Two researchers are at odds over methodologies. How do you navigate their conflicting perspectives?

2 Open Dialogue

Facilitating an open dialogue between the researchers is a critical step. Encourage them to express their concerns and reasoning behind their preferred methodologies in a respectful environment. This dialogue should be a safe space where both parties can freely discuss the scientific merits of their approaches without fear of dismissal or ridicule. Your role is to guide the conversation, ensuring it remains focused and constructive, and to help translate any technical jargon that may impede understanding.

3 Compare Outcomes

A practical approach to resolving methodological disputes is to compare the potential outcomes of each method. Discuss with the researchers what results they expect from their respective methodologies and how these results would contribute to the overall goals of the research. By aligning their focus on the end goal, you may help them see beyond the immediate disagreement and consider how a compromise could yield valuable data or insights.

4 Seek Expertise

In some cases, bringing in an external expert can provide an objective perspective on the methodological dispute. Look for someone with experience in both methodologies or in research management who can offer impartial advice. This expert should help clarify any misunderstandings and suggest possible solutions or compromises that neither researcher may have considered, potentially breaking the deadlock.

5 Evaluate Objectives

Sometimes, researchers get so caught up in their methods that they lose sight of the broader research objectives. Remind them of the project's goals and how each methodology might serve those aims. This can often refocus the conversation on what's most important—the research outcomes—rather than on personal preferences or ego. It's essential that both researchers feel their ultimate goal is shared and valued.

6 Build Consensus

Finally, strive to build a consensus between the researchers. This doesn't necessarily mean one methodology is chosen over the other; it could be a hybrid approach that incorporates elements from both. The aim is to reach an agreement that both researchers can support, even if it requires some give and take. Your role is to facilitate this compromise, ensuring that it's based on sound research principles and that both parties acknowledge the mutual benefits.

7 Here’s what else to consider

This is a space to share examples, stories, or insights that don’t fit into any of the previous sections. What else would you like to add?