In the attempt to do better research innovative experts often cross the lines of established knowledge strongly supported by academic authorities. However, it appears sometimes necessary to find novelty even in the way research is conducted. In some circumstances, people with less knowledge in a specific field could lead to improvement of knowledge in this field.
I am looking to cases where researchers have improved available knowledge proceeding outside the box.
This question is in line with the ideas developed by Waine C. Booth, Gregory G Colomb and Joseph M. Williams in the book "The Craft of Research."
What is the craft of genuine research? Paraphrasing Deng Xiaoping, it does not matter if a cat is black or white so long as it catches mice. Booth et al. (2016) is a valuable guide to effective and meaningful research, this largely from the perspective of reporting because the worth of any knowledge product hangs on its effective dissemination to—present and future— audiences. (Lest we forget, research is about both generation and dissemination of findings.) That said, whether a researcher should concentrate on in his/her field of expertise or extend it may be moot: the United Nations list 18 "Global Issues" and have set 17 goals to be achieved by 2030; surely, there is great scope for any form of science, technology, and innovation there. The more relevant point is that, given the scale of the challenges the world faces in the 21st century, we all need to cooperate from the perspective of outcomes, not inputs: this calls for multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity, and transdisciplinarity.
Dear Olivier,
Many thanks for the answer which is inspiring and a response to the question I raised!
My regards,
Joseph
Joseph Tshilomb Jonathan and Ahmed Abdullah Amanah ;
basically a researcher needs to highlight the characteristics of his expertise, but in his development he needs to collaborate with other researchers, so that the approach is more comprehensive and useful from a multi-disciplinary perspective
Dear Joseph,
I just submitted to SMS Annual conference 2020 a real story how working within phenomenon-based research approach brought me (and my research assistants) very far from our initial field of study and far beyond our initial knowledge.
In addition, an experienced and self-confident researcher entering a new field (for her or him) may revolutionize the whole field -- she/he may dare to behave like a bull in a china shop, not to take for granted the established definitions by some existing "gurus" of the field and easily find weak places, banalities, open and hidden errors and even stupidities in papers with 1,000+ citations in WoS.
Dear Joseph:
The creation of what we now call "Operations Research" was in ww2, as far as I know an idea from W. Churchill. It was quite simple, to put together scientist from differents backgrounds to find solutions, at first, for the convoys in the Atlantic. It worked. The US also did it afterwards, and that´s the beginning of Russel Ackoff, a very, very interesting author in systems thinking.
So, my answer is yes, research is better when you have a team with different ideas and backgrounds. No doubt about it, the problem is to manage such a group.
Regards
Gustavo Concari
I think interdisciplinarity is the key to efficient solutions in any field of science. Most od us are experts in a tiny segment, but high quality solutions today need different approaches since the problems are complex. If we only look at corona today, we are facing primarily medical issues, but also psychological, economic...
Ultimately, the only ‘field of expertise’ is physics. So, when we drill down physics, we find interdisciplinarity. We cast the reality of physics on our interests, which we call disciplines. However, when we ask deeper questions (deeper whys) we drill down to the fundamentals of physics.
Good question Joseph Tshilomb Jonathan
Research in own field of expertise gives authenticity or otherwise satisfaction to both the researcher and the reader; especially those who would want to use the research for references and citations. However, Like Mirna Leko-Simic added, interdisciplinary is necessary because it gives a wider knowledge. For example, I once collaborated with a medical personnel in their research on the subject of diabetes in which I researched and added on the part of the financial costs (expenses) that are affected by the diabetic condition (even though health is not my area of expertise).
I also like the example of … “If we only look at corona today, we are facing primarily medical issues, but also psychological, economic...” In this case, a business major can research and add the economic effects of the COVID 19
The researcher's diverse process and knowledge can expand his field of research and professional innovation, especially in the exchange of quantitative and qualitative media, which can bring unexpected gains and achievements.
Being focused in own discipline of research helps to craft and increased your expertise level, no doubt to do better research innovative experts across the boarder will make you in becoming a celebrities researcher rather than genuine researcher. However the ideas developed by Waine C. Booth, Gregory G Colomb and Joseph M. Williams in the book "The Craft of Research" leads to different meaning which it apply to certain discipline. For example in accounting and management a researcher could innovate their experts across the boarder in order to enriched the definition and concept of accounting and management from a different perspective.
Because many studies rely on the cooperation of many researchers to complete. Researchers are working across the domain knowledge. According to the American Psychological Association (APA) defines authors who are not necessarily the authors of the paper, and those who have substantial contributions to this research, including those involved in the formulation of research questions or assumptions, the construction of experimental designs, the organization and conduct of statistical analysis, the interpretation of research results, and the authors of research studies, are eligible to be authors (APA, 2010).
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Econ
- Innovation Economics
- Innovation