The workshop begins with a brief presentation of what the Global Inter- and Transdisciplinary (henceforth ID-TD) Mentorship Initiative is/was all about, and how and why I perceive that this Initiative, which I started in 2021, has failed. Participants would then proceed to jointly discuss important aspects of global ID-TD mentoring, and brainstorm how we could create tools and communities for mentorship that would not be limited by the kind of struggles my original initiative experienced; i.e. conceptualizing the past struggles as productive failures enabling future success. Ideally, the workshop will be followed by an action plan and call to gather interested people to contribute and make it happen beyond the workshop and conference.
Background:
In 2021, I started developing the so-called Global Inter- and Transdisciplinary Mentorship Initiative, the main idea of which was to develop a wide-encompassing and inclusive network of mentors and mentees with an ID-TD focus:
- The Initiative aimed to extend access to sustainable and context-sensitive mentoring and peer-support for ID-TD early-career researchers (henceforth ECRs) and students, as they pursued their paradoxical and risky role as change-makers (see Dooling et al. 2017), pushing academia to become more open for ID-TD approaches.
- The initiative placed special emphasis on regions where ID-TD programs and centers are still relatively marginal, especially across the Global South.
- The Initiative also aimed to increase understanding about the specific challenges and forms of discrimination experienced by ID-TD students and ECRs in different regional and other contexts.
Many ID-TD networks and scholars at different career stages and regions expressed immediate or gradual interest in the initiative. However, by late 2023, I decided to stop advancing the Initiative for the following reasons:
- Lack of collaboration and integration between the networks and people involved. The Initiative was planned with the same idea as the ITD Alliance: a network of networks, which support one another in the development of similar goals in different contexts. In practice, each network that expressed interest in the Initiative wanted to create its own working group, to develop the initiative building on its specific interests and context and needs, quickly starting to dismiss needs and contexts of the other groups. Within months of starting the initiative, the “global” collaborative aspect of the initiative was lost; the forest was not seen for the trees. At the same time, I find that the existence of local groups is important, as it is only in this way that we can learn about context-specific needs and challenges. I.e. the Initiative failed to develop a functional glocal approach.
- Lack of leadership and coordination. As the person who had started the initiative, I was expected to lead the [non-existent] global network and all the different local groups at the same time. My time went into navigating endless meetings with each organization and its subgroup, each of which also expected me to fully understand and prioritize their specific needs and context, even if I often had no prior experience with their organization. I ran out of time, energy, and motivation within weeks from starting. This was especially the case considering that my own research focuses on journalism studies, not research on ID-TD; henceforth the initiative or nothing I do for these groups counts towards my own research career at all. I felt as though none of this was considered by the groups involved in the initiative. Lesson learned: From the start, I should have appointed someone to lead each group, vs. trying to assume that responsibility myself. I tried, but there really weren’t any volunteers. I still should have spoken up much more clearly about my own boundaries and position from the start.
- Lack of communication, as to what it takes to launch and create this initiative (vs. expecting results and benefits right away). Many of the ECRs and students who wished to become involved wanted me to provide them with their ideal mentor right away, without considering that the initiative and the pool of potential mentors first needs to be developed with the help of everyone. It was as though within weeks of starting, some of the people involved were annoyed that I couldn’t just give them what they were personally after, without even wanting to give anything in return. At the same time, I fully understand the despair I sensed – many of these students and ECRs had been looking for a suitable ID-TD mentor for years, and when spotting the Initiative, they no longer had the time or energy to consider what they themselves still needed to contribute to gain what should be considered a basic right in academia: a suitable mentor. Lesson learned: Whenever launching this kind of initiative, it is important to consider the needs – including emotional – and resources of the participants from the start, rather than assuming that everyone is on the same page and with resources to contribute and patience to wait.
Ethical considerations: This workshop does NOT seek to blame or shame any person or organization who was involved in the initiative. The only person who will be “named” at all is Kirsi Cheas, who planned and organized the initiative, and is happy to look in the mirror for the fore-described failures. The goal of the workshop is not to point a finger at absolutely anyone, the goal is to openly share past errors so we can learn from them collectively, rather than repeating them in the future. If this proposal is accepted, I would appreciate dialogue with the organizers of the ITD Conference in advance of the workshop, as to how to make sure the workshop feels like a safe place for all the participants (especially those who might have been involved in the development of the original Initiative), and no-one feels guilt-tripped in any way.
Organization of workshop: The workshop will start with a brief presentation of what the Initiative was (if pre-registration is possible, the description of the workshop on Google Drive can be shared to participants in advance), how it failed, and what is meant by the concept of Productive failure (e.g., Pearce 2020, Kapur 2016). The joint discussion can then begin. The participants will be first asked to spontaneously react to the ideas and failures presented, and how we could perceive them productively in the development of global ID-TD mentorship and related networking. Participants will then be divided into smaller groups, where they will be invited to brainstorm alternative initiatives/solutions for extending mentorship for ID-TD students and scholars in different global contexts. The ideas will be written on Miro Whiteboard. Participants interested in developing mentorship further will be asked to add their contact info on a separate sheet, which will then be shared amongst the interested participants, who can continue brainstorming beyond the workshop, continuing to build on the Miro board.
Contributors: The principal responsible person for the workshop is Kirsi Cheas, who will be in charge of the initial presentation and overseeing the conversations and brainstorming. In addition, I have spoken with various colleagues from my original organization Finterdis – the Finnish Interdisciplinary Society, who are planning to attend the ITD2024 conference in person and are willing to support the organization of the workshop (e.g. guiding small groups in conversation, helping with tech, etc.) if need be. The final composition of the workshop group will be decided upon learning the results of each willing participant’s individual submissions and conference travel grant application results.
