Peer Discussion Guide: Leading effectively across complex, collaborative projects

Pamela Agar

This guide is designed for peer-facilitated discussion to help you get more from the established researcher resources. It curates a small selection of related resources and offers a light structure for reflection and conversation. They are not training sessions. They are structured opportunities to pause, think, and learn with others.  There is no expert facilitator in the room. Everyone participates as an equal, taking shared responsibility for holding the structure, time, and quality of the conversation. Our Peer Discussion Guides Find out more about our Peer Discussion Guides and how you can use them to help you get more from our established researcher resources.

Peer Discussion Guide: Planning projects and project teams

Pamela Agar

This guide is designed for peer-facilitated discussion to help you get more from the established researcher resources. It curates a small selection of related resources and offers a light structure for reflection and conversation. They are not training sessions. They are structured opportunities to pause, think, and learn with others.  There is no expert facilitator in the room. Everyone participates as an equal, taking shared responsibility for holding the structure, time, and quality of the conversation. Our Peer Discussion Guides Find out more about our Peer Discussion Guides and how you can use them to help you get more from our established researcher resources.

Learn from a case study of effective coordination of a multi-site research consortium

Pamela Agar

This paper by Steiner et al. describes how a five-institution research collaboration built and sustained effective multi-site coordination from launch through delivery. Whilst written in a health research context, the infrastructure challenges it addresses are directly familiar to anyone leading a multi-site UK research project: partners with different institutional systems and norms, data sharing complications, the risk of fragmented governance, and the practical difficulty of keeping distributed teams aligned around shared goals. The paper’s value lies not in providing a generic framework but in showing exactly what one team actually did, and why – making it a rich source of transferable ideas rather than abstract principles. The consortium’s approach was organised around six interconnected practices, each of which has a clear parallel in UK multi-site research contexts: The authors are explicit that most of these elements need to be planned and resourced at the proposal stage, not retrofitted once problems emerge. Application of team science best practices to the project management of a large, multi-site research consortium (Steiner et al., Journal of Clinical and Translational Science, 2023) What will you take forward? One thing to consider: Reading this as a case study rather than a prescriptive guide, which one or two …

Build your project team deliberately, from first meeting to close

Pamela Agar

The Drexler–Sibbet Team Performance Model offers a practical roadmap for building and sustaining effective project teams. It maps seven predictable stages that teams move through – from initial orientation to high performance and renewal – each centred on a core question that the team must answer well before it can progress. For established researchers, who assemble new teams from scratch for specific grants or projects, often across institutional boundaries and with people who have not worked together before, the model is particularly valuable because it makes visible the work that typically goes undone: establishing shared purpose, building trust, and agreeing how decisions will be made, before the real delivery pressure begins. The seven stages and their central questions are: The model is also useful as a diagnostic when a project team is struggling: it helps identify whether the underlying problem is unresolved purpose, lack of trust, unclear roles, or something else entirely – each of which requires a different response. What will you take forward? One thing to consider: Think about a project team that underperformed or felt difficult to lead. Looking at the seven stages, at which point did the foundations start to feel shaky, and what would you …

Adapt your leadership style according to project phase and team

Pamela Agar

Note: This article requires access via HBR or an institutional library subscription. This classic Harvard Business Review article by Daniel Goleman draws on research with nearly 4,000 leaders to identify six distinct leadership styles and, crucially, the conditions under which each is most and least effective. Although written for a business audience, its framework translates directly to the research context, where the same researcher may need to lead a bid development team, manage a large multi-site delivery team, mentor an early career researcher, and navigate a difficult partner relationship – often within the same project lifecycle. The article’s central argument is that leadership style is not a fixed personality trait but a deliberate choice, and that the most effective leaders notice, and switch between styles fluidly as circumstances demand. “Research is a team sport. Be clear whether your greatest contribution is as the ‘star striker’ or the ‘coach,’ and align your role accordingly.” Nick Plant, Pro-Vice-Chancellor: Research and Innovation, University of Leeds. Read more from Nick. For those leading research, four styles are especially worth developing: What will you take forward? One thing to consider: Thinking about your current or most recent project, which leadership style did you default to? …

Understand what drives performance in distributed project teams

Pamela Agar

This Deloitte Insights article draws on survey research to identify what most strongly predicts team effectiveness in distributed, digitally-mediated working environments. Although written for a broad organisational audience, its findings translate directly to the research context: researchers leading time-limited, multi-site projects who need to assemble and sustain productive teams across institutional boundaries. The research is particularly valuable because it moves beyond assumptions about tools and technology to identify the relational factors that most reliably determine whether distributed teams succeed or struggle. The article’s central finding is striking – whether a team member has strong digital skills or access to good employer-provided tools matters less than whether they are part of a well-functioning team. For those leading complex, multi-institutional projects this reframes the challenge: the priority is building the conditions for team effectiveness, not just getting the logistics right. Three factors are identified as critical: What will you take forward? One thing to consider: In your current or next project team, what would need to be true for every member to feel safe raising a problem or admitting they don’t know how to do something — and how would you create that condition across institutional boundaries?

Build a project team structure that fits funder expectations

Pamela Agar

This UKRI guidance explains the different roles that can be included in funding applications submitted through the UKRI Funding Service, including role descriptions, responsibilities, eligibility, and costings guidance. It is particularly useful in a UK Higher Education context because it helps researchers match the design of their project team to the formal expectations of a major funder, rather than relying on inherited assumptions about who should be included and in what capacity. For established researchers who are increasingly shaping bids rather than simply contributing to them, it provides a practical framework for thinking about who needs to be named, how responsibilities should be framed, and how contributions can be recognised appropriately. “Research is a team sport. Be clear whether your greatest contribution is as the ‘star striker’ or the ‘coach,’ and align your role accordingly.” Nick Plant, Pro-Vice-Chancellor: Research and Innovation, University of Leeds What will you take forward? One thing to consider: Does the way you are currently framing your project team reflect the real contribution of each person, and how well would it stand up to UKRI scrutiny?

Make interdisciplinary collaborative projects more explicit, practical, and workable

Pamela Agar

This paper by Patel et al. offers a concise and practical introduction to starting collaborative projects across disciplines. It is especially useful because it focuses on the early design choices that often determine whether interdisciplinary work succeeds: building the team, assigning roles and responsibilities, agreeing ground rules, discussing authorship, and creating the conditions for trust and psychological safety. For established researchers – who are often at the point of convening interdisciplinary work rather than simply participating in it – the paper gives a clear basis for thinking through the practical mechanics of collaboration, rather than treating interdisciplinarity as an abstract aspiration. What will you take forward? One thing to try: Notice where in your current collaboration there are assumptions about roles, language, or authorship still implicit rather than properly discussed. Make a commitment to raise them at your next meeting, or arrange a review of how things are going.

Build collaborations that allow projects to scale up without fragmentation

Pamela Agar

This practical guide to big team science by Baumgartner HA et al. is particularly helpful for researchers beginning to work in larger collaborations that need more deliberate leadership than a small project team. It addresses issues such as leadership, governance, team design, communication, decision-making, collaborative writing, and infrastructure. For established researchers stepping into more flexible leadership positions, the value of the guide is that it treats leadership as a set of practices rather than simply a formal role, helping you create structures that allow collaboration to scale up without becoming fragmented. What will you take forward? One thing to consider: Which part of your current leadership approach would need to change if your project team doubled in size or complexity over the next year?

Plan and manage your research group budget

Pamela Agar

This practical Science Careers article by Megan T brown introduces the financial realities of running a research group for the first time. Whilst framed for early career researchers, this guide has much practical advice for Established Researchers. The article provides a clear overview of the financial principles PIs need to run a sustainable research group. The resource is particularly relevant because it emphasises treating the lab as a small organisation with its own financial model. It highlights the importance of understanding institutional and funder rules, staff costs, equipment planning, and aligning spending decisions with longer-term research priorities. Key insights include: For new Lab Builders, the central message is that financial stewardship is a core leadership responsibility. Good budgeting enables researchers to support their team and respond strategically to emerging opportunities. What will you take forward? One thing to consider: How well do you understand the financial structure of your grant funding – and what conversations with finance colleagues might strengthen your financial planning?

Avoid Overwhelm: Plan and review in waves

Pamela Agar

To prevent feeling overwhelmed, approach your planning in ‘waves’ or ‘horizons’, breaking down strategies and long-term activities into manageable phases. Planning too far ahead in intricate detail often leads to unrealistic expectations and potential setbacks and setting yourself up to feel a failure. An approach to consider: Rolling wave planning is used for projects where there are unknowns or risks, and so is very appropriate for research projects where all the data isn’t immediately available. You can learn more about the technique in the project management blog. This dynamic approach keeps your plans flexible, realistic, and aligned with evolving circumstances. ‘Stock-take’ to review progress Being strategic requires us to be honest with ourselves about where we are, what we have achieved, what’s working and what is getting in the way. In this video, you are guided through a structured process to review your career (have a pen and paper at the ready!). The same technique can also be used to review progress of a project, a relationship or collaboration, or a PhD student you are supervising. You can also download a  Stock take – progress review (pdf) worksheet to use separately from the video or share with colleagues, students or collaborators. What …

Create a Gantt Chart – even if it’s imperfect and you only do it once!

Pamela Agar

Gantt charts are divisive in the planning world – love them or hate them, they can save time and aid influence and negotiation. While often criticised for being created then ignored, they hold value even as a one-off exercise. Why? Even an imperfect Gantt chart can clarify milestones, highlight potential workload bottlenecks, and prompt decisions. Use them to suggest ideal deadlines, demonstrate periods of high pressure, and justify changes in priorities, rescheduling, or resource requests. Visual timelines make it easier to persuade others than simply claiming, “I won’t have capacity then.” Gantt charts also help identify lighter periods for progressing lower-priority tasks or scheduling breaks. They reveal task dependencies to encourage timely completions and highlight independent activities that can be tackled during quieter spells. Moreover, they foster realistic expectations about task durations and clarify mutual support timelines within teams. Not sure how to make a start? Learn more here in the Research Whisperers blog that gives a simple guide to creating a Gantt Chart. What will you take forward? One thing to consider: What would become easier to explain or negotiate if you could show your workload visually rather than holding it in your head?  

Planning multiple activity/ year strands: use a Work Breakdown Structure approach

Pamela Agar

At an established career stage, work rarely comes in neat, single-track projects. Most established researchers are holding multiple strands at once: long-running research programmes, teaching and supervision, leadership or departmental roles, external commitments, and opportunities that arrive mid-cycle. These strands sit on different timescales, are owned by different people, and often come with expectations that are only partly explicit. Individually, each strand may feel manageable. Collectively, they can create a persistent sense of overload, uncertainty, or even stress and anxiety. One experienced academic described their solution simply: “Every year or so, I need to see everything in one place.” Their approach was deliberately practical. They started by mapping all current and anticipated tasks and activities on a single large whiteboard, often beginning with a loose mind map. The map would soon reveal themes or work strands. For each strand, they identified the person who ultimately defined success (not necessarily themselves!). This might be a programme director, head of department, collaborator, or mentor. Naming this authority helped replace assumptions that could lead to overwhelm with conversations. Each strand was then built out to include: They also added a final layer: purpose. Why does this matter? What does it contribute to career …

Strategic planning – envision and plan into the future

Pamela Agar

This two-part video series from the Imperial Academic’s Success Guide, helps you to start developing a career strategy.  It gives you prompts and ways of thinking to turn vague and aspirational ideas into something more actionable that you can share with others. You can use the prompts to envision your career strategy in general, or to apply to a specific research idea or funding proposal.  It may also help you to put together a strategy to present to a probation review panel, a funder or your research group. Whilst it is focussed on research leadership strategy, you can easily apply the questions to other leadership roles in education, outreach, commercialisation, etc.  Being Strategic part 1 In this video, you are prompted to explore the big picture and envision the future – this can help you to get the important ‘headlines’ in place. Being Strategic part 2 In this video for Part 2 you will look at practical ways to turn the big picture in to a plan with a coherent narrative.  You can also download the horizon scanning questions and a PESTLE Analysis (doc) that is referred to in this video.  What will you take forward? One thing to consider: What is …