COMMENTARY

Best Practices in Communicating Best Practices

Commentary on: ‘Developing and Communicating ResponsibleData Management Policies to Trainees and Colleagues’

C. K. Gunsalus

Received: 17 August 2009 / Accepted: 20 July 2010 / Published online: 2 September 2010

� Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Abstract: We send messages as much in how we communicate as by what we

communicate. Learning best practices, such as those for data management proposed

in the accompanying article, are components of becoming a responsible and con-

tributing member of the community of scholars. Not only must we teach the prin-

ciples underlying best practices, we should model and teach approaches for

implementing those practices and help students come to view them within the larger

context of becoming members of a professional community. How to collaborate

across differences and how to have disputes professionally are skills all profes-

sionals need, and they should be taught along with the content itself.

Keywords Best practices � Ethics � Research integrity � Dispute resolution �Professionalism � Whistleblowing

As with so many challenging aspects of professionalism, the devil is in the details of

how to develop and communicate responsible data management practices. Julia

Frugoli et al. (2010) provide an admirable guide for those who aspire to do the right

thing. They highlight both the critical role of a foundation of basic principles, and

the importance of explicit, formal education in the standards and expectations of the

profession/research community. Key experiential components of training can

augment the foundation lessons and improve outcomes of ethics curricula.

C. K. Gunsalus (&)

Special Counsel, Colleges of Business and Medicine, 496 Wohlers Hall, 1201 S. Sixth Street,

Champaign, IL 61820, USA

e-mail: gunsalus@illinois.edu

123

Sci Eng Ethics (2010) 16:763–767

DOI 10.1007/s11948-010-9227-1

Principle-Based

The single most important step is grounding discussion about professional matters

in a set of principles. This practice is universally beneficial. If all researchers would

embrace this approach, many of the problems that plague working life in research

could be obviated, or at least mitigated.

Systematic Instruction

A primary failing of our graduate education system is that students are judged upon

myriad aspects of professionalism, but seldom systematically instructed in them.

The thoughtful design and delivery of formal instruction on how to be a responsible

and ethical researcher—in practice, not just in theory—sends powerful and positive

messages. It emphasizes that students belong to a wider community rather than just

to the private fiefdoms of their labs; that they belong to their departments and their

universities, as well as to the larger community of scholars. Group instruction

provides information about, and reinforcement of, norms and standards.

Relating Personal Experience as Effective Pedagogy

One of the most compelling aspects of the approach described by Frugoli and

colleagues (2010) is the idea that faculty members should tell students about their

personal experiences to win their attention as well as to convey important teaching

points.

Since before organized education began, communities have been inculcating,

conveying and teaching their values and beliefs through storytelling. The research

community too often overlooks the power of this approach. Storytelling is not

something to be avoided as too ‘‘soft’’ or insufficiently objective. Its use takes into

account how humans absorb important lessons and helps students envision

themselves as practicing researchers. As a pedagogy, especially around matters of

professionalism and ethics, sharing experiences has tremendous utility. Including

storytelling prominently in discussions of best practices for responsible conduct

education is an important step.

All too often, students and emerging professionals view ethics as a luxury that

cannot be afforded until they are farther along in their careers (Fischman et al.

2005). Having mentors and supervisors share personal experiences helps to

reinforce the reality that at every stage of professional life there are pressures and

incentives to behave badly and they do not vanish as soon as one lands a job, earns

tenure, wins a big grant or gets promoted. Discussions among students and faculty

members about ‘‘real’’ dilemmas faculty members have faced—and the problem-

solving approaches they have used to resolve them—can enable students to envision

different futures for themselves.

764 C. K. Gunsalus

123

Mechanisms for Broaching Topics

Requiring students to present notebooks from their own laboratories for review by

other students—with the permission of the laboratory head/research supervisor—is

a particularly strong practice that could be valuable in multiple dimensions. Primary

among these is to provide an opportunity for students to explore conflicts that might

exist between their formal and informal curricula.

It can be confusing when students are taught one set of practices in their ethics

seminars and then see divergent practices in the laboratories where they do research.

There can be good reasons for divergences, and if they are not discussed and

brought into the open, students can make up explanations that are neither accurate

nor helpful. Validating discussions about data recording and retention, for

example—including the pros and cons of specific practices—de-mystifies an

important topic. It shows that such situations should be analyzed and models how

productive discussions might occur between collaborators whose practices might

differ.

Examination of lab notebooks in a course on the responsible conduct of research

can provide a structured opportunity and permission for students to explore related

questions in a way that fully acknowledges the power differentials students confront

when their advisors demonstrate practices that fall short of those taught in other

settings.

How might a student approach his or her thesis advisor or Lab head/research

supervisor with the idea that a lab’s data management practices could be improved?

Elsewhere, I have described the concept of practicing some first sentences for

difficult interactions (Gunsalus 1998a). Providing instruction and practice in

concrete approaches to opening difficult conversations would facilitate the

development of an important skill.

While it comes from another discipline, the short, classic article by Peter Drucker

titled Managing Oneself (Drucker 2005) is an invaluable resource for preventing

problems that is worthy of incorporation into the curriculum. Drucker advises that,

upon starting in a new workplace, one of the early items of business is to open lines

of communication by soliciting information from supervisors and colleagues about

preferred working styles, contributions, and so forth. An exercise I’ve employed,

based directly on Drucker’s approach, is to assign the article to students for advance

reading, along with a structured set of questions to consider and prepare. In teams or

groups, students then practice asking and answering a set of key questions of each

other. First, each person addresses the group:

This is what I am good at [explain]. This is how I work. [explain] These are

my values. [explain] This is the contribution I plan to concentrate on and the

results I should be expected to deliver. [explain].

After each person speaks, he or she turns to the next person and says:

And what do I need to know about your strengths, how you perform, your

values, and your proposed contribution?

Best Practices in Communicating Best Practices 765

123

To answer ‘‘what should my contribution be?’’, each person must address three

distinct elements:

(1) What does the situation require?

(2) Given my strengths, my way of performing, and my values, how can I make

the greatest contribution to what needs to be done?

(3) What results have to be achieved to make a difference?

This approach, adapted to specific topics and settings, could provide a foundation

for instructors and students alike for broaching difficult professional topics such as

best practices in data management and others, including authorship, ways resolving

differences, working styles, etc.

How to have Disputes Professionally

Finally, for those circumstances where prevention and improved communication do

not avert problems, junior researchers need to learn how to deal with problems and

disputes. While reasonable people can differ about the most appropriate way to

record and store data for a given project, the problems that fester and sometimes

explode rarely lie in the technical details.

Instead, problems arise because people do not know (and are not taught) how to

express differences of opinion professionally. The first necessary steps are laid out

in an earlier paper, ‘‘How to blow the whistle and still have a career afterwards’’

(Gunsalus 1998b): consider alternative explanations; ask questions; identify relevant

documentation; separate personal and professional concerns; assess your goals; seek

advice and listen to it. While presented in the context of whistleblowing, these

initial steps are largely about how to have a professional dispute over an important

matter while retaining a reputation as a serious and credible researcher.

Teaching these and other skills can underline the importance not only of an

analytically rigorous approach to scientific problems, but also of extending the same

approach to professional, interpersonal disputes. Asking questions before jumping

to conclusions—no matter how powerfully the conclusion ‘‘feels’’ right—is a strong

scientific practice. Similarly, discussing results or approaches with objective

colleagues, and considering carefully how to choose such colleagues wisely, is a

strong practice that yields robust conclusions and defensible outcomes.

Should we aspire to less?

References

Drucker, P. (2005). Managing oneself. Harvard Business Review, 83(1), 100–109.

Fischman, W., Soloman, B., Greenspan, D., & Gardner, H. (2005). Making good: How young people copewith moral dilemmas at work. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Frugoli, J., Etgen, A. M., & Kuhar, M. (2010). Developing and communicating responsible data

management policies to trainees and colleagues. Science and engineering ethics. doi:

10.1007/s11948-010-9203-9.

766 C. K. Gunsalus

123

Gunsalus, C. K. (1998a). Preventing the need for whistleblowing: Practical advice for university

administrators. Science and Engineering Ethics, 4(1), 75–94.

Gunsalus, C. K. (1998b). How to blow the whistle and still have a career afterwards. Science andEngineering Ethics, 4(1), 51–64.

Best Practices in Communicating Best Practices 767

123