7 Transdisciplinary Research in Land Use Science …
139
Additional proof of this finding is that junior scientists put their academic career
opportunities at risk by assisting in TDR projects. Many doctoral students tasked with
co-ordinating parts of a project had failed to complete their dissertation by the time
the project had come to an end. This finding corresponds with results from a comparative study published by Lange and Fuest (2015), who investigated similar projects.
Moreover, the scientific quality of doctoral theses evolving from TDR projects is
thought to be relatively low. Consequently, some professors have little motivation to
supervise such theses.
In addition, the results from a survey (Zscheischler et al. 2018) show a strong
“practice tendency” of the perception of TDR success among scientists. Scientists
seem to consider TD research mainly as a research form that prioritises practical
outcomes.
7.4.10 The Science-Practice Benefits Equilibrium Is
Off-Balance
One objective of our study was to assess the extent to which TDR contributes to the
goals of SLM and keeps its promises. Since many conceptual papers on the evaluation
of TDR have shown that it is virtually impossible to prove a direct impact, we asked
researchers and practitioners about their perspectives on TDR project success.
The results (see Zscheischler et al. 2018) showed that there is a clear conceptual
deficit regarding success dimensions and criteria when asking about the success and
benefits of recent TDR projects in the form of an open question. Nonetheless, a
quantitative survey, which asked respondents to rate prescribed criteria, indicated
that there is a kind of basic shared “success profile” among all project participants.
This “success profile” highlights criteria with a high relevance to practice, whereas
typically scientific success criteria were rated as less important. This assessment
indicates a significant imbalance within the science-practice benefits equilibrium, as
advocated in the literature, which leans toward the practice-oriented side of the TD
ideal.
As shown (Zscheischler et al. 2018), many criteria are simultaneously important and that must be considered for the successful execution of TDR projects. It
can be assumed that a deficit in fulfilling one criterion cannot be compensated by
overperforming in another.
Our results show that the “output performance” and “process quality” of projects
are important for the overall success perception of a project, while personal benefits
for “career opportunities” seem to have no influence. This finding underlines the
assumption of a high degree of idealism among participating scientists.
In general, the results revealed that the overall success assessment of TDR is rather
moderate. On the one hand, this finding can be traced back to the often sub-optimally
realised TDR process (see Zscheischler et al. 2017). On the other hand, the study
revealed both high and vague expectations.
139
Additional proof of this finding is that junior scientists put their academic career
opportunities at risk by assisting in TDR projects. Many doctoral students tasked with
co-ordinating parts of a project had failed to complete their dissertation by the time
the project had come to an end. This finding corresponds with results from a comparative study published by Lange and Fuest (2015), who investigated similar projects.
Moreover, the scientific quality of doctoral theses evolving from TDR projects is
thought to be relatively low. Consequently, some professors have little motivation to
supervise such theses.
In addition, the results from a survey (Zscheischler et al. 2018) show a strong
“practice tendency” of the perception of TDR success among scientists. Scientists
seem to consider TD research mainly as a research form that prioritises practical
outcomes.
7.4.10 The Science-Practice Benefits Equilibrium Is
Off-Balance
One objective of our study was to assess the extent to which TDR contributes to the
goals of SLM and keeps its promises. Since many conceptual papers on the evaluation
of TDR have shown that it is virtually impossible to prove a direct impact, we asked
researchers and practitioners about their perspectives on TDR project success.
The results (see Zscheischler et al. 2018) showed that there is a clear conceptual
deficit regarding success dimensions and criteria when asking about the success and
benefits of recent TDR projects in the form of an open question. Nonetheless, a
quantitative survey, which asked respondents to rate prescribed criteria, indicated
that there is a kind of basic shared “success profile” among all project participants.
This “success profile” highlights criteria with a high relevance to practice, whereas
typically scientific success criteria were rated as less important. This assessment
indicates a significant imbalance within the science-practice benefits equilibrium, as
advocated in the literature, which leans toward the practice-oriented side of the TD
ideal.
As shown (Zscheischler et al. 2018), many criteria are simultaneously important and that must be considered for the successful execution of TDR projects. It
can be assumed that a deficit in fulfilling one criterion cannot be compensated by
overperforming in another.
Our results show that the “output performance” and “process quality” of projects
are important for the overall success perception of a project, while personal benefits
for “career opportunities” seem to have no influence. This finding underlines the
assumption of a high degree of idealism among participating scientists.
In general, the results revealed that the overall success assessment of TDR is rather
moderate. On the one hand, this finding can be traced back to the often sub-optimally
realised TDR process (see Zscheischler et al. 2017). On the other hand, the study
revealed both high and vague expectations.