The importance of international research programs across the disciplines is becoming an ever-critical strategic endeavor for research universities in the U.S. and abroad. Research environments cross borders, engaging in complex project management practices, optimizing hyperconnected systems, and sequencing and balancing cultural value differences and similarities to avoid miscommunication. International research initiatives are not new, but the need to better plan, manage, and sustain long-term international research programs is novel for the modern university. Primary friction points center around the professional development of internationally competent faculty who must integrate their teaching, research, and service profiles strategically and tactically to focus on competitive funding demands. Initial inquiries show that while many emerging and experienced faculty are interested in developing an international research footprint, they are woefully unprepared to navigate the design of international research to meet the needs and expectations of diverse stakeholders and processes. For instance, the demands of tenure procedures systematically prioritize relatively less complex research trajectories. This paper develops a conceptual systemic model for individual international research portfolios in higher education to assist faculty in becoming more engaged international researchers while at the same time empower administrators to better service faculty interested in international research endeavors. Employing active network theory and user experience methodology, the research also examines ways to balance management interface design, tenure requirements, organizational cultures, and other institutional and professional expectations, with complex international infrastructural and logistical realities, to address this on-going challenge confronted by the modern research university.
Beruvides et al. (Tue,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: