WEBVTT 00:00:04.891 --> 00:00:09.051 Hi, I'm Paul van Schoor and together with my colleague Andreas Roepstorf, 00:00:09.271 --> 00:00:13.171 we are speaking with Professor Theo Mulder about the challenges that large-scale 00:00:13.171 --> 00:00:17.151 scientific organizations face in building and sustaining collaboration. 00:00:18.351 --> 00:00:22.751 Trained as an experimental neuropsychologist, Theo was a professor at Radboud 00:00:22.751 --> 00:00:27.411 University before serving two terms as the Scientific Director of the Royal 00:00:27.411 --> 00:00:29.931 Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences in Amsterdam, 00:00:30.151 --> 00:00:34.711 after which she became the Director of the Netherlands Institute for the Advancement of Science. 00:00:35.391 --> 00:00:39.471 He also initiated and organized the Interdisciplinary Consortium for Clinical 00:00:39.471 --> 00:00:43.671 Movement Sciences and Technology, which links a large number of clinical and 00:00:43.671 --> 00:00:45.971 academic partners in the research of movement disorder. 00:00:46.731 --> 00:00:51.311 Theo, welcome to our podcast interview. It's great that you could join us. 00:00:51.751 --> 00:00:56.771 And maybe we could start by you just describing a little bit your trajectory 00:00:56.771 --> 00:01:02.091 that brought you to where you are now and the different main steps in between. 00:01:02.971 --> 00:01:08.171 In terms of your professional career and your experience with the important 00:01:08.171 --> 00:01:09.271 topic of collaboration. 00:01:11.351 --> 00:01:14.491 Okay, so my name is Theo Mulder. 00:01:14.551 --> 00:01:19.571 I'm trained as an experimental neuropsychologist in Nijmegen. 00:01:19.731 --> 00:01:26.231 And in 1994, I became professor of movement disorders in Nijmegen. 00:01:26.231 --> 00:01:32.851 And I was there until 1999 and then went to Groningen to become head of the 00:01:32.851 --> 00:01:36.571 Department of Human Movement Sciences and professor of Human Movement Sciences. 00:01:36.871 --> 00:01:44.691 And then in 1999, a remarkable career switch took place when I became the overall 00:01:44.691 --> 00:01:49.091 director of the 19 institutes in the Netherlands of the Royal Netherlands Academy 00:01:49.091 --> 00:01:54.851 of Sciences and so became the scientific director of the Royal Netherlands Academy of Sciences. 00:01:56.015 --> 00:02:01.155 And that I did, which was a rather grim job on the edge of politics and science. 00:02:01.595 --> 00:02:07.815 And that I did 10 years. That no longer is justified. 00:02:08.755 --> 00:02:15.155 And after that, I was one year director of the NIOF, the Netherlands Institute 00:02:15.155 --> 00:02:17.375 for the Advancement of Sciences. 00:02:18.455 --> 00:02:21.595 And then I thought, well, this is the end of the career. 00:02:21.595 --> 00:02:28.455 And then I gave a lecture in Nijmegen and criticized the Radboud University, 00:02:28.735 --> 00:02:29.855 Radboud University Hospital, 00:02:30.475 --> 00:02:33.855 the Sint Maartens Klinik and the Technical University in Twente, 00:02:33.955 --> 00:02:40.055 that they did not cooperate enough on the domain of human movement disorders 00:02:40.055 --> 00:02:42.315 because they were all specialized in it. 00:02:42.395 --> 00:02:51.255 But there was not enough cooperation in a world who was organizing itself in larger consortia. 00:02:51.595 --> 00:02:57.195 And I thought, under the umbrella of the Royal Academy, I thought it made sense 00:02:57.195 --> 00:03:00.155 to say that. And I will never hear anything about it. 00:03:00.395 --> 00:03:03.375 Will not hear anything about it. But that was not the case. 00:03:04.555 --> 00:03:07.655 The boards phoned me and said, well, you have a point. 00:03:07.655 --> 00:03:13.575 And then a new aspect, instead of going with my, 00:03:13.695 --> 00:03:20.135 in Dutch's terms, pensioen, a new part of a career started as head of a large 00:03:20.135 --> 00:03:23.475 scientific cooperation between five partners. 00:03:24.955 --> 00:03:29.015 And you're still in that collaborative process? 00:03:30.135 --> 00:03:38.255 Yes, and I gave that lecture in the City Theatre in Nijmegen, 00:03:38.395 --> 00:03:40.855 and that was in 2017, I think. 00:03:41.215 --> 00:03:53.815 And then they invited me to create a consortium of about 200 FTA, 00:03:54.035 --> 00:04:03.215 200 full positions in science between the five partners, and we organized that, and it was termed ICMS, 00:04:03.475 --> 00:04:08.295 Interdisciplinary Consortium for Clinical Movement Sciences and Technology. 00:04:09.435 --> 00:04:17.595 And I'm still, until this day, until July the 1st, I was the chair of the board, 00:04:17.735 --> 00:04:21.435 but now, happily, another one is taking over. 00:04:21.675 --> 00:04:28.215 Okay, congratulations. So if you look at these jumps you make into managing 00:04:28.215 --> 00:04:33.215 these complex processes of collaboration or cooperation, 00:04:33.575 --> 00:04:39.095 as you call them, what are for you the defining features of collaboration? 00:04:39.275 --> 00:04:40.455 What makes collaboration interesting? 00:04:42.233 --> 00:04:48.273 In this context, what does it mean? Yes, it's a simple question, 00:04:48.393 --> 00:04:55.793 but it requires, as always, a difficult answer because there are many aspects of cooperation. 00:04:57.133 --> 00:05:02.313 The first one is that you saw a change in science policy in the Netherlands 00:05:02.313 --> 00:05:04.153 and also science policy in Europe. 00:05:04.153 --> 00:05:09.773 Instead of that single persons who were brilliant could apply for money, 00:05:09.933 --> 00:05:15.113 it became a sort of policy that larger consortia were formed, 00:05:15.193 --> 00:05:18.973 applying for much more money. 00:05:19.093 --> 00:05:23.673 Of course, incorporating the brilliant individuals. 00:05:23.673 --> 00:05:32.573 So, if you would like to play a role in Europe, you should reorganize yourself 00:05:32.573 --> 00:05:35.553 from individuals into consortia. 00:05:35.773 --> 00:05:42.513 And so, one part of cooperation is that it was a political necessity to do that. 00:05:42.513 --> 00:05:48.533 And the other part is that, of course, if you create an interdisciplinary group, 00:05:48.713 --> 00:05:51.033 you are scientific much more powerful. 00:05:51.173 --> 00:05:59.973 You have many more viewpoints than if you work on your own in a so-called social scientific island. 00:06:00.413 --> 00:06:06.373 That might be the objective to construct large consortia, but what would make 00:06:06.373 --> 00:06:07.993 such a consortium collaborative? 00:06:08.553 --> 00:06:11.653 What are the defining features? Trust. 00:06:12.840 --> 00:06:20.980 The only thing I think that if in Dutch, somebody say it like this, 00:06:21.140 --> 00:06:24.760 As je uit je bek stinkt, wil niemand met je samenwerken. 00:06:26.000 --> 00:06:28.900 That is not translatable. Oh, it's not. 00:06:31.340 --> 00:06:37.720 But that means that if there is a group of people who have joint interests and 00:06:37.720 --> 00:06:44.940 trust each other and are able to share and are willing to share, 00:06:45.120 --> 00:06:47.420 that is the seed of cooperation. 00:06:47.960 --> 00:06:53.000 It's a human affair. So there is a political pressure, but it will not work 00:06:53.000 --> 00:07:01.140 without trust and the capability or the willingness to share. 00:07:01.620 --> 00:07:09.100 In the Groningen University Hospital, There was a large shield in the hole and 00:07:09.100 --> 00:07:11.540 there is that if you cannot share, you cannot multiply. 00:07:12.360 --> 00:07:19.200 And that's true. That's right. But then let's jump to the period you were running 00:07:19.200 --> 00:07:22.860 the institutes at the Royal Academy, which are a dozen or so. 00:07:24.680 --> 00:07:31.980 17 at this point. Okay. And we're talking about hundreds, if not thousands of researchers. 00:07:33.280 --> 00:07:38.360 So, how do you see collaboration? 00:07:38.660 --> 00:07:42.700 How well did collaboration come off the ground in that context? 00:07:44.520 --> 00:07:51.420 That was a totally different context as, for example, ICMS is because the institutes 00:07:51.420 --> 00:07:57.660 of the Royal Academy are in the domain of biology, 00:07:58.060 --> 00:07:59.780 in the domain of neuroscience, 00:08:00.280 --> 00:08:02.060 in the domain of the humanities. 00:08:02.500 --> 00:08:09.620 So within the humanities, there is cooperation and I stimulated that cooperation very strongly. 00:08:09.620 --> 00:08:15.060 Within the biology also, within the neuroscience also, but between the humanities 00:08:15.060 --> 00:08:17.500 and the neuroscience, there was none called. 00:08:19.673 --> 00:08:24.313 But actually there were three pillars. Okay, but how did you engineer that? 00:08:24.553 --> 00:08:27.053 How did you detect it? How do you measure that? 00:08:27.573 --> 00:08:34.733 And then also, how did you try to improve the collaboration within and between these institutes? 00:08:35.733 --> 00:08:40.673 Yeah, let's take as an example the Institutes of the Humanities. 00:08:41.533 --> 00:08:45.693 The Institutes of the Humanities are quite well known, but they are small. 00:08:45.693 --> 00:08:57.453 And the impetus for the cooperation was that if you unite these six institutes, 00:08:57.453 --> 00:09:01.833 seven institutes of the humanities into a Royal Academy Humanities Institute, 00:09:02.093 --> 00:09:06.953 they became also related to content. 00:09:06.953 --> 00:09:13.233 They became much more powerful and were a much larger power compared to the 00:09:13.233 --> 00:09:17.893 much larger institutes in the neuroscience and the biology domain. 00:09:19.913 --> 00:09:25.533 But that was not an easy process. That was absolutely not an easy process because 00:09:25.533 --> 00:09:31.853 not everybody was convinced that working together and joining together would 00:09:31.853 --> 00:09:34.013 create only positive aspects. 00:09:35.873 --> 00:09:40.613 Splendid isolation is a lovable concept. But 00:09:40.613 --> 00:09:47.673 that sounds more like you try to sort of stabilize an existing situation without 00:09:47.673 --> 00:09:54.193 having real control over then improving the collaborative process within or 00:09:54.193 --> 00:09:56.793 between these institutions. Or did I misunderstand? 00:09:59.522 --> 00:10:02.642 Partly that is true, but there was one main aspect. 00:10:03.302 --> 00:10:16.202 We managed to get a substantial amount of money to stimulate the institutes 00:10:16.202 --> 00:10:19.042 to work together and to open new research lines. 00:10:19.642 --> 00:10:27.962 So in a way, it was protecting the institutes as they were, But in the other way, 00:10:28.142 --> 00:10:37.322 it was also meant as a facilitator for more internal cooperation than existed before. 00:10:37.982 --> 00:10:45.362 Okay, but that was a big incentive for members of such an institute to then 00:10:45.362 --> 00:10:49.742 collaborate because more money would be made available to them. 00:10:49.742 --> 00:10:53.842 Yeah, and more possibility to create larger research programs, 00:10:54.042 --> 00:10:56.722 for example, longer, long-term research. 00:11:00.482 --> 00:11:07.002 Andrea? Yeah, Theo, I was very interested by your three points, 00:11:07.062 --> 00:11:12.182 the joint interests, the trust, and the willingness to share. 00:11:13.082 --> 00:11:17.422 Would you mind repeating the Dutch phrase again? I'm just trying to unpack that one. 00:11:18.042 --> 00:11:22.562 The Dutch phrase was, and I can translate it, if you, if you, 00:11:22.582 --> 00:11:25.642 if your back stings, then I don't want to work with you. 00:11:26.282 --> 00:11:30.462 And that means if you smell ugly, I will not cooperate with you. 00:11:30.602 --> 00:11:35.742 And that's the sort of thing that was meant as a metaphor that you would like 00:11:35.742 --> 00:11:41.302 to work together, that there is some mutual trust and even sympathy. 00:11:41.962 --> 00:11:49.222 And if that's not the case, then it's a top-down process to work together. 00:11:49.502 --> 00:11:53.642 And that never works, almost never works. 00:11:54.622 --> 00:11:57.442 So cooperation should grow bottom-up. 00:12:00.004 --> 00:12:03.584 To follow up on that one, because of the willingness to share, 00:12:03.784 --> 00:12:07.424 what can be shared in these processes in the scientific community? 00:12:08.064 --> 00:12:12.104 What is it that people are sharing? Because it doesn't seem to be only a matter 00:12:12.104 --> 00:12:13.504 of sharing economic resources. 00:12:14.624 --> 00:12:18.504 Could you tell a little bit more of what you have seen people share successfully? 00:12:21.704 --> 00:12:26.044 You can share money, but that's not what I meant. 00:12:27.244 --> 00:12:31.724 You can share knowledge. You can share infrastructure, you can share methods, 00:12:31.964 --> 00:12:33.104 you can share databases. 00:12:33.644 --> 00:12:40.904 And if you do that, you'll become a much more interdisciplinary or multidisciplinary 00:12:40.904 --> 00:12:45.604 power, which can solve problems which nobody can in its own. 00:12:46.384 --> 00:12:52.004 So by sharing, I mean especially the non-materialistic aspects of knowledge, 00:12:52.044 --> 00:12:54.164 infrastructure, methods, data. 00:12:56.704 --> 00:13:02.644 This is very interesting, but it's English because in English. Go ahead, Andreas. 00:13:04.204 --> 00:13:07.984 I think this point about sharing is a critically important one. 00:13:08.504 --> 00:13:13.244 Which kind of reservations or obstructions that you find for people actually sharing? 00:13:13.584 --> 00:13:16.564 Is it that they feel that they lose something when they are here, 00:13:16.724 --> 00:13:18.964 or is it an unwillingness to do it? 00:13:19.044 --> 00:13:23.284 Or what's the mechanism in that? Could you expand on that? The noise history. 00:13:27.984 --> 00:13:31.724 Yeah actually it's a very human mechanism if 00:13:31.724 --> 00:13:34.564 you if you if you have not 00:13:34.564 --> 00:13:37.824 the idea that all will 00:13:37.824 --> 00:13:40.624 profit from it and and you are 00:13:40.624 --> 00:13:43.784 not willing to give up something where you 00:13:43.784 --> 00:13:46.644 can profit from so if you if you 00:13:46.644 --> 00:13:49.744 don't let's let's again use the 00:13:49.744 --> 00:13:52.944 word trust if you don't trust the other parties in the consortium 00:13:52.944 --> 00:13:56.504 you are not willing to open your infrastructure you are 00:13:56.504 --> 00:14:00.084 not willing to uh to open data sets for 00:14:00.084 --> 00:14:02.844 them and that's what i 00:14:02.844 --> 00:14:05.644 meant if the if there and that's what what took 00:14:05.644 --> 00:14:09.044 place in icms there the researchers the 00:14:09.044 --> 00:14:15.064 professor saw that there was a plus value in in joining together and creating 00:14:15.064 --> 00:14:21.824 new mutual interdisciplinary research programs and i it's my strict opinion 00:14:21.824 --> 00:14:27.364 than it was if it was the dean who was on top of this process, 00:14:27.544 --> 00:14:33.684 then it would be much less easier to create such a consortium. 00:14:37.129 --> 00:14:43.989 Go for it. Would that mean that it has to be conceived of as a plus-sum game 00:14:43.989 --> 00:14:48.389 or a zero-sum game or a negative-sum game? 00:14:48.569 --> 00:14:52.409 Is that really what lies at the core of these collaborations? 00:14:52.929 --> 00:14:57.669 That the participants somehow imagine that this is not a zero-sum or a negative-sum game? 00:14:57.949 --> 00:15:04.749 Yeah, that's absolutely true. If the participants are not convinced that they 00:15:04.749 --> 00:15:12.769 can profit from that sort of cooperation in receiving large grants or having 00:15:12.769 --> 00:15:17.869 a more scientific power in the university or in the scientific community, 00:15:18.229 --> 00:15:24.489 they are not easily willing to cooperate or to join that consortium. 00:15:24.489 --> 00:15:32.949 So they have to see the practical, the pragmatic, and also the scientific or 00:15:32.949 --> 00:15:35.869 theoretical advantages of it. 00:15:40.549 --> 00:15:45.449 To follow this point and then I'll give it back to you Paul you describe very 00:15:45.449 --> 00:15:49.969 different levels at which this plays itself out there might be economic resources 00:15:49.969 --> 00:15:54.189 it might be power within the university or it might be the possibility to do 00:15:54.189 --> 00:15:57.289 to gain knowledge that you wouldn't be able to get otherwise, 00:15:57.929 --> 00:16:02.229 how would you actually balance these things out against each other because sometimes 00:16:02.229 --> 00:16:05.709 you might lose one of these accounts but win on another one, 00:16:06.329 --> 00:16:10.789 Can you say something about what it takes to create an environment where even 00:16:10.789 --> 00:16:14.809 though some incommensurable things are in a sense being exchanged, 00:16:15.189 --> 00:16:17.689 at the same time collaboration is maintained? 00:16:18.089 --> 00:16:20.289 These guys are off-demand. It's very interesting. 00:16:22.591 --> 00:16:26.871 The word you used, environment, is the correct word. 00:16:27.431 --> 00:16:34.151 You should create an environment with people from different backgrounds who 00:16:34.151 --> 00:16:42.371 see more or less immediately the advantages of working together. 00:16:42.631 --> 00:16:44.931 And you cannot manage all these aspects. 00:16:45.911 --> 00:16:54.331 It's not possible to manage them. It's a sort of social dynamics which appear in this process. 00:16:55.651 --> 00:17:02.591 For example, there is a board of the ICMS, but the main core of ICMS is the 00:17:02.591 --> 00:17:06.291 Council of Researchers and clinical leaders. 00:17:09.411 --> 00:17:16.591 They together form the core of the program and they decide the trajectories to the future. 00:17:16.591 --> 00:17:23.051 And of course you are saying at one side you lose something and the other side 00:17:23.051 --> 00:17:27.131 you win something but that's the dynamic of groups and that's the dynamic of 00:17:27.131 --> 00:17:33.691 science in the midst of political changes and especially in the arena of Europe, 00:17:34.551 --> 00:17:40.171 so there are two parts ICMS is still an experiment that is running while your 00:17:40.171 --> 00:17:47.951 experiment at the Royal Academy is finished So, if we now just look at that period, 00:17:48.351 --> 00:17:56.471 can you highlight a real success case and then explain why that was so successful 00:17:56.471 --> 00:18:02.311 along the lines of the model of collaboration you propose? 00:18:03.884 --> 00:18:10.344 Let's start in the Royal Academy. I think a success case is NIN, 00:18:10.484 --> 00:18:12.944 the Netherlands Institute for Neurosciences. 00:18:15.464 --> 00:18:20.664 In 2006, the institute was in the turmoil. 00:18:21.204 --> 00:18:29.944 It received not such a positive evaluation and there was instability in the 00:18:29.944 --> 00:18:35.764 institute. And the merger between two institutes was not well balanced and there was mistrust. 00:18:36.364 --> 00:18:43.104 And I think I am fascinated by science. 00:18:43.304 --> 00:18:48.924 I'm not a technical board member. 00:18:49.224 --> 00:18:51.004 I have a passion for science. 00:18:51.344 --> 00:18:55.044 And by recreating that institute, 00:18:55.184 --> 00:19:04.064 also injecting money into the institute, and to hire two novel directors and 00:19:04.064 --> 00:19:07.624 to reorganize the Institute in a much more social community, 00:19:08.484 --> 00:19:14.744 I think that was a success story within the realm of the Royal Academy. 00:19:15.164 --> 00:19:21.384 And that Institute, NIN, is now quite successful, as Paul knows. 00:19:21.864 --> 00:19:26.704 Absolutely. But Theo, in that case, it could sound like you say, 00:19:26.784 --> 00:19:28.744 well, you just have to pick the right people to lead. 00:19:29.684 --> 00:19:34.664 But how then about the sharing that you highlighted earlier, right? 00:19:34.724 --> 00:19:40.784 How within that context was the sharing of knowledge and infrastructure a decisive factor? 00:19:41.084 --> 00:19:49.704 Or would that success story hinge more around, let's say, the leaders of the process? 00:19:50.868 --> 00:19:57.068 Yeah, it's the leaders of the process, but it's also that the leaders, 00:19:57.188 --> 00:20:03.328 together with the Royal Academy, reorganized the Institute so that senior leaders, 00:20:03.608 --> 00:20:13.588 senior group leaders, get a more decisive voice into the future and the trajectory of the Institute. 00:20:13.588 --> 00:20:16.888 Institute, it was also 00:20:16.888 --> 00:20:27.328 governed in another way as before and they managed to get the whole community 00:20:27.328 --> 00:20:35.168 within the Institute behind the programs they designed themselves. 00:20:36.288 --> 00:20:40.828 And again, it was not a top-down, it was not a totally top-down process, 00:20:41.028 --> 00:20:46.188 it was down and bottom up. So what are the key features in the governance structure, 00:20:46.548 --> 00:20:50.568 the change in governance structure that made the difference? 00:20:53.328 --> 00:21:03.468 I think the division in group and the more powerful position of the group's 00:21:03.468 --> 00:21:08.208 leaders to redesign the future of the institute. 00:21:08.208 --> 00:21:16.708 So, it's also the engagement of a broader group of stakeholders in the process. Yes, absolutely. 00:21:18.528 --> 00:21:23.388 To contrast that, what would be an example of actually a failure? Sure. 00:21:25.733 --> 00:21:29.113 In that same period where the model didn't work? 00:21:31.933 --> 00:21:36.533 That's also a difficult question because you have longer to think about a correct 00:21:36.533 --> 00:21:39.453 answer to that question than to the other question. 00:21:42.853 --> 00:21:47.273 That's why I did the easy one first, Theo. Yeah, there 00:21:47.273 --> 00:21:59.373 were also institutes with a very powerful historic tradition and who played 00:21:59.373 --> 00:22:05.453 a large role in Dutch society and were famous, historically also famous. 00:22:05.573 --> 00:22:12.613 It was very difficult to reorganize these old humanities institutes. 00:22:12.773 --> 00:22:14.873 That's a difficult case. 00:22:16.353 --> 00:22:24.753 I love the humanities, and I really learned a lot of these institutes. 00:22:25.293 --> 00:22:28.753 For me, it's the core of our civilization, humanities. 00:22:30.033 --> 00:22:33.793 But it's also very difficult to change these institutes, 00:22:34.513 --> 00:22:43.333 who were stable sometimes for a century, and to create the Royal Academy Center 00:22:43.333 --> 00:22:46.193 of Humanities, that was a hell of a job, 00:22:47.593 --> 00:22:55.933 with many but much much negative press and people who wrote, 00:22:57.233 --> 00:23:03.653 maybe is the right place for Theo Mulder somewhere in the Dutch canals oh really 00:23:03.653 --> 00:23:09.453 okay but then could you put your finger so on one we have inertia we have organizational 00:23:09.453 --> 00:23:12.493 inertia there's tradition right that might go against 00:23:12.913 --> 00:23:18.013 successful collaboration in this case, but were there other features of then 00:23:18.013 --> 00:23:22.193 this Humanities Institute that made it so difficult to instill the transition? 00:23:25.313 --> 00:23:32.133 There were parts where, in general, 00:23:32.373 --> 00:23:42.353 the general age of the researchers in the Humanities Institute was around 55. 00:23:43.504 --> 00:23:50.344 And in the science institutes and the biology institutes, it was around 32 or 00:23:50.344 --> 00:23:52.624 33. That makes a difference. 00:23:53.304 --> 00:23:58.184 And another difference is that not all the institutes in the humanities have 00:23:58.184 --> 00:24:03.984 research traditions who fit together. 00:24:04.304 --> 00:24:08.644 They cultivate. And in a way, a scientist is conservative. 00:24:08.644 --> 00:24:11.904 Conservatory uh conservative uh he 00:24:11.904 --> 00:24:15.144 he he embraces the methods 00:24:15.144 --> 00:24:18.324 he likes he embraces the methods he is successful and 00:24:18.324 --> 00:24:21.704 is very hesitant to change um and 00:24:21.704 --> 00:24:25.864 although you have the umbrella of humanities it's 00:24:25.864 --> 00:24:31.964 not uh um it's not all it's all not all humanities institutes are the same they 00:24:31.964 --> 00:24:35.964 have different traditions they have different outlooks they have different fields 00:24:35.964 --> 00:24:45.744 of interest and it took It took a lot of work to join these institutes into also a consortium, 00:24:45.744 --> 00:24:49.544 but then a consortium in the humanities. 00:24:49.864 --> 00:24:53.304 But it took place and now it is quite successful. 00:24:53.804 --> 00:25:00.604 But now if we talk about this relationship between the academy and the institutes 00:25:00.604 --> 00:25:03.684 and the universities or the academic institutions. 00:25:04.304 --> 00:25:08.224 That's, of course, not a level in which collaboration has to be organized, 00:25:08.524 --> 00:25:14.004 possibly around the same structures that you already indicated of objectives, 00:25:14.304 --> 00:25:19.144 trust, maybe methods and concepts, I don't know. 00:25:19.144 --> 00:25:25.564 But on top of that, there is a form of collaboration with the state itself, 00:25:25.744 --> 00:25:30.364 who is funding the academy, but also in parallel funding through its National 00:25:30.364 --> 00:25:33.684 Research Council, these other institutes and universities. 00:25:34.624 --> 00:25:40.964 So how effective is that process? How is that project, how is that level of the process managed? 00:25:41.504 --> 00:25:46.024 What are its key features and how can you make it successful? Sure. 00:25:47.564 --> 00:25:50.924 There are three intermingling questions. 00:25:51.644 --> 00:25:57.744 Let's first focus on the difference of the Royal Academy Institute and the university. 00:25:58.144 --> 00:26:03.204 One of the characteristics of the Academy Institute is that they have the possibility 00:26:03.204 --> 00:26:10.624 to focus on very long-term research programs. Some of these programs are 10 or 15 years or longer. 00:26:11.104 --> 00:26:20.884 And that's not always, but that's more than once a difference between how universities work. 00:26:21.204 --> 00:26:29.624 So that's a difference. And the point of cooperation between the institutes 00:26:29.624 --> 00:26:35.704 and the universities actually is based on the same preconditions, 00:26:35.704 --> 00:26:36.944 as I said before. 00:26:37.284 --> 00:26:42.124 There has to be a joint interest, there has to be a joint advantage, 00:26:42.544 --> 00:26:48.824 and there has to be a willingness to cooperate. 00:26:48.824 --> 00:27:00.464 And the directors of the institute have quite a lot of influence to manage that by themselves. 00:27:02.844 --> 00:27:08.644 Okay. But then you have the institute, you have the academy. 00:27:09.144 --> 00:27:15.864 That's what you described now. That's the within academy collaboration between the stakeholders. 00:27:15.864 --> 00:27:19.644 But now, how do you manage the collaborative process with, for instance, 00:27:19.724 --> 00:27:23.124 the Funding Council, because that also brings you closer to, 00:27:23.164 --> 00:27:27.684 let's say, a political strategic level of decision-making where other forms 00:27:27.684 --> 00:27:30.204 of interaction might drive the process? 00:27:31.724 --> 00:27:37.784 In the realm of the academy, it's more the level of facilitation because of 00:27:37.784 --> 00:27:41.804 the powerful position of the institute directors themselves. 00:27:41.804 --> 00:27:45.304 Themselves um uh and and 00:27:45.304 --> 00:27:48.604 icms was was 00:27:48.604 --> 00:27:51.984 a much much was was a much different process 00:27:51.984 --> 00:27:55.324 to build then uh then and 00:27:55.324 --> 00:27:59.864 then the cooperation between universities and and the royal academy institute 00:27:59.864 --> 00:28:06.444 because um all directors of the uh of the institutes were also university professors 00:28:06.444 --> 00:28:14.744 So that is one of the methods to create a bridge between the institutes and the universities. 00:28:15.104 --> 00:28:22.064 And that was also a method to bring in educational obligations into the institutes, 00:28:22.064 --> 00:28:25.084 although they're not obliged to do that. 00:28:25.084 --> 00:28:36.864 So by creating these co-roles and these professorships, you decrease the traditional 00:28:36.864 --> 00:28:39.744 tension between the institutes and the universities. 00:28:40.840 --> 00:28:46.040 Right, but now there are also different levels of competition within the system. 00:28:47.040 --> 00:28:50.140 So also being a psychologist, 00:28:50.580 --> 00:28:58.860 you will appreciate these probable or possible collisions or trade-offs between, 00:28:58.940 --> 00:29:03.560 let's say, personal objectives like building your career, 00:29:03.920 --> 00:29:08.360 advancing your theory, validating your hypothesis, and so on. 00:29:08.360 --> 00:29:14.640 While in the meantime having to find ways to interact and collaborate with the 00:29:14.640 --> 00:29:19.140 person has a similar kind of personal-driven or ego-driven agenda. 00:29:19.420 --> 00:29:24.840 So this might set up a trade-off where at some point people also have to sacrifice 00:29:24.840 --> 00:29:29.380 personal goals in order to be successful in the collaboration. 00:29:29.780 --> 00:29:36.340 So do you see that collision as a process that must be actively managed and 00:29:36.340 --> 00:29:42.080 understood or it has resolved itself automatically in the past. 00:29:42.940 --> 00:29:49.440 The situation you are describing is a situation who takes place in larger organizations 00:29:49.440 --> 00:29:55.900 too, in the university, in larger industrial consortia. 00:29:56.100 --> 00:30:03.920 And that is not specific for the Royal Academy Institute. 00:30:03.920 --> 00:30:13.360 It's in all larger social institutions you have these sort of tensions and if 00:30:13.360 --> 00:30:18.940 you create an atmosphere that these tensions can take place and resolve itself, 00:30:19.240 --> 00:30:24.880 then it's part of the social dynamics of groups. 00:30:26.240 --> 00:30:27.980 Of course, they're... 00:30:29.896 --> 00:30:38.616 And of course, as everywhere, there are tensions between people who work together, 00:30:38.836 --> 00:30:40.616 and that's not abnormal. 00:30:41.036 --> 00:30:54.596 And these tensions will fade away or not, but that takes place in every human group. 00:30:54.596 --> 00:30:58.776 But my question is, would you manage, for instance, would you try to detect 00:30:58.776 --> 00:31:02.316 these kinds of collisions and then really actively step in? 00:31:03.036 --> 00:31:08.196 And which buttons would you then push to try to remediate? Or would you just 00:31:08.196 --> 00:31:10.216 say, look, this is in the nature of the beast. 00:31:10.776 --> 00:31:14.616 There's not much I can do about that. So just let it run its course and maybe 00:31:14.616 --> 00:31:16.476 someone will drop out of the process. 00:31:17.836 --> 00:31:22.056 Yeah, in between. Because don't forget how it works. 00:31:24.496 --> 00:31:29.156 We talked now for about half an hour about the Royal Academy, 00:31:29.356 --> 00:31:35.676 although it's already five or more years ago that I ended my position as a director. 00:31:36.336 --> 00:31:41.276 But to answer your question, you have the so-called headquarter of the Royal 00:31:41.276 --> 00:31:43.396 Academy in Amsterdam, the Trippenhuis. 00:31:43.396 --> 00:31:51.696 And then you have the institutes who are scattered around several cities in 00:31:51.696 --> 00:31:53.076 the Netherlands, most in the West. 00:31:53.476 --> 00:31:58.496 And although you can see the tensions from a distance, 00:31:58.616 --> 00:32:04.696 you can see tensions within institutes, it's extremely difficult to manage that 00:32:04.696 --> 00:32:09.916 literally from a headquarter in another city. 00:32:09.916 --> 00:32:14.936 So, if you would like to manage it, 00:32:15.156 --> 00:32:21.196 it goes always via the director and as a support or as a, 00:32:21.196 --> 00:32:30.356 but it's extremely difficult to look in detail what type of human affairs take 00:32:30.356 --> 00:32:34.556 place in institutes who are 70 kilometers from Amsterdam. 00:32:34.556 --> 00:32:42.356 But okay, so we also celebrate that today is your last day as chairman of the 00:32:42.356 --> 00:32:47.156 board of this interdisciplinary consortium of movement science. 00:32:47.556 --> 00:32:52.456 Which you essentially have built up working with many people across different 00:32:52.456 --> 00:32:54.576 universities and clinics. 00:32:54.576 --> 00:33:01.276 So what lessons did you carry over from your time at the Academy into now building 00:33:01.276 --> 00:33:06.396 this network and this complex collaborative process really from scratch? 00:33:08.685 --> 00:33:14.985 There were a number of lessons. I think when I was Royal Academy Director, 00:33:15.425 --> 00:33:17.665 I worked much more top-down. 00:33:19.325 --> 00:33:24.765 One of the reasons was the distance between the headquarter, 00:33:24.905 --> 00:33:29.165 the Trippenhaus, the literally distance of the headquarter and the Institute, 00:33:29.365 --> 00:33:34.065 and also the organization of the Institute. 00:33:34.065 --> 00:33:40.185 The lesson number one was if you create a consortium, you should create it step 00:33:40.185 --> 00:33:42.725 by step, bottom up and content driven. 00:33:43.025 --> 00:33:49.025 And that was one of the main lessons I learned when they asked me to improve 00:33:49.025 --> 00:33:54.885 the cooperation between the partners I mentioned, the university hospital, 00:33:55.205 --> 00:34:00.605 the technical university, the Sinemizers Clinic, between clinics and research institutes. 00:34:00.605 --> 00:34:04.125 It was slowly, but not very slowly, 00:34:04.245 --> 00:34:12.185 because it started in 2018 and now it exists and is very successful, 00:34:12.445 --> 00:34:21.205 but slowly building the supporting frame of the content bearers, the professors, 00:34:21.545 --> 00:34:22.865 the senior researchers. 00:34:22.865 --> 00:34:32.905 And that, I think, was a lesson I learned from my history at the academy. 00:34:33.325 --> 00:34:35.405 Take more time. Right. 00:34:36.305 --> 00:34:48.605 Take more time and? Yeah, take more time and involve everyone who has a role in the process, 00:34:48.805 --> 00:34:53.065 step by step or as a group, in the building of that new construction. 00:34:53.405 --> 00:34:57.885 But it also means that you're shaping a process over time, right? 00:34:58.665 --> 00:35:04.905 Yeah. First you prepare the ground, you identify, I guess, the key players with 00:35:04.905 --> 00:35:06.285 whom you then prepare the next 00:35:06.285 --> 00:35:10.325 phase. So how many phases have you gone through? What was the process? 00:35:11.980 --> 00:35:18.480 To create ICMS, it took about four years. 00:35:18.960 --> 00:35:23.240 And the first phase one were the 00:35:23.240 --> 00:35:34.680 so-called grand meetings to have a probe whether one saw the importance of a 00:35:34.680 --> 00:35:39.640 more intensive cooperation between five partners in two cities. 00:35:39.640 --> 00:35:46.860 If that willingness was not there, or if there was too much hesitation, 00:35:47.480 --> 00:35:50.580 then it's sleuren aan een doodpaal. 00:35:53.640 --> 00:36:01.040 In my opinion, it's not very possible to create such a large consortium totally 00:36:01.040 --> 00:36:06.680 top-down. Phase one was the willingness to cooperate. 00:36:07.060 --> 00:36:11.360 Phase two was to create the social organization to manage that. 00:36:11.540 --> 00:36:17.240 So to create groups of senior researchers, clinicians, and let them talk with each other. 00:36:17.980 --> 00:36:29.840 Phase three was what is bottom-up if you have all the money you want, 00:36:29.840 --> 00:36:36.340 what are the three large programs you would like to work on the next 10 years 00:36:36.340 --> 00:36:39.380 and how would you like to subdivide? 00:36:39.980 --> 00:36:46.800 That was phase three. And phase four was how would you like to fill in with 00:36:46.800 --> 00:36:48.380 content these programs? 00:36:50.540 --> 00:36:57.640 And after phase four, in fact, the building was there and the people were there 00:36:57.640 --> 00:37:01.760 And now a joint grant process could start. 00:37:01.940 --> 00:37:07.700 And that's the phase we are in now. And everybody is on board and stays on board. 00:37:08.280 --> 00:37:18.520 Right. So it's step-like. And I learned that it is a massive advantage if you 00:37:18.520 --> 00:37:25.640 do not take only the head of departments and your senior professors as your 00:37:25.640 --> 00:37:27.300 stakeholders, but the whole community. 00:37:29.240 --> 00:37:30.280 Right. Andreas? 00:37:32.320 --> 00:37:35.420 Yes, thank you, Theo. Sorry, I was thrown off the network. 00:37:36.260 --> 00:37:44.000 I would like to inquire a bit more into the temporal extension or the temporal dimension. 00:37:44.880 --> 00:37:48.280 What is the importance of the time frame you have in front of you, 00:37:48.420 --> 00:37:51.520 whether it is one year, three years, five or ten years? 00:37:51.820 --> 00:37:56.500 Is it like an optimal spot? but is longer always better when you're trying to 00:37:56.500 --> 00:37:58.160 get the collaboration off the ground? 00:38:00.844 --> 00:38:04.344 No. Longer is not always better. 00:38:06.984 --> 00:38:16.144 Let's take ICMS as an example. ICMS is now a politically stable consortium, 00:38:16.184 --> 00:38:17.884 but it's still vulnerable. 00:38:17.884 --> 00:38:28.144 If in the next two years there are no large grant acquisitions, 00:38:28.304 --> 00:38:35.524 then it's not unthinkable that the senior scientists are saying, well, 00:38:35.704 --> 00:38:43.164 we have grants, but we had that grants before ICMS2 and I don't see any advantage in it. 00:38:43.164 --> 00:38:50.384 And it's break down again. 00:38:50.864 --> 00:38:53.884 So a longer period is not always better. 00:38:54.544 --> 00:39:00.644 It is, the proof of the putting is if the members of the consortium see that 00:39:00.644 --> 00:39:07.744 a consortium has more advantage than each group or each institution at its own. 00:39:07.884 --> 00:39:13.864 And in that phase, we are now, and Paul knows that exactly because we work together 00:39:13.864 --> 00:39:16.784 at the so-called Vroegfonds aanvraag. 00:39:16.884 --> 00:39:21.944 That's a major grant proposal in the Netherlands. 00:39:22.284 --> 00:39:27.524 And everybody knows that we are there because there is an ICMS. 00:39:27.724 --> 00:39:32.504 Nobody in its own could be part of that large grant. 00:39:32.644 --> 00:39:40.204 But if it's not successful, then it still has a risk. But by taking more time, 00:39:40.284 --> 00:39:44.504 you make the consortium more socially solid. 00:39:46.844 --> 00:39:51.784 And this vulnerability, is the weakness, is the strength, or is it? 00:39:52.644 --> 00:39:55.044 It's the weak strength. 00:39:56.744 --> 00:40:03.244 It's, of course, a normal part of the scientific deal. 00:40:03.244 --> 00:40:05.804 But if you bring together more 00:40:05.804 --> 00:40:12.644 than 200 senior scientists and behind them maybe 500 junior scientists, 00:40:12.864 --> 00:40:19.444 and in one, two, three years there is no advantage of the consortium visible, 00:40:19.924 --> 00:40:23.984 then there is no future. 00:40:23.984 --> 00:40:27.184 But I'm not that pessimistic on 00:40:27.184 --> 00:40:30.484 the contrary I see a 00:40:30.484 --> 00:40:33.664 very much positive future for 00:40:33.664 --> 00:40:36.604 such a consortium but only if it 00:40:36.604 --> 00:40:41.364 is based on and then we are back at the beginning if it is based on the willingness 00:40:41.364 --> 00:40:49.684 to cooperate on mutual trust and the conviction that you can answer questions 00:40:49.684 --> 00:40:56.024 which you cannot answer if you if you work much more monodisciplinarily. 00:40:59.728 --> 00:41:05.348 And I think it's a political necessity in the science policy of Europe at this 00:41:05.348 --> 00:41:09.848 moment, that you have these public and public-private consortia, 00:41:09.848 --> 00:41:12.948 because we didn't discuss the private part, 00:41:13.168 --> 00:41:17.828 but that's as well in Europe as in the Netherlands and in other countries, 00:41:17.968 --> 00:41:20.228 you have the building up. 00:41:20.228 --> 00:41:26.928 But Theo, I hear a little bit of possible contradiction in how you now describe 00:41:26.928 --> 00:41:32.088 the process, because we started out by saying, well, people have to see that 00:41:32.088 --> 00:41:34.368 they can gain in understanding, 00:41:34.848 --> 00:41:39.408 in methodology, shared infrastructure, what have you, all these good things. 00:41:40.508 --> 00:41:43.908 But now on the other hand you say yeah but if the seniors don't 00:41:43.908 --> 00:41:48.228 see in two years time that they get more money then the whole thing will again 00:41:48.228 --> 00:41:52.748 collapse so that seems to contradict now the goal setting because what's then 00:41:52.748 --> 00:41:58.488 really the objective is the collaboration a vehicle a means to an end to generate 00:41:58.488 --> 00:42:01.268 more money or resource in the end for, 00:42:01.968 --> 00:42:03.608 the principal investigators, 00:42:04.448 --> 00:42:09.188 right or is it the other way around so it's really the a measure of success, 00:42:09.368 --> 00:42:12.948 whether you can generate more grant money, because that would then contradict 00:42:12.948 --> 00:42:18.568 the idea of common goal setting along a more intellectual and idealistic perspective. 00:42:20.596 --> 00:42:27.016 I think these things are intermingled, but science runs on ideas and money. 00:42:27.896 --> 00:42:32.436 If you have ideas and no money, there is no science. And if you have money and 00:42:32.436 --> 00:42:33.996 no ideas, there is also no science. 00:42:34.496 --> 00:42:42.416 So such a consortium brings in new intellectual possibilities and people like that. 00:42:42.496 --> 00:42:48.696 And I see corporations appear who were not there in this way three years ago. 00:42:48.696 --> 00:42:56.256 But nevertheless, if this willingness to cooperate and if these new project 00:42:56.256 --> 00:43:08.316 plans are not ending in real possibilities to work together in a scientific program, 00:43:08.576 --> 00:43:14.616 then enthusiasm could end. 00:43:14.616 --> 00:43:20.096 And although everybody sees that it has more possibilities and also to solve 00:43:20.096 --> 00:43:23.796 not only the scientific but also the social challenge. 00:43:24.596 --> 00:43:33.756 So I'm not pessimistic at all. But I see the fragile aspects of such a social 00:43:33.756 --> 00:43:37.656 experiment bringing together 200, 250 scientists. 00:43:37.656 --> 00:43:42.856 But in other large collaborative projects, like take the American Brain Project, 00:43:43.076 --> 00:43:45.196 with those massive investments, 00:43:45.656 --> 00:43:49.116 if you talk with the leaders of that project, they would say, 00:43:49.156 --> 00:43:54.336 look, if we just managed to train a next generation of researchers who can be 00:43:54.336 --> 00:43:57.816 more multidisciplinary and collaborative, the project was a success. 00:43:57.816 --> 00:44:04.736 But in your description, the outcome is at a two-year time frame, right? 00:44:04.796 --> 00:44:08.016 So do you see these as comparable objectives? 00:44:08.316 --> 00:44:14.016 Would that also be a sufficient justification to keep everyone on board in the 00:44:14.016 --> 00:44:15.416 project that you have set up? 00:44:18.195 --> 00:44:25.175 Yes, you know that in the BRAIN project there were many tensions, 00:44:25.415 --> 00:44:30.215 but it's larger, but these tensions were there. 00:44:30.715 --> 00:44:42.275 Until now, ICMS, which is much smaller, doesn't have these tensions. 00:44:42.275 --> 00:44:47.595 It could appear, it can appear, but not now. 00:44:49.435 --> 00:44:57.115 Yes, it's a combination of these, what you term, idealistic aspects to work together, 00:44:57.915 --> 00:45:02.435 idealistic aspects to solve large societal challenges, 00:45:02.435 --> 00:45:14.835 and especially the view that you have to get more possibilities to do that than as a group at its own. 00:45:15.675 --> 00:45:27.575 So I'm absolutely not pessimistic, but I see how complex it is to create such 00:45:27.575 --> 00:45:30.935 a new and larger community between cities. 00:45:31.535 --> 00:45:38.615 Right but now looking at the ICMS experiment that you're stepping out of today, 00:45:39.355 --> 00:45:41.215 looking back do you feel like I, 00:45:42.035 --> 00:45:46.955 made a few mistakes there's some things I could have done better and. 00:45:48.296 --> 00:45:52.696 Yeah. And it's again a question of top-down and bottom-up. 00:45:52.796 --> 00:46:01.596 I think I learned from the Royal Academy, but if I would repeat the process. 00:46:02.456 --> 00:46:11.396 I would from the very start bring more people together as I did. 00:46:11.396 --> 00:46:17.376 Now I focused on the senior leaders, on the department heads, on the professors, 00:46:17.776 --> 00:46:22.376 on the associate professors, but 00:46:22.376 --> 00:46:27.516 under that umbrella, there is a group of hundreds of junior scientists. 00:46:28.176 --> 00:46:39.796 Assistant professors, professors and who are actually also the force to drive 00:46:39.796 --> 00:46:44.016 these experiments to a good end. 00:46:44.156 --> 00:46:53.056 If I would start again, I would take more time to involve a larger group of 00:46:53.056 --> 00:46:58.856 especially junior scientists to come aboard. Yeah, that makes sense, right? 00:46:58.896 --> 00:47:02.396 Because as you described earlier, it's a multi-year process, right? 00:47:02.496 --> 00:47:08.236 So the ones who are junior at year one are already more advanced at year three, four, right? 00:47:08.276 --> 00:47:12.216 And they also carry the idea. of the idea. 00:47:12.576 --> 00:47:21.296 But now, to sort of go towards the finish line, stepping back a little bit from 00:47:21.296 --> 00:47:24.796 the concrete processes you were in on collaboration, 00:47:25.216 --> 00:47:31.616 do you feel we learned anything from the last one and a half years of COVID-19 ruling our reality? 00:47:34.819 --> 00:47:36.659 How many hours we have. 00:47:42.499 --> 00:47:45.939 Yeah yeah yeah let's let's 00:47:45.939 --> 00:47:49.239 let's make it a simple answer what 00:47:49.239 --> 00:47:56.299 kovat learned us is that you that in in in to solve these sorts of problem you 00:47:56.299 --> 00:48:06.299 have to cooperate that's uh and you have and And normally it takes years to create the medicine. 00:48:06.399 --> 00:48:11.299 And now it took one and a half year. 00:48:11.619 --> 00:48:15.499 Here also it is trust and the willingness to share. 00:48:15.859 --> 00:48:20.899 And the societal pressure, of course. And what I think is important. 00:48:21.419 --> 00:48:27.099 COVID learned also that if there are large societal problems, 00:48:27.099 --> 00:48:30.339 problems you actually need science to solve 00:48:30.339 --> 00:48:33.299 them politics alone is is 00:48:33.299 --> 00:48:41.599 is air uh and without content you cannot solve these problems so um and i think 00:48:41.599 --> 00:48:45.899 that it has learned with us that we need that we actually need science to solve 00:48:45.899 --> 00:48:51.199 major problems in society social sciences to to manage 00:48:51.399 --> 00:48:59.719 all those complot theories and social insecure thoughts, 00:48:59.879 --> 00:49:10.719 and biological science to develop the medicines we need to cope with this new disease. Andreas? 00:49:13.599 --> 00:49:18.119 You mentioned at an early stage that a collaborative environment was very important. 00:49:18.119 --> 00:49:23.659 I wonder whether your kind of final point about the need not just to talk to 00:49:23.659 --> 00:49:28.019 the principal investigators and heads of institutes, but also to talk to the 00:49:28.019 --> 00:49:32.619 more junior researchers, is that also part of creating this collaborative environment? 00:49:33.059 --> 00:49:37.339 Could you tell a little bit more about if you were to start from scratch in 00:49:37.339 --> 00:49:41.459 designing a collaborative environment that's not just about principal investigators 00:49:41.459 --> 00:49:45.599 optimizing their own needs, what would you be doing then? 00:49:45.599 --> 00:49:49.659 It seems to be critical in this collaborative environment, isn't it? 00:49:55.021 --> 00:50:04.141 Yeah, Andreas, one of the points which played a major role is. 00:50:06.461 --> 00:50:14.981 COVID prevented the organization of real meetings between people in physical form. 00:50:14.981 --> 00:50:25.081 So it was not possible to organize a symposium with 200 people or 300 people. 00:50:25.241 --> 00:50:27.581 And on screen, that's not possible. 00:50:27.941 --> 00:50:40.901 So if COVID was not there, probably we could reach junior scientists more easily than now. 00:50:40.901 --> 00:50:46.841 Now, you can reach them in one institute, but you cannot reach a tree of 400 PhD students. 00:50:47.801 --> 00:50:52.821 I'm sure that if there was no COVID, we would have organized one, 00:50:52.981 --> 00:50:57.621 two, three, four symposia with speakers, with junior speakers, 00:50:57.901 --> 00:51:01.841 with senior speakers, with an interesting international speakers, 00:51:01.961 --> 00:51:05.861 creating junior groups, having dinners. 00:51:05.861 --> 00:51:12.221 And all that which is needed to build up such a social scientific community, 00:51:14.021 --> 00:51:19.581 was not possible and we met each other in boxes on the screen. 00:51:20.861 --> 00:51:25.801 And so that is also part of the answer, what would you do different? 00:51:26.401 --> 00:51:30.421 But some things were not possible to do different. 00:51:34.280 --> 00:51:44.100 Right. So, Theo, do you believe humans, in a general sense, are able, 00:51:44.220 --> 00:51:47.700 will ever be able to really and truly collaborate? 00:51:47.840 --> 00:51:51.480 Or do you think that also from a psychological, biological perspective, 00:51:52.000 --> 00:51:57.900 there are just intrinsic limitations in the human condition that will prevent 00:51:57.900 --> 00:52:02.600 us from really fully developing the potential of large-scale collaboration? 00:52:05.040 --> 00:52:12.120 Look, evolution has learned us that cooperation is one of the core characteristics 00:52:12.120 --> 00:52:15.200 of Homo sapiens. It's a group animal. 00:52:17.020 --> 00:52:22.740 If you look at Homo sapiens, you see an angel and a devil. And in between is everything. 00:52:23.520 --> 00:52:29.020 So I think cooperation is one of the social needs, which is characteristic for 00:52:29.020 --> 00:52:37.860 Homo sapiens. as well as physical contact and sharing thoughts by means in social gatherings. 00:52:38.020 --> 00:52:44.280 So I think it will be possible and it has shown that it is possible in all large 00:52:44.280 --> 00:52:46.360 scientific cooperations. 00:52:48.860 --> 00:52:56.040 But then if you could change one thing in humans, what would that be? 00:52:59.860 --> 00:53:04.600 So if I repeat that question, because part of the question, I thought you answer, 00:53:04.700 --> 00:53:08.180 if you would change one part of human being, what would that be? 00:53:08.180 --> 00:53:12.200 One thing in humans, let's say I give you the ultimate technology, 00:53:12.520 --> 00:53:20.100 you can change any piece of the human phenotype, the Homo sapiens phenotype that you want. 00:53:20.920 --> 00:53:31.200 Which bit would you change in order to more fluently create constructive collaboration among humans? 00:53:32.860 --> 00:53:40.560 I would lower the level of jealousy. 00:53:43.540 --> 00:53:48.840 Okay. Very good. Well, Theo Mulder, thank you very much for this conversation. 00:53:51.360 --> 00:53:52.260 Thank you too. 00:53:54.340 --> 00:53:59.840 Hi, you listened to one of our podcasts in the series on collaboration Produced 00:53:59.840 --> 00:54:02.420 by the Ernst Trommel Forum and the Convergent Science Network. 00:54:03.120 --> 00:54:06.100 You can find more episodes on our website.