In the 1970s, climatologist John Kutzbach of the University of Wisconsin and colleague

Thompson Webb III of Brown University had a bold idea. To help understand Earth's
climate, they would gather an interdisciplinary group of scientists and use a supercomputer
to model the climate of the last ice age.
The team included geologists, paleo-ecologists, marine scientists, glaciologists, and
climate modelers and was called COHMAP, for Cooperative Holocene Mapping Project.
Together, the researchers tested the computer model against data from the geologic
record, and they found some areas of striking agreement. Their results, including a 1988
Science paper with 33 authors (COHMAP Members, 241:1043), are widely regarded as a
seminal contribution to the field.
The secret to their success? Interdisciplinary teamwork, says Kutzbach. The team had
access to different lines of independent evidence of past climatic conditions. "When you
found someone in another discipline singing the same song, it was really nice," he says.
"And even if there was disagreement, that told us where there were problems."
Indeed, researchers in many fields now recognize that no single person is able to
contribute all the necessary expertise to solve increasingly complex problems. And so,
from universities to corporate labs, scientists are signing on to teams.

Different cultural backgrounds can create working problems unless people take the time to
get to know each other, says Parker. For example, he was called in to resolve conflict in a
team that included an Asian-born chemist who was something of a loner. Parker asked
team members to tell their life stories. The Asian chemist related how she had been
brought up by her grandmother to be self-reliant, and how she had come, alone, to the
United States for graduate study, and then stayed on. Knowing her history helped her
colleagues understand and respect her independent style, says Parker.
Getting acquainted in the beginning may be good strategy, since the early stages of
collaboration--when the overall goal is defined and responsibilities assigned--may be
especially tricky, team leaders say. For example, computer scientist James Coggins of the
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, is part of a working group of the National Cancer
Institute. The team's goal is to design new software to plan radiation therapy. Team
members are scattered around the U.S. in three sites, on the East and West coasts and in
the Midwest.
So even in this larger team, the day-to-day experience of each scientist was that of
working in a small group.
That's true for classic "big science" projects, too, says Gene Fisk, deputy spokesman for
the D-zero project at Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory in Batavia, Ill. The D-zero
experiment involves about 350 physicists who seek to understand the basic constituents of
matter by studying the particles produced when protons and antiprotons crash together.
The researchers are organized into groups.
Still, subgroups must rely on each other--and that can sometimes lead to conflict. For
example, physicists who analyze data depend on the software that processes and
manages data files. Fisk recalls one Saturday morning computer users' meeting, at which
one physicist complained that he wasn't getting help from the computer division. Fisk had
to serve as the liaison between the dissatisfied physicist and the computer specialists. He
and others make sure that there are organizational structures--such as the computer
users' meeting--to deal with such frustration.
To help understand Earths climate, they would gather an interdisciplinary group of
scientists and use a supercomputer to model the climate of the last ice age.
The team included geologists, paleo-ecologists, marine scientists, glaciologists,
and climate modelers and was called COHMAP, for Cooperative Holocene Mapping
Project.
The team had access to different lines of independent evidence of past climatic
conditions.
Indeed, researchers in many fields now recognize that no single person is able to
contribute all the necessary expertise to solve increasingly complex problems.
And so, from universities to corporate labs, scientists are signing on to teams.
For example, physicists who analyze data depend on the software that processes
and manages data files.
Fisk recalls one Saturday morning computer users meeting, at which one physicist
complained that he wasnt getting help from the computer division.
Fisk had to serve as the liaison between the dissatisfied physicist and the computer
specialists.
Para ayudar a comprender el clima de la Tierra, reunirían un grupo interdisciplinario de
científicos y usarían una supercomputadora para modelar el clima de la última era glacial.
El equipo incluyó geólogos, paleoecologistas, científicos marinos, glaciólogos y
modeladores climáticos y se llamó COHMAP, por el Proyecto Cooperativo de Mapeo del
Holoceno.
El equipo tuvo acceso a diferentes líneas de evidencia independiente de condiciones
climáticas pasadas.
De hecho, los investigadores en muchos campos ahora reconocen que ninguna persona
puede contribuir con toda la experiencia necesaria para resolver problemas cada vez más
complejos.
Y así, desde las universidades hasta los laboratorios corporativos, los científicos se
inscriben en equipos.
Por ejemplo, los físicos que analizan los datos dependen del software que procesa y
administra los archivos de datos.
Fisk recuerda una reunión de usuarios de computadoras el sábado por la mañana, en la
cual un físico se quejó de que no estaba recibiendo ayuda de la división de computadoras.
Fisk tuvo que servir de enlace entre el físico insatisfecho y los especialistas en
informática.