To send content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about sending content to .
To send content items to your Kindle, first ensure email@example.com
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about sending to your Kindle.
Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Since the late nineties, composition projects inviting artists and contemporary composers into schools and communities became more established and written about in German speaking countries (see for instance Henze, 1998; Schneider, Bösze & Stangl, 2000; Schneider, 2000; Schatt, 2009; Schlothfeldt, 2009; Schneider, 2012). Additionally, music education researchers have provided theoretical and didactical analysis of contemporary music teaching and learning in schools (Winkler, 2002; Weber, 2003). In this qualitative study, expert interviews were analysed using Grounded Theory Methodology to investigate structures and processes of current practises in collaborative composition projects. Apart from illustrating the seven structural factors and three main project sections that emerged, the article also discusses the main category fostering creative processes.
In order to operate in line with the circular economy (CE) concept, companies and other stakeholders need to work together to enable the circulation and cascading of resources. Although the need for proactive stakeholder management is a common theme in recent work on CE, little work has been dedicated to creating prescriptive methods for the co-design of CE value chains (CEVCs) focusing on selecting strategic partners, when to engage them and in what capacity. Following calls to connect the emerging CE literature with literature from existing bodies of knowledge, this paper explores the theoretical foundations of a CEVCs co-design method. Specifically, this paper explores resource-base view (RBV); resource dependency theory (RDT); and actor-network theory (ANT), and synthesises an outline for the co-design process of CEVCs. Reflections on the process link it to the extant co-design literature and explain how the process can be used for method and tool development.
Adopting design thinking and innovation-oriented approaches in organizations is crucial but not always simple. New practices of collaboration, user-orientedness and exploration require a compatible culture to be successfully integrated into product development. This paper presents a case study based on 12 interviews of employees and managers in a large Finland-based technology company, introducing new ways of working to product development. Silos, focusing on inventions, and a lack of resources for exploration were highlighted as key challenges in transitioning from incremental development to innovations. Perhaps counterintuitively, introducing new ways of working requiring a collaborative culture - the most widely recognized shortcoming in the current practice in the case - were best received, and support and feedback could be found for pilot projects in these arenas. When the gap between the practice and culture was smaller, change efforts could perhaps be more challenging, as there was less of a consensus on a need to change. The results suggest than developers need not automatically shy away from piloting new ways of working even when existing cultures are not compatible.
Today, top-down processes, centralized IT infrastructures, and one-vendor strategies prevail in Product Lifecycle Management (PLM) of large multi-brand Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) groups. Given the usually decentralized organisation and structures and processes that emerge from cross-brand collaboration, these centralized approaches are challenging the adaptiveness and performance of the OEM groups.
In this concept paper, we investigate challenges for cross-brand and cross-domain cooperation from the perspective of processes and IT systems. The main contribution of this paper is that we motivate and outline a novel technical architecture approach combining service-orientation with an event-driven software architecture and asynchronous event processing to support users from different brands and domains in their collaboration along the development process. We analyse related work on collaboration models as well as on event processing and discuss our approach before the background of the state of the art. Finally, we summarize our findings and give an outlook to future research venues.
Science and technology generated by Universities has many challenges in reaching commercial product applications, as has been explored in a range of literature. Product design has been identified to add value through various types of contributions in addressing these challenges; however, there remains a gap in literature to explore how and when product development activities can practically be applied to technology development.
This paper furthers the idea that the product development process can help bridge the gap between the laboratory and commercial applications by proposing a framework for how Ulrich and Eppinger's product development process can integrate with the STAM technology development model. This is a significant step towards understanding how in practice these disciplines can work together to bring science and technology from the laboratory to products in the marketplace.
In this article, I explore how digital data collection in the context of the Berkeley-Abiquiú Collaborative Archaeology (BACA) project works, some of the affordances of this new-ish technology, and how they articulate with analogue art practices to achieve the goals of engaged research. Thinking with affordances helps me reflect critically on what digital data recording offers our research goals. In this case, the most important aspect of using digital data recording is how it changes our relationship to time. New orientations of research time created by such technology is an opportunity to engage creatively with how archaeology can represent complexity, produce embodied experience, and share senses of place through both digital and analogue practices. As archaeologists trying to think trans-humanistically, we need to reflect critically on digital technologies to produce engaged research. This is always a shifting target. New uses reveal new possibilities, and vice versa. But newness is not what makes an impact, a difference, or changes the way we do research together; what makes a difference is the result, effects, and affects of these affordances.
Infrastructure projects require collaborative exploration of what is needed and what is possible. Good leadership creates the goodwill and team spirit which generate a good outcome. To develop a whole global industry – e.g., the wind industry – this has to be sustained over a wide geography and a long period of time. Developing a new sector of an industry – e.g., offshore wind energy – raises new problems, particularly problems of the size of larger wind turbines, and all the necessary subsea infrastructure. This is seriously expensive for a market limited in size. Creating a stable market helps reduce the risk but the investment required to establish the physically large factories to build these large turbines in quantity for what remains a limited market appears prohibitive.
Political science does not offer a distinct subdiscipline to address the subject of energy. Insofar as political science has addressed energy, it has focused on issues often neglected by other disciplines, notably the role of geopolitics and international relations, and the domestic politics of resource-rich states. Apart from the different subfields, we examine different approaches including realism, constructivism, liberalism and Marxism. The rise and fall and rise again of academic articles on energy in leading political science journals is reviewed and linked to exogenous forces such as the price of oil. Two distinct energy topics which have received attention are nuclear power and the oil crises of 1973–79 because of their wider geopolitical ramifications. Perhaps the most prominent or consistent thread through studies of the politics of energy is the question of energy security or energy independence. Finally, in recent years, energy has increasingly emerged as a focus for study in environmental politics and climate change politics in particular.
There has been—and continues to be—tension between Native peoples and museums in the United States due to past collecting practices and exhibitions that strive to interpret their culture and history without their involvement. Previously, many of these exhibitions stereotyped and lumped Native peoples together, depicting their cultures as static and interpreting them and their material culture from a Western scientific perspective. Changes are being made. Collaboration between Native peoples and museums in all areas of museum work, including exhibitions, is beginning to be considered by many as a best practice. Exhibitions developed in collaboration with Native peoples, with shared curatorial authority, decidedly help ease the historic tension between the two, and they are much more vibrant and accurate than when collaboration is lacking. This article will provide three examples of collaboration, defined with our tribal partners, to develop exhibitions at History Colorado, the state history museum, concluding with lessons learned.
The National Institutes of Health’s Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) institutes have been created, in part, to have a positive impact on collaboration and team science. This study is the first to examine the associations between a CTSA hub, the Michigan Institute for Clinical and Health Research (MICHR), and investigators’ ego networks. We ran cross-sectional and panel models of the associations between consulting with MICHR and the ego network measure of two-step reach (TSR) – that is, colleagues of colleagues reachable in two steps – from a network of 2161 investigators who had co-submitted a grant proposal to an external sponsor in 2006. Our analyses covered the period 2004–2012, although some model specifications covered the shorter time period 2006–2010. Consulting with MICHR had positive associations with the size of and changes in an investigator’s TSR across and over time, even controlling for research productivity and organizational affiliation. For example, over the period 2006–2010 an investigator who consulted with MICHR reached 44 more individuals than a non-consulting investigator. This study expands our understanding of the indirect impacts that clinical and translational science institutes have on investigators’ scientific networks. This network-based approach might be useful in quantifying the impact of team science initiatives at the university level.
This article discusses findings from the literature and our own research related to the experience of the diagnostic process in mental healthcare, primarily from the perspective of patients, and it focuses on the benefits of collaboration. A common finding throughout our research is that, if a diagnostic process is undertaken, the majority of patients want to be actively involved and feel valued in it. This helps ensure that they find the process and the resulting diagnosis to be meaningful, informative and useful. We believe that collaboration could also mitigate some of the reported negative unintended consequences of diagnosis, including feeling stigmatised, labelled and disempowered. Our work has led us to conceive of diagnosis as having two overarching elements: the diagnostic process and the resulting diagnostic label. This article focuses specifically on the diagnostic process; we do not consider here the debate surrounding the evidence base for the validity of psychiatric classification.
After reading this article you will be able to:
•understand patients' experiences of the diagnostic process
•achieve a shared and collaborative diagnostic process with patients
•reflect on potential barriers and facilitators to collaborative diagnosis in your own practice.