Ethics CoPs not Ethics Police: Building communities of practice in ethics and integrity

Gary Allen and Mark Israel 

Research ethics professionals have grown wary of researchers who talk disparagingly about the work of research ethics reviewers as the ‘ethics police’ (Klitzman, 2015; Makhoul et al., 2014). So, there is more than a little irony in our suggestion for responding constructively to such an adversarial stance (Allen & Israel, 2018) – the Community of Practice (CoP).

[colored_box]A CoP is characterised by a shared area of knowledge and set of practices within which experiences and insights can be shared and learning can be fostered (Wenger et al., 2002). Done well, a CoP can result in continual improvement across and beyond the institution through mutual engagement, joint enterprise and the creation of a shared repertoire (Wenger, 1998). An institution’s research ethics reviewers, Research Ethics Adviser and Research Integrity Adviser networks and its research community should be regarded as fertile fields for the fostering and supporting of CoPs.

In the human research ethics and research integrity spheres, seeding and supporting virtual and physical CoPs can deliver a number of tangible benefits:

1. Improving the awareness/knowledge of that academic and professional community;
2. Improving the satisfaction of the group;
3. Improving the retention of the group; and
4. Ensuring the knowledge and experience of the group informs institutional practice.

These are important because the benefits overlap with matters that institutions frequently report as challenges in research practice.

Establishing a CoP in these areas can usefully be pursued within the following framework:

1. Bringing the group together (either physically or virtually) to share experiences, challenges, ideas and innovations.
2. Maintaining a resource library of relevant news, blog posts, social media posts and research outputs relevant to the work of the CoP.
3. Building a library of discussion sheets.
4. Creating a reading and discussion group about the library and the activity sheets.
5. Conducting regular workshops on topics relevant to the CoP.
6. Holding panel discussions of topics relevant to the work of the CoP.
7. Encouraging researchers to discuss emerging (or existing) fields of research that might present ethical issues – and suggesting innovative approaches.
8. Generating relevant resources members of the CoP could use (e.g. an email about their role that could be sent to researchers in their area).
9. Conducting flipped workshops that involve attendees prereading material to be discussed later in a group.
10. Conducting workshops that involve hands-on activities to generate and share better practice.
11. Ensuring development of policies, procedures and professional development/resource material is informed by members of the CoP.
12. Ensuring institutional responses to national consultations (e.g. by the NHMRC) is informed by input from the relevant CoP.

Many of these elements are not resource-intensive, but the CoP should be supported by a professional staff member whose role it is to identify or develop items and encourage and support activities between formal and informal group meetings. And, if the institution recognises the contribution and work of the CoP (which is recommended), this should include time in workload for professional development and networking.

REFERENCES

Allen, G. & Israel, M. (2018) Moving beyond Regulatory Compliance: Building Institutional Support for Ethical Reflection in Research. In Iphofen, R. & Tolich, M. (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research Ethics. London: Sage. pp.276-288.

Klitzman, R. (2015) The Ethics Police? The Struggle to Make Human Research Safe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Makhoul, J., El-Alti, L., Qutteina, Y., Nasrallah, C., Sakr, C., Nakkash, R., & Alali, K. (2014) ‘Protecting’ or ‘Policing’: Academic Researchers’ View of IRBs in an Arab Context. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 9(5), 25-35.

Wenger, E. (1998) Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Wenger, E., McDermott, R. & Snyder, W. (2002) Cultivating Communities of Practice: a guide to managing knowledge. Harvard Business School Press.

HOW AHRECS CAN HELP

AHRECS maintains a freely-available Resource Library and publishes the free Research Ethics Monthly. In addition, institutions can subscribe to https://www.ahrecs.vip which funds the free resources and also includes discussion and activity sheets. The subscribers’ area also includes short talks by members of the AHRECS team.

AHRECS can be commissioned to conduct workshops for your CoP (anything from 30-minutes to a day in length). For example, we can deliver a remote workshop (45-minute speaking and 15-minute question/answer) for $900.

Send an email to en*****@****cs.com if you would like to discuss institutional access to the subscribers’ area or commission AHRECS to conduct a workshop for your CoP.

FURTHER RESOURCES

Allen, G. & Israel, M. (25 February 2019) REAlising a collegiate Research Ethics Adviser network. Research Ethics Monthly. Retrieved from: https://ahrecs.com/human-research-ethics/realising-a-collegiate-research-ethics-adviser-network

Allen, G., Israel, M. & Thomson, C. (29 May 2019) Is it something I said (or the way I said it)? Research Ethics Monthly. Retrieved from: https://ahrecs.com/human-research-ethics/is-it-something-i-said-or-the-way-i-said-it

This post may be cited as:
Allen, G. & Israel, M  (10 March 2021) Ethics CoPs not Ethics Police: Building communities of practice in ethics and integrity. Research Ethics Monthly. Retrieved from: https://ahrecs.com/ethics-cops-not-ethics-police-building-communities-of-practice-in-ethics-and-integrity/