Example 3
Online 90-min transformation practice workshop: Reflecting on and discussing roles of scientists in sustainability transformations
Context
The workshop was held online at the Conference «Transformations Community – Transformative Partnerships for a better world» on 12 July 2023. It was designed by Sibylle Studer and Franziska Marfurt, based on inspirations drawn from the work by Hanna Salomon, Sabine Hoffmann and Simone Ritzer.
Target group
The conference invited transformations thought-leaders and practitioners. Attendees across sectors and systems were welcome. The aim was to «connect with inspiring transdisciplinary scholars, practitioners and creatives working on transformations towards regenerative and just futures».
Workshop abstract
What is the role of research in sustainability transformations? Who acts as supporter, critical friend, integrator, midwife, … evidence provider? We believe that transformations gain effectiveness when roles are clarified. With the proposed practice we aim to foster the capability of positioning oneself in a spectrum of roles. Furthermore, we’ll provide a vocabulary to advocate for an academic system which acknowledges that research may embody different/multiple roles to adequately contribute to societal challenges.
Expected outcomes
Participants will benefit from:
- Enhancing their vocabulary to talk about their role(s) as researchers in sustainability transformations and to foster inner-academic dialogue about role diversity
- Finding a community of practice to discuss challenges related to role ambiguity, expectation management, etc.
Workshop Outline
The workshop was facilitated by 2 persons (see “Drehbuch”).
| When? | What? | Material |
|---|---|---|
| 10:00 | Welcome | |
| 10:05 | Poll to get to know the audience Ice breaker | Poll (see file “Drehbuch”) E.g. As a very short introduction round: Please all unmute yourself and briefly say “hello” in your mother tongue |
| 10:15 | Introduction: We outline why we talk about roles of scientists and what literature tells us about the spectrum of roles of science in sustainability transformations. Presentation of the model by Oberlack et al (Model 2) | Figure 5 from the Guide |
| 10:25 | Positioning exercise
| |
| 10:45 | Plenary: Discuss Impressions (10’) What was your “aha” moment, surprising observations, … |
Example from a Breakout Room (above)
For the second part of the workshop, the facilitators were prepared for two scenarios – 1) participants are researchers only; 2) there are several extra-scientific actors
| When? | If participants are researchers only | If several extra-scientific actors participate | Material |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10:55 | Brief Intro to fluidity of roles & look at the joint picture | Presentation of the joint picture of (self-described) roles of scientists and “expectations towards scientists’ roles” (Facilitator copied the individual dots on each spider into a joint group spider while participants engaged in discussions above) | Powerpoint presentation (fluidity of roles) |
| 11:00 | Exchange amongst participants (in Breakout Rooms if n > 7)
| Exchange amongst participants (in Breakout Rooms if n > 7)
| |
| 11:10 | Synthesis in plenary | If more than 7 participants: Chat waterfall: What is your main take away? What is your favourite sentence heard/discussed in this workshop? | |
| 11:15 | Debrief session on the positioning exercise: Feedback on process, and usefulness of the positioning exercise | ||
| 11:25 | Wrap-up and goodbye |
Below: example from a Break-out Room, revised by the facilitator to emphasize the profiles of each person shown above
Aspects discussed
In the plenary discussion after the positioning exercise, the following aspects were raised, amongst others:
- What is an «expert»? The roles of academics and practitioners are not separate, and practitioners are also experts for certain topics/life-worlds.
- Sometimes it is important to reject the role of being an expert, because research participants are experts themselves. Thinking and acting in roles can redistribute power (or reinforce existing power relations).
- Differentiating between the role of a translator vs. a facilitator (who can change power relations and therefore also carries responsibility for that) vs knowledge broker induced-reflections on agency and one’s own position towards change and power.
- The idea of knowledge brokerage was also related to intergenerational dialogue between those who want to enforce the «old ways» and younger generations. The «middle generation» may support the reinterpretation of «old» and «new» ways.
- Participants felt that they are oscillating between academic vs. practitioner roles, as transformations also ask for self-transformation and lifelong learning. (The conference team also uses the term «pracademic»).
- Discussions also led to reflections on professional vs. personal positions and even identity.
- One participant working at the interface between science and public service reported that he had discussions in his team about whether he is «an executive with science backgrounds» or «a scientist working in an executive position». A clarification that he considers himself a «scientist who is adapting to working in a non-science area» helped to settle tensions.
- While participants found it productive to make roles explicit and reflect on them, it was also argued that strictly sticking to a professional role can impede transformations. When building partnerships, it is considered to be important to show not only the professional role, but also the purpose you want to serve and the personal background (positionality).
- Interestingly, participants ended up discussing principles of science they identify with, like integrity, transparency, scientific rigor, and the mandate to serve society (in contrast to private profit in the private sector). These are principles they may share with many other scientists who perform other roles.
Facilitation experience
- We had 34 participants who registered, but only 8-10 (coming in and out) were present. As a consequence, we adapted the second part of the workshop and remained in the plenary. The success of this adaptation of the programme shows that the typology and our questions were «food enough for thought» to spark vivid dialogue between participants. The participants started to refer to each other and ask questions, thus, facilitation was carried out in a far more subtle and less obvious way.
- In general, the audience displayed a high level of reflexivity. Some of the participants also knew literature on roles in sustainability sciences.
- In another context, we would recommend preparing questions to spark conversations. For example, think of questions that everyone can answer, e.g. Which role are you least familiar with? How would you describe your role? Furthermore, you can invite reflection about the importance of role awareness with questions such as: Why do you think we talk about roles and not just about activities of scientists?
- The discussions were rich, but we missed relating them to future actions the participants may have had in mind. You can introduce a «call for action» at the end of the workshop by asking: We have reflected a lot in the last hour: What impact does that have on you and on your future actions? For example, does that change the way you will start a presentation/conversation next time you’re invited to ‘be an expert’? Are there questions you want to raise in the next team meeting?
