Biomedical Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
success of other scientists and that scientifi c advance was not a function of a
lone scientist working in isolated conditions. Newton had the matter correct,
that scientifi c collaboration is conducive to scientifi c progress, especially as
science has been conducted over the last two centuries.
Rosenberg and Birdzell [1] argued that the “Western miracle,” the process
of growth and development in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, was a
consequence of the growth of scientifi c knowledge and the rise of technology
in free-market economies. Rosenberg and Birdzell [1] believe that “Western
science has made a better organized attack on the secrets of nature and used
greater resources in the assault than science in other cultures.” The organized
attack involved the situating of scientists under one roof. Rosenberg and
Birdzell noted [1] that “although the idea of bringing scientists together for
directed research in an institute equipped with laboratory instruments and a
suitable library was tried successfully in the fi rst half of the 15th century by
Prince Henry the Navigator of Portugal, it came into common practice only
in the 19th century.”
In short, the Western miracle, the tremendous advances in scientifi c knowl-
edge and in the subsequent standard of living, has deep roots in cooperative,
mutual endeavors guided by scientifi c inquiry and goals. Today's scientifi c
laboratories, both academic and nonacademic, rely on the contributions of
many people working together to achieve a better understanding of the natural
world. McGowan and McGowan [2] suggested that the history of scientifi c
publication shows growing awareness of collaboration within the scientifi c
disciplines. They reviewed the history of attribution in the journal Science and
discovered that over the years fewer and fewer articles were published under
the name of a single author. We may safely conclude that collaboration and
cooperation are hallmarks of modern science.
The apparent necessity of collaboration and cooperation in the sciences, in
an ideal world, would have scientists undertake collaborative endeavors effi -
ciently and agreeably. In the real world, problems arise both systemically and
locally. One example of a systemic problem that has rendered scientifi c col-
laboration less effi cient is the problem of exclusion. Indeed, much has been
said and written by feminists alleging the lack of a female presence in the
scientifi c community.
Local problems exist, too, as case studies show. We begin, though, with a
brief examination of collaboration itself.
8.2
TEAMWORK, COOPERATION, AND COLLABORATION
Not every collective endeavor, that is, an endeavor undertaken by several
people, can be called a collaboration. Griesel [3] suggests that the word col-
laboration sometimes produces confusion because of its elasticity. Griesel
suggests this word could mean teamwork, partnership, cooperation between
two or more people, or a more restrictive form of organizational structure.
Search WWH ::




Custom Search