Authorship, avoiding disputes and internal assessment/investigation

Disputes in research collaborations are not uncommon but some of them are avoidable. For example, authorship issues in multi-author papers can give rise to disagreements and disputes, if all co-authors have not been actively engaged in defining their roles, contributions, and responsibilities from the start. At TU Wien, we recommend documenting the planned contributions, roles and responsibilities of each co-author early in the planning phases of a manuscript. Such a document can be revisited during the writing process and relevant changes documented for all co-authors to reconsent. CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy; credit.niso.org) Author Statements can be used as a helpful tool (available for example here: https://zenodo.org/records/5668289, öffnet eine externe URL in einem neuen Fenster; https://ijast.org/credit-author-statement/, öffnet eine externe URL in einem neuen Fenster).

What if, despite best efforts, things do not go smoothly? 

In this case, contact the Service Unit of Responsible Research Practices for a consultation. In this face-to-face meeting, with a person with expertise in research ethics and integrity, you can take time to share your concerns and explain the context of your issue or dispute. 

In this consultation, you will have a chance to openly voice your concerns and learn about the possibilities for solving your dispute at TU Wien. Most importantly, however, it is possible to give your concerns a context, including any relevant facts. Without a detailed view of the context (What is the work about? Who is involved? Who occupies what role in the context? Is there funding or other commitments involved? Who has obtained the funding?) it is not possible to assess the situation or provide appropriate guidance. For this reason, the Unit of Responsible Research Practices does not provide answers in writing to specific questions concerning specific disputes. It is our experience that personal consultations are appreciated because they provide a chance to talk about a potentially burdensome issue and at the same time be informed about ways to go about the problem. Sometimes this consultation alone helps put things in perspective. 

What options are available in disputes? 

After the mandatory consultation, there are three internal options to proceed from. 

• Moderated meeting. A moderated meeting is suited for solving disagreements in the early stages of a dispute. This is when everyone involved is willing to solve the issue at hand together. The meeting can be led for example by a dean. Documentation should be kept of the nature of the dispute, participants in the meeting, and the outcome of the meeting.
• Mediation. A mediation may be necessary in more complex disputes. In this case, professional and impartial mediators are available through TU Wien. A mediation process may start with separate sessions between a mediator and the individuals involved as the dispute may have advanced to a level where dialogue between the persons involved is not easy.
• Internal assessment/investigation. An internal assessment or investigation may be necessary if the other attempts at solving the problem or coming to an agreement have failed and/or have been turned down. In this case, the Vice Rector of Research, Innovation and International Affairs can initiate, following a request of an involved party, or the recommendation of the Senior Advisor for Research Ethics and Integrity, an internal assessment to be conducted by an ad hoc committee comprising 3-5 impartial members of the senior faculty . The task of the committee is to study the relevant documentation provided by the disputing parties, provide a possibility for a hearing for each party, deliberate, and make a recommendation to the Vice Rector. The Vice Rector can pronounce a decision at the end of the process. The coordination of the internal assessment process is carried out by the Senior Advisor for Research Ethics and Integrity, supported by the staff of the Unit of Responsible Research Practices. 

To ensure impartiality the ad hoc committee members are nominated separately for each case. 

In assessment of matters of research integrity, TU Wien refers to the national OeAWI Guideline (2015) (https://oeawi.at/en/guidelines/, öffnet eine externe URL in einem neuen Fenster) and the European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (the ALLEA Code) (2023) (https://allea.org/portfolio-item/european-code-of-conduct-2023/).

In cases that cannot be solved in an internal assessment process, the Vice Rector for Research, Innovation and International Affairs can refer the case to be investigated by the Austrian Agency of Scientific Integrity (OeAWI).