I recently set aside time to think about my current research collaborations, and which opportunities I should go after.

Here’s the generalized template for anyone interested in repeating the exercise:

Think Day: Assessing Current Collaborations and Identifying Where to Develop New Ties (1.5 hours)

Purpose

This think day is designed to help researchers and academic leaders take a step back from day-to-day collaboration activity and strategically assess their collaboration landscape.
The goal is to distinguish between collaborations that are actively advancing one’s research agenda, those that require re-positioning or consolidation, and those that should be developed or deprioritized.

The session supports a shift from reactive collaboration to intentional, agenda-driven partnerships.

---

Intended Outcomes

By the end of the session, participants should have:

• A clear overview of their current collaborations
• Insight into which partnerships offer the highest strategic value
• Identification of gaps in their collaboration network
• A short, actionable plan for strengthening or initiating key collaborations in the next 3–12 months

---

Session Structure (1.5 hours)

1. Clarifying the Purpose of Collaboration (10 minutes)

Participants begin by articulating what collaboration is meant to achieve in their current career stage or institutional role.

Prompt examples:

• What should collaboration enable for me right now (e.g. funding, impact, visibility, institutional growth)?
• Which time horizon am I optimizing for (next year vs. next five years)?
• How does collaboration support my broader research or leadership agenda?

Outcome:
A concise statement describing the strategic purpose of collaboration for the coming year.

---

2. Mapping the Current Collaboration Landscape (25 minutes)

Participants list their existing collaborators and categorize them according to the level of engagement.

A common approach is to use three categories:

• Core collaborations: frequent interaction, shared outputs, mutual dependency
• Active collaborations: regular contact, but limited outputs or unclear trajectory
• Potential collaborations: informal or emerging contacts with unrealized potential

Outcome:
A visual or written map of collaborations that reveals concentration, gaps, or overextension.

---

3. Evaluating Strategic Value (25 minutes)

Each collaboration is assessed using a small number of criteria, such as:

• Alignment with current research priorities
• Mutual benefit and balance
• Access to resources (data, infrastructure, funding)
• Fit with funding opportunities
• Level of trust and reliability
• Reputational or institutional leverage

Participants score or qualitatively assess collaborations to distinguish:

• High-priority partnerships to deepen
• Medium-priority collaborations to reshape
• Low-priority collaborations to limit or conclude

Outcome:
A prioritized list of collaborations based on strategic value rather than habit or history.

---

4. Identifying Gaps and Missing Links (15 minutes)

Participants reflect on what is missing from their collaboration network.

Typical questions include:

• Are there key regions, disciplines, or institutions missing?
• Is there a lack of partners connected to funding, policy, or implementation?
• Are collaborations overly dependent on a single individual or institution?

Outcome:
Identification of 3–5 strategic gaps and a description of the type of collaborators needed to fill them.

---

5. Defining Strategic Next Steps (10 minutes)

Participants translate insights into concrete actions for the next 90 days.

Examples:

• Initiating a targeted conversation with a potential partner
• Formalizing an existing collaboration
• Redirecting or closing a low-value collaboration
• Delegating execution to another team member

Actions should be specific, time-bound, and aligned with the stated collaboration purpose.

Outcome:
A short action list with owners and timelines.

---

6. Reflection and Commitment (5 minutes)

The session closes with a brief reflection on:

• What needs to change in how collaborations are approached
• One measurable indicator of progress (e.g. number of priority collaborations strengthened)

Outcome:
A clear commitment that can be revisited after 6–12 months.

---

Who This Think Day Is For

• Mid-career and senior researchers
• Group leaders and principal investigators
• Academic leaders (programme directors, deans, research coordinators)
• Anyone experiencing “collaboration overload” or unclear return on collaborative effort

---

Why This Think Day Matters

As research careers progress, opportunities for collaboration grow faster than individual capacity. Without deliberate reflection, collaboration risks becoming reactive, diluted, or misaligned with strategic goals.

This think day provides a structured way to reclaim agency over collaboration, ensuring that partnerships remain meaningful, sustainable, and aligned with long-term impact.