The hidden power dynamics in research collaborations
Part of the Building Better Research Ecosystems series
Researchers from different institutions, countries, and disciplines come together to share expertise, generate new knowledge, and address important challenges. At its best, collaboration creates opportunities that would be difficult to achieve alone. Yet beneath the surface of many collaborations lies a reality that is discussed far less often: power is not always distributed equally.
The ability to influence decisions, control resources, shape outcomes, and determine whose voices are heard is often unevenly shared among collaborators. While these dynamics are rarely discussed openly, they can significantly influence both the experience and outcomes of collaborative research.
Understanding power and contribution
Researchers are often united by a common interest, a desire to solve problems, or an opportunity to contribute to a meaningful project. In the early stages, discussions frequently focus on scientific objectives, timelines, and expected outputs. Questions such as who controls funding, who has institutional backing, who owns critical data, who has access to publication channels, and who possesses the strongest professional networks can significantly influence the balance of power within a collaboration. These factors may not always be visible at the outset, but they often become more apparent as projects progress.
Junior and senior researchers
One of the most common power imbalances occurs between junior and senior researchers. Senior researchers often possess extensive publication records, established reputations, funding relationships, and institutional influence. These achievements are usually the result of years of hard work and experience. However, this difference in experience can sometimes create environments where junior researchers feel unable to question decisions, raise concerns, or negotiate expectations.
Early-career researchers may worry that speaking up could affect future opportunities, references, collaborations, or career progression. As a result, concerns that should be discussed openly may remain unspoken. Healthy collaborations create space for all contributors to ask questions, challenge assumptions, and participate in decision-making without fear of negative consequences.
Independent researchers and institutions
Another often overlooked dynamic exists between independent researchers and established institutions. Universities and research organisations provide important resources, including funding, administrative support, legal expertise, ethics oversight, and institutional credibility. Independent researchers may bring valuable expertise, practical experience, innovative ideas, or unique industry connections. However, they often operate without the protection and support structures that institutions provide.
When disagreements arise, the difference in available resources can become significant. An institution may have access to legal advisors, research offices, administrative departments, and established policies. On the contrary, independent researchers may have none of these advantages. This highlights how structural differences can influence the ability of participants to navigate challenges when they occur.
Researchers from developing countries
International collaborations frequently involve researchers from countries with very different levels of research infrastructure and funding. Researchers in developing countries often possess deep local knowledge, cultural understanding, field experience, and access to study populations that make important research possible.
Yet they may face challenges, including limited funding opportunities, reduced access to scientific journals, fewer research support services, and fewer opportunities to participate in global academic networks. These constraints can affect their ability to influence project direction despite making substantial contributions. True collaboration requires recognising that local knowledge and contextual expertise are not secondary contributions. In many cases, they are essential to the success of the research itself.
Wealthier institutions and resource inequality
Funding remains one of the most significant sources of influence within research collaborations. Institutions with greater financial resources often control grant applications, budgets, staffing decisions, equipment procurement, travel funding, and project administration. Because resources are concentrated in one location, decision-making authority can also become concentrated.
This influence is not necessarily exercised intentionally or unfairly. Often it emerges naturally from the practical realities of managing large projects. However, resource inequality can create situations in which some collaborators have a greater ability to shape priorities, timelines, authorship discussions, dissemination strategies, or future opportunities arising from the work.
Acknowledging these realities is not a criticism of funding institutions. It is simply recognition that resources and influence are frequently connected.
Why these conversations matter
Power dynamics are not inherently negative. Every project requires leadership, coordination, and accountability. Differences in experience, expertise, and resources are natural and often beneficial.
Problems arise when these differences remain unacknowledged, when power dynamics are ignored, and expectations become unclear. Contributors may feel reluctant to voice concerns and decisions may be made without adequate consultation. By recognising that power exists within collaborations, researchers can take proactive steps to ensure that influence is exercised responsibly and transparently.
Building more balanced collaborations
The strongest collaborations are not those in which power differences disappear. Rather, they are collaborations in which power differences are acknowledged and managed with integrity. Recognising power dynamics is only the first step. The more important question is how researchers, institutions, and funders can manage them constructively.
While no collaboration can eliminate every risk, many challenges can be reduced through proactive planning, clear communication, and transparent governance.
Practical measures may include:
Discussing authorship expectations early and revisiting them as contributions evolve.
Agreeing on how intellectual contributions will be recognised and documented.
Clearly defining roles, responsibilities, deliverables, and decision-making authority at the outset of the collaboration.
Clarifying formalised remuneration arrangements, where relevant, before work begins.
Establishing written agreements that address intellectual property, publication rights, data governance, confidentiality, and dispute-resolution processes.
Defining how future publications, secondary analyses, and follow-on work will be managed.
Clarifying responsibilities that may continue beyond the formal project period.
Ensuring that external collaborators, consultants, independent researchers, and technical specialists are appropriately recognised and included in governance discussions where relevant.
Maintaining transparent communication channels that allow concerns to be raised and discussed constructively.
Periodically reviewing collaboration arrangements as projects evolve and new opportunities emerge.
Funders, institutions, and project leaders can also help support more equitable collaborations by:
Encouraging transparent authorship and contribution practices.
Recognising the value of external collaborators and non-traditional research partners.
Providing accessible and credible pathways for raising concerns.
Supporting governance arrangements that remain effective throughout the lifecycle of collaborative outputs.
Considering how accountability will be maintained after formal funding periods and governance structures have ended.
When these principles are present, trust can flourish across collaborations, enabling partners with diverse experiences, resources, and institutional backgrounds to work towards shared goals.
Looking beyond publications
Research collaborations are often evaluated by publications, grants, and project outputs. While these outcomes are important, they tell only part of the story. The quality of a collaboration is also reflected in how participants are treated, how decisions are made, and whether contributors feel respected and valued throughout the process. The most successful collaborations create value that extends beyond individual outputs. They strengthen relationships, build trust, develop future opportunities, and leave all participants feeling that their contributions mattered.
Recognising the hidden power dynamics that can exist within research collaborations helps foster greater awareness, transparency, and fairness, creating stronger foundations for effective and mutually beneficial partnerships.
When influence is exercised responsibly and partnerships are built on mutual respect, collaboration becomes more than a means of producing research, it becomes a foundation for lasting professional relationships and meaningful scientific progress.
Written by Sasha Saugh
Aquatic Veterinarian | Founder, Aquaglobal Veterinary Consulting
