CCC is excited to see how our latest best-practice documents on interdisciplinary research for Funders, Researchers, and Organizational Leaders echo—and amplify—the strategic recommendations from the recent National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine’s (NASEM) report on The Science and Practice of Team Science. Below, we enumerate several recommendations presented in both sets of resources.
1. Seed Funding & Early Stage Support
NASEM emphasizes the importance of pilot grants and flexible budgeting for early-stage interdisciplinary work.
CRA/CCC’s Best Practices for Funders document mirrors this, recommending dedicated seed-stage funding, travel grants, and support for team-building workshops to kickstart cross-disciplinary collaboration.
2. Structural & Budgetary Flexibility
NASEM urges institutions to adapt budgeting, space allocation, and staffing—breaking free from disciplinary silos.
Best Practices for Organizational Leadership from CRA/CCC echo this, advising universities to create jointly funded faculty positions, shared facilities, and dual‐advising structures.
3. Mentoring, Team Science & Cultural Thriving
NASEM highlights the cultural challenges of interdisciplinary research—differences in language, expectations, evaluation systems—and advocates for dual mentorship and team-building initiatives.
Best Practices for Researchers from CRA/CCC recommend early collaboration, team-science training, intentional project design, and credit communication with helping to mitigate disciplinary tensions.
4. Recognition & Reward
NASEM calls for updating promotion and tenure criteria to properly reward interdisciplinary contributions.
CRA/CCC’s documents, while not focused on promotions directly, underscore the importance of recognizing these contributions through publication norms, collaboration metrics, and “team credit” systems.
5. Leadership Commitment & Organizational Catalyst
NASEM urges top-down leadership, including the establishment of interdisciplinary platforms and active institutional champions.
CRA/CCC’s Organizational Leadership Best Practices advocate similar steps: form task forces, set measurable interdisciplinary research goals, and ensure continuous review of policies.
6. Time & Coordination Resources
NASEM notes that interdisciplinary work demands significant time and coordination—and that support roles help offset this overhead.
CRA/CCC’s documents similarly call for effective project management, clear role definitions, and institutional investment in coordination support.
By weaving together NASEM’s structural wisdom with CRA/CCC’s operational playbooks, we’re forging a cohesive vision: one where institutions invest structurally, research teams communicate intentionally, and leadership champions interdisciplinary research consistently. Together, these initiatives help realize the promise of interdisciplinary computing as envisioned by both NASEM and CRA/CCC.
