACTIVITY END -->
							
							<p>Competition, inadequate training and limited rewards can influence how researchers interact with one another in a professional setting.  Knowing this, you should take steps to ensure that you are prepared as your research career develops and you assume broader responsibilities.</p>
							
							<h3>Summary</h3>
							
							<p>Professional relationships have an impact on how research is conducted. Bias in peer review can lead to inferior research receiving funding and getting published. Improper regulatory decisions can harm human participants. Because of these risks, researchers must work well together and meet their responsibilities within the world of professional research. It is never too early to start planning for these responsibilities by seeking advice and guidance from colleagues.</p>
							
						</page-content-main>
					</page-row>
					
				</page-container>
			</base-container>
		</div> <!-- END content wrapper -->
		
		<!-- scripts -->
		<script src="../js/vendor.min.js"></script>
		<script src="../js/vue-components.min.js"></script>
		<script>
			new Vue({
			  el: "#app",
			  data: {},
			  mounted: function () {
				var core = document.createElement('script');
				core.src = "../js/core.min.js";
				document.getElementsByTagName('head')[0].appendChild(core);

				var project = document.createElement('script');
				project.src = "../js/project.min.js";
				document.getElementsByTagName('head')[0].appendChild(project);
			  }
			});
		</script>

	</body>
</html>