Toolkitting: an unrecognized form of expertise for overcoming fragmentation in inter- and transdisciplinarity

Complex global problems necessitate inter- and transdisciplinary (ITD) research approaches. However, ITD research lacks established canons of methods and tools, unlike disciplinary research. Existing ITD tools and knowledge are often tacit and scattered, leading to fragmentation and inefficiencies. This fragmentation hinders ITD projects by requiring researchers to repeatedly reinvent methods and processes. To address this, numerous ITD toolkits have emerged, offering curated collections of methods, processes, concepts, and resources. However, even these toolkits suffer from fragmentation, with limited awareness and accessibility among researchers. The authors, core members of the Toolkits and Methods Working Group within the Global Alliance for Inter- and Transdisciplinarity, aim to address this through their examination of toolkitting. The study analyzes the expertise and practices involved in the creation, maintenance, and study of toolkits, highlighting the critical role of "toolkitting" as a metawork that organizes and systematizes ITD research practices. The authors acknowledge that this study is based on their collective analysis and experience, with inherent limitations.

The paper begins by referencing existing literature that highlights the fragmentation of ITD methods and tools. It notes that while many organizations and individuals have created toolkits to address this, these toolkits themselves are fragmented. The authors cite previous work that emphasizes the need to study ITD toolkits and the processes involved in their creation and maintenance. The authors' own working group's efforts in mapping the landscape of ITD toolkits are also mentioned, identifying 64 English-language toolkits (with others in various languages) and highlighting examples that showcase diversity in focus and structure.

The authors use a qualitative approach, drawing on their combined experience in creating, using, maintaining, and studying ITD toolkits. Four specific toolkits, each developed by some of the authors, serve as in-depth case studies: the td-net Toolbox, the Integration and Implementation Insights (i2Insights) blog and repository, the Integrated Research Toolkit, and the SHAPE-ID Toolkit. These case studies illustrate the diversity in toolkit focus, content, structure, and maintenance practices. The authors analyze the processes and expertise involved in toolkit creation, encompassing phases such as definition, design, development, and dissemination, also considering governance structures and the need for technical skills. Similarly, they examine toolkit maintenance, covering tasks like updating links, replacing outdated tools, and assessing user needs. Finally, the authors explore toolkit scholarship, discussing the various approaches to studying toolkitting, whether from an external (observational) or internal (participatory) perspective. The authors identify key expertise needed for each stage of toolkitting. This section of the paper serves not only as a descriptive account of toolkitting, but also as a prescriptive guide for future practices.

The paper's key findings revolve around the concept of "toolkitting" as a distinct form of expertise essential for improving ITD research. Toolkitting, described as metawork (work that organizes work), systematizes how ITD research is conducted. The authors highlight the need to move beyond simply creating toolkits to actively maintaining and studying them. The analysis of four case studies demonstrates that toolkits vary widely in structure, content, and purpose, reflecting different theoretical underpinnings and user communities. The authors identify several key areas of expertise required for effective toolkitting: project management, relational skills, assessment skills, design expertise (information schema, user experience, platform selection), communication skills, technical skills (depending on the platform), indexing skills, marketing and advertising skills, and assessment expertise. They emphasize the importance of addressing toolkit fragmentation, suggesting the creation of a comprehensive toolkit inventory and a federated knowledge bank. The study notes that toolkit maintenance is crucial but often neglected, and that decommissioning of outdated toolkits is equally important to ensure the integrity of online resources. Toolkit scholarship is also identified as a critical area, emphasizing both internal and external perspectives. The authors highlight the potential of toolkit scholarship to evaluate existing toolkits, identify areas of unmet need, and help shape the development of future funding instruments.

The paper's findings highlight the significant gap between the creation of ITD toolkits and the systematic understanding and utilization of toolkitting expertise. The fragmentation of toolkits, mirroring the fragmentation of ITD knowledge itself, limits the potential impact of these resources. The authors' emphasis on toolkitting as a form of metawork emphasizes its capacity to shape the future of ITD research. By improving the creation, maintenance, and study of toolkits, the ITD field can benefit from improved accessibility, rigor, and overall quality. The proposed toolkit inventory and federated knowledge bank aim to address the issue of fragmentation by creating a shared platform and promoting collaboration. The authors also acknowledge the potential risks of toolkitting, such as unintended consequences and power imbalances. They stress the importance of ethical considerations, language accessibility, and the decolonization of research to ensure equitable outcomes. This discussion emphasizes the need for careful consideration of the broader implications of toolkitting and the need for a systematic approach to managing this field.

The paper concludes by advocating for increased attention to toolkitting expertise and practices. The authors propose the creation of a comprehensive, ongoing inventory of ITD toolkits, laying the foundation for a federated knowledge bank that connects and develops existing and future toolkits. This collaborative effort would bring together toolkit creators, curators, users, funders, and scholars to advance ITD research. The authors acknowledge the limitations of their study, emphasizing the need for future research to expand upon their findings and address the complexities of toolkitting in different contexts.

The authors acknowledge that their analysis is based on a limited number of case studies and their own experiences as toolkit creators, curators, and scholars. This limits the generalizability of their findings to other contexts and types of toolkits. The study also primarily focuses on English-language toolkits, potentially overlooking valuable resources in other languages. Further research is needed to address these limitations and expand the scope of toolkitting studies.