Developing an Open Social Scholarship Collaboration: Lessons from INKE


  • Lynne Siemens University of Victoria
  • The INKE Research Group University of Victoria



collaboration, project management, INKE


Many academic teams and granting agencies undergo a process of reflection at the completion of research projects to understand lessons learned and develop best practice guidelines. Generally completed at the project’s end, these reviews focus on the actual research work accomplished with little discussion of the work relationships and process involved. As a result, some hard-earned lessons are forgotten or minimized through the passage of time. Additional learning about the nature of collaboration may be gained if this type of reflection occurs during the project’s life. Building on earlier examinations of INKE, this paper contributes to that discussion with an exploration of seventh and final year of a large-scale research project.
Implementing New Knowledge Environment (INKE) serves as a case study for this research. Members of the administrative team, researchers, postdoctoral fellows, graduate research assistants, and others are asked about their experiences collaborating within INKE on an annual basis in order to understand the nature of collaboration and ways that it may change over the life of a long-term grant. Interviewees continue to outline benefits for collaboration within INKE while admitting that there continue to be challenges. They also outline several lessons learned which will be applied to the next project.


Download data is not yet available.


Metrics Loading ...


Amabile, Teresa M., Chelley Patterson, Jennifer Mueller, Tom Wojcik, Paul W. Odomirok, Mel Marsh, and Steven J. Kramer. 2001. “Academic-Practitioner Collaboration in Management Research: A Case of Cross-Profession Collaboration.” Academy of Management Journal, 44(2): 418–431.

Bammer, Gabriele. 2008. “Enhancing Research Collaborations: Three Key Management Challenges.” Research Policy, 37(5): 875–887. DOI:

Blythe, Richard A., and William Croft. 2010. “Can a Science—Humanities Collaboration Be Successful?” Adaptive Behavior, 18(1): 12–20. DOI:

Borgman, Christine L. 2007. Scholarship in the Digital Age: Information, Infrastructure, and the Internet. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI:

Borgman, Christine L. 2009. “The Digital Future Is Now: A Call to Action for the Humanities.” Digital Humanities Quarterly, 3(4). Archived at:

Bracken, Louise J., and Elizabeth A. Oughton. 2006. “‘What Do You Mean?’ The Importance of Language in Developing Interdisciplinary Research.” Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 31(3): 371–382. DOI:

Bryan, Laura, Michael Negretti, Faline Bateman Christensen, and Sean Stokes. 2002. “Processing the Process: One Research Team’s Experience of a Collaborative Research Project.” Contemporary Family Therapy 24(2): 333–353. DOI:

Cummings, Jonathon N., and Sara Kiesler. 2005. “Collaborative Research across Disciplinary and Organizational Boundaries.” Social Studies of Science, 35(5): 703–722. DOI:

Cummings, Jonathon N., and Sara Kiesler. 2007. “Coordination Costs and Project Outcomes in Multi-University Collaborations.” Research Policy, 36(10): 1620–1634. DOI:

Dombrowski, Quinn. 2013. “What Ever Happened to Project Bamboo?” DH 2013, Lincoln, Nebraska.

Garland, Diana R., Mary Katerine O’Connor, Terry A. Wolfer, and F. Ellen Netting. 2006. “Team-Based Research: Notes from the Field.” Qualitative Social Work, 5(1): 93–109. DOI:

Hagstrom, Warren O. 1964. “Traditional and Modern Forms of Scientific Teamwork.” Administrative Quarterly, 9(3): 241–263. DOI:

Hara, Noriko, Paul Solomon, Seung-Lye Kim, and Diane H. Sonnenwald. 2003. “An Emerging View of Scientific Collaboration: Scientists’ Perspectives on Collaboration and Factors That Impact Collaboration.” Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54(10): 952–965. DOI:

He, Daqing, and Wei Jeng. 2016. Scholarly Collaboration on the Academic Social Web. Gary Marchionini (ed.), Synthesis Lectures on Information Concepts, Retrieval, and Services. Williston, VT Morgan & Claypool.

INKE. 2012. “Implementing New Knowledge Environments.” Accessed September 22, 2012.

INKE. 2014a. “Future Directions.” Accessed November 3, 2014.

INKE. 2014b. “Whistler Gathering 2014.” Accessed January 9, 2015.

INKE. 2014c. “Whistler Gathering 2015.” Accessed January 11, 2015.

INKE. 2018. “About.” Accessed:

Jeffrey, Paul. 2003. “Smoothing the Waters: Observations on the Process of Cross-Disciplinary Research Collaboration.” Social Studies of Science, 33(4): 539–562. DOI:

Jeong, Seongkyoon, and Jae Young Choi. 2014. “Collaborative Research for Academic Knowledge Creation: How Team Characteristics, Motivation, and Processes Influence Research Impact.” Science and Public Policy, 42(4): 460–473. DOI:

Kanfer, Alaina G., et al. 2000. “Modeling Distributed Knowledge Processes in Next Generation Multidisciplinary Alliances*.” Information Systems Frontiers, 2(3): 317–331. DOI:

Karlsson, Jan, et al. 2008. “Reaching Beyond Disciplines through Collaboration: Academics’ Learning in a National Multidisciplinary Research Programme.” Journal of Workplace Learning, 20(2): 98–113. DOI:

Katz, J. Sylvan, and Ben R. Martin. 1997. “What Is Research Collaboration?” Research Policy, 26(1): 1–18. DOI:

Kishchuk, Natalie. 2005. “Performance Report: SSHRC’s Major Collaborative Research Initiatives (MCRI) Program.” Retrieved from SSHRC database:

Kraut, Robert E., Jolene Galegher, and Carmen Egido. 1987. “Relationships and Tasks in Scientific Research Collaboration.” Human-Computer Interaction, 3(1): 31–58. DOI:

Lawrence, Katherine A. 2006. “Walking the Tightrope: The Balancing Acts of a Large E-Research Project.” Computer Supported Cooperative Work: The Journal of Collaborative Computing, 15(4): 385–411. DOI:

Lowry, Paul Benjamin, Aaron Curtis, and Michelle Rene Lowry. 2004. “Building a Taxonomy and Nomenclature of Collaborative Writing to Improve Interdisciplinary Research and Practice.” Journal of Business Communications, 41(1): 66–99. DOI:

Marshall, Catherine, and Gretchen B. Rossman. 1999. Designing Qualitative Research. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Massey, Claire, et al. 2006. “Crossing Fields: The Case of a Multi-Disciplinary Research Team.” Qualitative Research, 6(2): 131–149. DOI:

McCracken, Grant. 1988. The Long Interview. Qualitative Research Methods, 13. Newbury Park, California: SAGE Publications.

Melin, Göran. 2000. “Pragmatism and Self-Organization: Research Collaboration on the Individual Level.” Research Policy, 29(1): 31–40. DOI:

Newell, Sue, and Jacky Swan. 2000. “Trust and Inter-Organizational Networking.” Human Relations, 53(10): 1287–1328. DOI:

O’Connor, Gina Colarelli, et al. 2003. “Managing Interdisciplinary, Longitudinal Research Teams: Extending Grounded Theory-Building Methodologies.” Organization Science, 14(4): 353–373. DOI:

Office of Digital Humanities. 2010. “Digging into Data Challenge.” Accessed September 26, 2010.

Olson, Gary M., and Judith S. Olson. 2000. “Distance Matters.” Human-Computer Interaction, 15(2/3): 139–178. DOI:

Olson, Judith, and Gary Olson. 2013. Working Together Apart: Collaboration over the Internet. Synthesis Lectures on Human-Centered Informatics, 6. Morgon & Claypool.

Pennington, Deana D. 2011. “Bridging the Disciplinary Divide: Co-Creating Research Ideas in eScience Teams.” Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 20(3): 165–196. DOI:

Quan-Haase, Anabel, Juan Luis Suarez, and David M. Brown. 2014. “Collaborating, Connecting, and Clustering in the Humanities: A Case Study of Networked Scholarship in an Interdisciplinary, Dispersed Team.” American Behavioral Scientist, 59(4): 443–456. DOI:

Rubin, Herbert J., and Irene S. Rubin. 1995. Qualitative Interviewing: The Art of Hearing Data. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

Schleyer, T., et al. 2012. “Conceptualizing and Advancing Research Networking Systems.” ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 19(1): 1–26. DOI:

Siemens, Lynne. 2010. “The Potential of Grant Applications as Team Building Exercises: A Case Study.” Journal of Research Administration, 39(1): 75–91.

Siemens, Lynne, et al. 2011. “A Tale of Two Cities: Implications of the Similarities and Differences in Collaborative Approaches within the Digital Libraries and Digital Humanities Communities.” Literary & Linguistic Computing, 26(3): 335–348. DOI:

Siemens, Lynne, and Elisabeth Burr. 2013. “A Trip around the World: Accommodating Geographical, Linguistic and Cultural Diversity in Academic Research Teams.” Linguistic and Literary Computing, 28(2): 331–343. DOI:

Siemens, Lynne, and INKE Research Group. 2010a. “The E-Paper Anniversary: Lessons from the First Year of INKE.” SDH/SEMI 2010, Montreal, Quebec.

Siemens, Lynne, and INKE Research Group. 2010b. “Understanding Long Term Collaboration: Reflections on Year 1 and Before.” Presented at INKE 2010. The Hague, Netherlands. DOI:

Siemens, Lynne, and INKE Research Group. 2012a. “Firing on All Cylinders: Progress and Transition in INKE’s Year 2.” Scholarly and Research Communication, 3(4): 1–16. DOI:

Siemens, Lynne, and INKE Research Group. 2012b. “From Writing the Grant to Working the Grant: An Exploration of Processes and Procedures in Transition.” Scholarly and Research Communication, 3(1): 1–8. DOI:

Siemens, Lynne, and INKE Research Group. 2012c. “INKE Administrative Structure: Omnibus Document.” Scholarly and Research Communication, 3(1): 1–21. DOI:

Siemens, Lynne, and INKE Research Group. 2012d. “INKE at the Midterm Review.” Research Foundations for Understanding Books and Reading in the Digital Age: E/Merging Reading, Writing, and Research Practices, Havana, Cuba.

Siemens, Lynne, and INKE Research Group. 2013. “Responding to Change and Transition in INKE’s Year Three.” Scholarly and Research Communication, 4(3): 1–12. DOI:

Siemens, Lynne, and INKE Research Group. 2014. “Research Collaboration as ‘Layers of Engagement’”: INKE in Year Four.” Scholarly and Research Communication, 5(4): 1–12. DOI:

Siemens, Lynne, and INKE Research Group. 2015. “‘INKE-Cubating’ Research Networks, Projects, and Partnerships: Reflections on INKE’s Fifth Year.” Scholarly and Research Communication, 6(4): 1–11. DOI:

Siemens, Lynne, and INKE Research Group. 2016. “Faster Alone, Further Together: Reflections on INKE’s Year Six.” Scholarly and Research Communication, 7(2): 1–8. DOI:

Siemens, Raymond G., et al. 2009. “Codex Ultor: Toward a Conceptual and Theoretical Foundation for New Research on Books and Knowledge Environments.” Digital Studies/Le champ numerique, 1(2): n.p. DOI:

Siemens, Raymond G., et al. 2009. “Implementing New Knowledge Environments: Year 1 Research Foundations.” INKE 2009, Victoria, BC.

Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council. 2009. “Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council Supports Major New Research Initiatives.” Accessed October 24, 2011.

Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council. 2010. “Major Collaborative Research Initiatives.” Accessed May 19, 2010.

Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council. 2013. “Partnership Grants: An Overview.” Accessed December 9, 2013. Archived at:

Trnka, Peter. 2008. “The Process of Large-Scale Interdisciplinary Science: A Reflexive Study.” In: Making and Moving Knowledge: Interdisciplinary and Community-Based Research in a World on the Edge, John Sutton Lutz, and Barbara Neis (eds.), 222–244. Montreal, Quebec: McGill-Queen’s University Press.

van Rijnsoever, Frank J., and Laurens K. Hessels. 2011. “Factors Associated with Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Research Collaboration.” Research Policy, 40(3): 463–472. DOI:

Williford, Christa, and Charles Henry. 2012. “One Culture: Computationally Intensive Research in the Humanities and Social Sciences: A Report on the Experiences of First Respondents to the Digging into Data Challenge.”

Yu, Wai-ming, Chun-kwok Lau, and John Chi-kin Lee. 2012. “Into Collaborative Research and Co-Authorship: Experiences and Reflections.” Reflective Practice, 14(1): 31–42. DOI:




How to Cite

Siemens, Lynne, and The INKE Research Group. 2019. “Developing an Open Social Scholarship Collaboration: Lessons from INKE”. KULA: Knowledge Creation, Dissemination, and Preservation Studies 3 (1):7.

Similar Articles

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.