Browsing by Author "Zhang JA"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    How research agendas are framed: Insights for leadership, learning and spillover in science teams
    (Elsevier B V, 2024-09) O'Kane C; Mangematin V; Zhang JA; Haar J
    Research agendas in science are fundamentally important to the generation of new knowledge and innovation. Yet, there remains a lack of scholarly attention and poor understanding on how science teams engage with research agendas in ways that influence their development. New insights are needed to better understand the factors that contribute to research agenda development and adaptation. In this paper, we draw on the framing perspective to explore how research agendas are framed in science teams over time. Research agendas can be understood as collective action frames within science teams that mobilize, guide, and coordinate the transformation of innovative but abstract science aspirations into something more concrete. Our research utilises a longitudinal case study analysis of two science teams over seven years (2016–2022). Our findings provide several new insights. First, we detail two ways in which research agendas are framed. Through centralised framing, research agendas are embodied and dictated by a visionary science team leader. In contrast, through decentralised framing, team leadership is weakly enacted and multiple team members discuss and deliberate the composition and direction of the research agenda. Second, we show centralised and decentralised approaches to framing enable and constrain the reframing and transformation of research agendas. Third, we demonstrate centralised and decentralised framing of research agendas are respectively stabilised by passive and active team learning environments across three areas: research agenda responsibility and accountability, nature of autonomy, and leadership development pathways. Finally, we theorise that, to enhance spillover, leaders who centralise framing of the research agenda need to balance between the benefits of reframing efficiency, and enabling greater team interaction and opportunities for S&T human capital development. On the other hand, when framing of research agendas is decentralised, team leaders need to balance between the benefits of team collaboration and leader development, and path dependent decision making. These insights lead to propositions that offer implications for theory and practice.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    How scientists interpret and address funding criteria: value creation and undesirable side effects
    (Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, 2023-08) O’Kane C; Zhang JA; Haar J; Cunningham JA
    Scientists and funding bodies are interdependent actors involved in an ongoing two-way signalling interaction; however, we lack insight on the social mechanisms underpinning this interaction. To address this issue, we examine how successfully funded scientists interpret and address criteria set by the funding body to maximise their chances of funding success. We also consider the possible adverse side effects that can arise from scientists’ competitive efforts to address these criteria. Our findings identify a portfolio of funding criteria—research feasibility, research alignment and team credentials—that scientists address when preparing grant applications. Effectively addressing these criteria enhances the prospects of funding success and value creation. However, we also find that scientists can over-address funding criteria, which is counterproductive and yields undesirable side effects. Our research therefore makes an important distinction between the possibilities for value creation and the value creation frictions that can unintentionally arise based on how grant-submitting scientists interpret and address the criteria signalled by the funding body. Our research has implications for policymakers, funding bodies and scientists which we also discuss.