Establishing ownership when you work in a team
Many research students receive their research training in a team
environment. This is particularly common in the sciences, but becoming
increasingly common across all disciplines as funding agencies strive
to encourage collaboration and critical mass within research groups in
order to achieve international competitiveness.
When a student works within a research team the common practice
is to publish research results with team members. This is natural as
the research itself is based on a team effort and it is unlikely that
the student has done everything from problem conceptualisation through
to solution. Moreover, the other team members will expect to contribute
to the publications arising from their joint work with the student as
their own careers rely on a record of research and research training
outcomes.
The advantages of collaborative work are manyfold, but certainly
include the benefits of a strong research culture and a fertile
publication opportunity. Nevertheless, when the student submits a
thesis for examination for the award of a PhD, there is a very clear
need to establish precisely what the student has achieved within the
research effort and to know that those achievements display
independence and a professional level of communication standards.
The following examiner's report highlights this issue from an examiner's perspective:
"First, the work presented in this thesis forms part of a long-standing
programme at UWA, which allows a PhD candidate to take advantage of a
significant body of knowledge in their own research. There is also a
close relationship between the work presented in this thesis and other
concurrent projects in the same group, which allows for a productive
interchange of ideas, techniques and equipment. Both of these factors
make it especially important for Mr X to delineate as clearly as
possible his personal contribution to the work. This is necessary to
allow an accurate assessment of the depth and originality of the
research presented, and is also a clear requirement of the formal
regulations for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy."
And from another examiner:
"It is unfortunate that the number of authors in the candidate's
publications spans from 5 to 9. This may reflect the actual
contribution of the candidate, or be the result of a team policy.
Nonetheless, the absence of a single name, or at least a 2-3 author
publication in which the candidate is the first author, seems to
indicate a limited autonomy."
See also
What work actually belongs to the candidate.