Philosophy

Our group philosophy is a living document. We regularly revisit these paragraphs and include outcomes of recent discussions of how we want to do research together. So first principle of our group philosophy is that it’s written by its members not just decided by the most senior person in the group.

As this is a work in progress members can create a pull request to suggest changes.

Inclusivity and diversity

Mental Health

Open science

Conference Logistics

Attending conferences

Working hours

We have flexible working hours. Some people are more productive in the morning, others during the day or later in the afternoon, evening or possibly even night. That’s okay. Core hours for most are 10am-4pm plus minus an hour or so but that can also vary throughout the week. If other hours work better for you feel free to communicate this so that other group members have an idea when you can be reached and when not.

Working days and remote working

The Oxford student handbook technically requires students to live within 25km of the Carfax Tower. Depending on the direction, one might have a faster commute from London Paddington though. The philosophy of this research group is not to restrict people’s whereabouts but to encourage some in person presence, ideally during the core days Tue, Wed, Thu. These days are chosen to better facilitate weekend travels but also to have some days with a lower frequency of scheduled meetings.

Group meetings

Invidiual meetings

Collaborative work

Collaborative work between group members, across the University, and with external researchers is strongly encouraged. In many cases, it’s more fun working together and overall beneficial to your professional career and your mental wellbeing by engaging with multiple people and/or different projects. Oxford’s Research Support has guidance on external collaborations which largely also applies to internal collaboration, but we discuss here particularly aspects for our collaborations within our research group.

If you lead a project, it is helpful to think about what ideas, skills, or perspectives another person can bring to a project. You do not have to solve all problems yourself, in some projects, you may think of assembling a “superhero team”. One hero to help with a particular method, another one to create a specific visualisation, and sometimes you need a domain expert for scientifically accurate formulations throughout the manuscript, and who can help defend it against reviewers (often that is the supervisor, but it does not have to be). But discuss clearly upfront what each individual is expected to contribute, and what they will get in return (e.g., co-authorship in a publication). As the lead on a project, you have the best overview of who contributed how much, such that you can also propose authorship (or its order on a publication) to contributors if not discussed upfront. See also CreDIT, a contributor role taxonomy, or authorship policies of journals (e.g., Nature’s policy.

Similarly, if you are invited to collaborate, balance the potential, maturity, momentum of the project, and your expected contribution with what is offered in return. Some projects die before leading anywhere for various reasons, and others would require 100% of your time for a close deadline. As a student writing a thesis, collaborations are important, often an asset, though they can also delay your progress towards a thesis - sometimes unexpectedly or outside of your control. At Oxford, theses can include contributions from other researchers, whether published (you or them as co-author) or not, but generally this has to be explicitly stated. Details can be discussed on a case-by-case basis.

Communication

Most of our communication happens through Slack. This is so that people feel more encouraged to write shorter messages, can edit what they wrote, more easily attach or detach media and particularly to have a communication platform that is different from email. Email has its use but team communication is not necessarily its strength. Whichever way you prefer to communicate is up to you but Milan will be most responsive on Slack.

Depending on time and given the flexible working hours responses are rarely imminent but we try to respond to group internal messages within a day or so. This is no hard requirement and there will be many exceptions to this rule of thumb but often it is also just nice to establish a responsive communication culture where we can support each other, help with IT, math or physics questions, etc. No one is expected to respond outside of their typical working hours.

One-on-one communication is normally treated confidentially particularly non-science matters of personal nature that is communicated because it impacts or can impact your or other people’s work within our research group. You are always free and encouraged to raise issues through communication with others and demand them to make time for an apropriate discussion on these issues. It is usually better to communicate but if you feel uncomfortable to do so it is unlikely your fault rather there is insufficient space and time created to raise it.

Having an online presence can help spread your research to a wider community of scientists, journalists, and the public and foster collaborations. As an early-career scientist it is recommended to have some online presence, in the form of your own or a departmental or group website and/or social media profiles. Even when not used actively, it will make it easier for others to find you if they hear about your work. Nowadays the publicity of your work, e.g. published in journals, mostly rests on you and can be greatly amplified if done well. At the same time you are also possibly reaching out to a large audience so bear in mind who you explicitly or implicitly represent. This ranges from your research group, colleagues, to your department or university but you can also be seen as a representative of a whole area of research, depending with whom you engage.

You may share published papers or preprints if publication policy and coauthors allow as well as talks, posters or links to public repositories. If not already public, make sure to get permission from coauthors or others involved, ask if unsure. In similar manner you may share group achievements such as awards, conference participation, invited talks, media coverage or outreach activities. Many scientists with a large reach also share personal perspectives, particularly societally relevant topics where their expert knowledge can weigh in. In the climate sciences this can range from renewable energy to biodiversity, water usage or computing technology but also be more reflective of issues within academia. Overall, sharing beyond your primary research outputs can greatly help you to gain visibility as a scientist, teach you how to communicate difficult topics or create engagement, all skills that are more or less important in your career too.

Different platforms can be used: Linkedin, Bluesky or personal blogs are popular, some scientists still post on X or Facebook for various reasons. Larger achievements can also be shared on the group or departmental website, or even in the form of press releases from the university or department. With the latter you have a higher chance of being covered in mainstream media which can have an enormous effect on your visibility. If journalists reach out, ideally respond within a few hours as they often work on very tight deadlines.

When sharing content, speed is important but this needs to be balanced with consensus from coauthors or contributors. Check with coauthors if materials include unpublished data and be generally aware of a potential risk that others scoop your research ideas. Sometimes you want to share and publish in a condensed time period to increase impact, sometimes mentioning a project over and over again will have a wider reach. And in general some materials you may want to share are under specific licenses or agreements that you need to align with. The general tone when engaging online is to be respectful, short critique can often be seen as offensive.

Vacation

The UK has 8 public holidays per year. In addition to those every member of the research group is expected to take about 5-6 weeks of vacation per year. The Oxford student handbook is not explicit about this but 5 weeks are typical. Working in academia can be very stressful at times and so taking time off to unwind is highly recommended. Some people need more vacation than others and that is okay, Milan does not count his days off and so also does not expect others to do so. He often combines professional trips to conferences or meetings with personal holidays to minimize travel time, costs and emissions and you are free to do so as well.

Individual days off generally do not have to be communicated unless conflicting with specific meetings (especially those that were difficult to schedule), conferences, submission deadlines, or similar. Longer holidays can just be informally communicated so that other members of the group are aware that no response to communication has to be expected. Plan and communicate those ideally a little further ahead but in general no permission is required. Milan believes vacation flexibility can massively contribute to personal wellbeing in academia by making space for other important things in life.

Acknowledgements

The group philosophy documented here is inspired from other following research lab principles, and partly borrows heavily, likely in order of similarity

Many thanks to those for publicly sharing their implementation of a progressive research group philosophy and more generally their contribution to making academia a welcoming place for everyone.

Climate Modelling Research Group