CONTACT US | EVENTS | PARENT LINKS | SITE MAP | SEARCH | HOME
|
|||||
| |||||
|
     |
|
|||
|
|
|||||||||||||||
|
Research: Research Findings |
||||||||
|
|
|
|
Program Information Management System (PIMS)
|
|
|
|
Research-Practice Collaboration (RPC) - Identifying Ventures
Based on Veigel's (2000) conceptualization, the items below provide five different ways to visualize research - practice collaborations. Veigel's work derives from a management perspective, transferring the best practices of modern management to research joint ventures. Given that good management is also critical to the conduct of research-practice collaborations, the following is an adaptation of his typology to research-practice collaborations. Which best describes your local collaboration for HFA evaluation? The No Collaboration Collaboration Collaboration here might be an agreement between two parties who see such a collaboration as a way to meet some externally imposed need or to satisfy some individual want. It's a marriage of convenience that is never consummated, never annulled. For example, in program evaluation this may take the form of a researcher analyzing data for the program, without involvement in designing, implementing, or interpreting the results, to meet the program's requirement for evaluation. The One-Time Collaboration This type of collaboration is actually better described as a quid-pro-quo exchange, a service offered for a service rendered. For example, building on the previous scenario, a researcher may conduct an evaluation in exchange for access to the evaluation data, which may be useful for his or her area of study. Both parties make a one-time investment to get their own needs met. The Arms-Length Collaboration As in the exchange-of-services collaboration above, each party in this type of limited collaboration has a need to be met and a contribution to offer. However, in contrast, the essence of a true collaboration is first seen here: creating shared values together. In the case of program evaluation for example, researchers and practitioners may work together for the purpose of designing a new service strategy, yet the collaboration is restricted to a limited time period, such as a demonstration program. The Arm-In-Arm Collaboration In this collaboration, the parties bring complimentary resources for ongoing work that creates new value. Despite the complimentary of their skills and interest, each group comes to the collaboration precisely because they recognize that working outside the collaboration it would be unlikely or impossible for them to produce the results that entice them to work together. Building on the previous example, this type of collaboration includes an ongoing commitment founded on a common goal in which each group acknowledges that working together to meet their mutual needs outweighs self-interest. The Hand-In-Hand Collaboration This collaboration is built on the premise of benefits to be realized from value-chain integration. Teams may share interests only in the product of the consortium and/or may owe their allegiance to very different disciplines. The motivation for all members to join the consortium is the possibility that groups so different can produce unique products and pioneer completely new areas. The self-interest of each party is genuinely replaced by a primary focus on the shared values and products. |
|
|
|
||||||||