It is unclear how science facilitators can balance the amount of structure, content, and freedom they give to teams in chartering workshops. We propose that design thinking principles and activities can fill this need in team science. We piloted a team chartering workshop based on design thinking (a “Strategy Jam”) with five hybrid research/research support teams. We tracked chartering outcomes and what led to them using a mixed methods, explanatory, longitudinal study design. Data were collected using the Team Diagnostic Survey and interviews with team leaders. Immediately after the Strategy Jam, teams’ scores for their compelling purpose increased by an average of 13%. For three of the four teams measured quantitatively, their sound structure scores increased by an average of 8% while one team’s score decreased by 11%. Qualitative analysis of interviews with all five teams revealed that design thinking factors were influential, along with contextual factors and generic factors common to any participatory workshop. An unknown follow up mechanism likely contributed to further gains and losses in chartering outcomes over time. In this pilot study, design thinking was an effective and efficient way to design a participatory chartering workshop. It was effective because it helped charter team purpose and structure along with team commitment, learning, and cohesion. It was efficient because a design thinking approach fulfilled five science facilitation functions at once: (1) structure the participation process, (2) structure the workshop process, (3) facilitate generic workshop factors (e.g., aligned choosing), (4) gain traction on chartering topics for ambiguous challenges, and (5) respond to context.
Laursen et al. (Wed,) studied this question.