The ceiling to coproduction in university-industry research collaboration

The purpose of this paper is to provide insight into government attempts at bridging the divide between theory and practice through university-industry research collaboration modelled under engaged scholarship. The findings are based on data sourced from interviews with 47 academic and industry project leaders from 23 large scale research projects. The paper demonstrates a ceiling to the coproduction of knowledge arising from the preconceived beliefs of both academics and industry partners regarding project roles and responsibilities. The findings show that coproduction was constrained by academic partners assuming control over much of the research activities and industry partners failing to confront or challenge academic decision-making because both academics and industry partners placed a higher value on academic knowledge compared with applied or practical knowledge. It is argued the theory of engaged scholarship, and consequent initiatives to encourage engaged scholarship, fail to account for the superior status of academic knowledge.

Scientists’ situated knowledge: Strong objectivity in transdisciplinarity

Although transdisciplinary research has started addressing important epistemological challenges, as evidenced by the discussion about ‘mode 2’ knowledge production, its relation with postulations of ‘scientific objectivity’ is not yet well clarified. A common way of dealing with the epistemological challenge of situated knowledge production, as proposed by transdisciplinarity, is to point to the fundamental aspect of reflexivity. But reflexivity also includes being aware that power and control over the object is derived from the social position of researchers, an issue not often explicitly discussed in transdisciplinary research. Reflexivity thus represents an important but insufficient principle for guaranteeing appropriate levels of self-reflection within a process of knowledge coproduction. We therefore hypothesize that transdisciplinary research could greatly benefit from feminist scientific tradition, in particular the insights of standpoint theory and the concept of ‘strong objectivity’. We analyse, and reflect upon, how a recent transdisciplinary research initiative – conducted together with civil society organizations in (CSOs) in six countries: Bangladesh, Bolivia, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Ecuador and India – has benefited from the use of ‘strong objectivity’. We analyse how the social position of all stakeholders, including ourselves as the scientific actors in this initiative, influence the process and conditions of transdisciplinary knowledge co-production, and we discuss how power and control by scientists affects the process and conditions of interaction. Thereby we argue for the necessity of explicitly assuming sides in contested contexts for reaching objectivity in transdisciplinary research.

Contextualist research: Iterating between methods while following an empirically grounded approach

An alternative approach to research is described that has been developed through a succession of significant construction management research projects. The approach follows the principles of iterative grounded theory, whereby researchers iterate between alternative theoretical frameworks and emergent empirical data. Of particular importance is an orientation toward mixing methods, thereby overcoming the existing tendency to dichotomize quantitative and qualitative approaches. The approach is positioned against the existing contested literature on grounded theory, and the possibility of engaging with empirical data in a “theory free” manner is discounted. Emphasis instead is given to the way in which researchers must be theoretically sensitive as a result of being steeped in relevant literatures. Knowledge of existing literatures therefore shapes the initial research design; but emergent empirical findings cause fresh theoretical perspectives to be mobilized. The advocated approach is further aligned with notions of knowledge coproduction and the underlying principles of contextualist research. It is this unique combination of ideas which characterizes the paper's contribution to the research methodology literature within the field of construction management. Examples are provided and consideration is given to the extent to which the emergent findings are generalizable beyond the specific context from which they are derived.