Biomedical Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
3.
Collaboration
Many people who enter the fi eld of scientifi c research
are inherently introspective or shy; others possess minds that are highly logical
and analytic. Many scientists were loners in school, perhaps never participating
in team activities, such as sports or group governance. This can present diffi cul-
ties when a large project requires close coordination and human interaction.
Teamwork requires communication, sharing information, understanding the
human side of research, and mutual support, particularly in times of adversity.
People without great collaborative skills may engage in criticism, blame, nega-
tivity, and back-biting, often when under high stress. They may horde informa-
tion for fear it will be used improperly. They may withdraw when others need
them most or engage in manipulative behavior to get the attention or credit
they yearn for. They many not communicate well, especially listening carefully,
and may not understand the human side of technical information.
Collaboration is the enabling force that opens the pathway to group
genius:
When we collaborate, creativity unfolds across people; the sparks fl y faster, and
the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. Collaboration drives creativity
because innovation always emerges from a series of sparks—never a single fl ash
of insight . . . lot ' s of small ideas . . . each spark lighting the next . . . each critical
to the [ultimate] success. [2, pp. 4, 7, 8]
Many stories of innovation, once you get past the smoke and mirrors, reveal a
backstage fi lled with other people, ideas, and objects that were as critical—if not
more so—than the one presented onstage. Ultimately, the amount of credit we
insist on giving to individuals in the innovation process is absurd.[3, p. 103]
4.
Creativity
Being creative has a massive advantage for a clinical research
team.
The quality
of creativity is not limited simply to imagination. It includes
a variety of qualities, such as collaborative resourcefulness, inquisitiveness,
curiosity, progressive thinking, problem-solving capacity, and even the desire
to jump over any obstacle to see ideas carried through to fruition.
Often the most creative people are not necessarily the most academically
qualifi ed, because most academia rewards knowledge, having the “right”
answers, and analytic skills. Highly creative people often are not primarily
analytic but are typically multidisciplined, eclectic, cross-functional, and fi lled
with more questions than answers. Thus they do not always fi t into bureau-
cratic, highly structured environments; they tend to like less structure and thus
are often able to live better on the edge of uncertainty because they use a
personal set of internal principles to guide themselves rather than external
procedures.
What is sought is a “fl uency of ideas and fl exibility of approach that char-
acterizes scientifi cally creative individuals working together on a problem”
[4, p. 187]. In highly complex environments, Welter and Egmon [1, p. 154; 5,
p. 126] point out that collaborative innovation teams will demonstrate fi ve
important qualities:
Search WWH ::
Custom Search