Lessons learned from our Collaboration Building Workshops

Collaboration Building Workshop 2021

SAQN hosted a second Collaboration Building Workshop in 2021 (14 – 25 June), using the same format as the first workshop, but with improvements identified through the review process. Here we reflect on the impact these changes had on the process. 

Launch event

We began the workshop with a brief ‘launch event’ one week before the start of the main workshop. This had several benefits:

  • Participants were introduced to the facilitators and mentors;
  • We started using Mural, allowing participants to get familiar with it and solve any technical issues in real time;
  • Participants started to meet each other, having one to one chats in Zoom breakout rooms;
  • Sharing the workshop aims and funding criteria at the start reduced the number of questions asked about funding later on in the workshop;
  • Participants had the opportunity to try out a new networking platform, ‘Wonder’, which was then used by many to host their ‘cafe time’ conversations.

Improved support for mentors

We recognised that mentors needed more support in order to give most value to the participants and to feel more engaged in the process. The two aims of this were to make mentors feel better informed about the process and their roles and to allow participants to become more familiar with mentors so that they felt comfortable asking for their support. Changes to the mentor programme were:

  • A short introductory meeting, outlining the mentor role and giving a broad overview of the process;
  • A mentor briefing session one week before the workshop, giving details of the mentors’ activities in week one;
  • Involving and introducing the mentors to the participants at the launch session;
  • Asking the mentors to lead the initial discussion activity in the first session;
  • A second mentor briefing session at the start of week two to review project ideas and give clear directions to the mentors for the remaining sessions;
  • Appointing a facilitator as ‘mentor support’, who acted as first point of contact during sessions and sent communications in between sessions;

Our mentors noted that they had appreciated the extra support they were given, and that they themselves benefited from taking part, as they could keep in touch with developments in the field of air quality, make new connections and influence the direction of research.

Improved use of online tools for facilitation

Building on our experience of running online events, we trialled using ‘SessionLab’, an event planning tool which can have multiple collaborators, and also made use of Google Docs and drive, so that all the workshop materials were accessible by the event team at any time. This had the following benefits:

  • Detailed notes on the running of the workshop were available in SessionLab and updated in real time, reducing email traffic and version control issues;
  • Notes sections in SessionLab were used to keep details of activities required between sessions (such as texts and timings of emails to participants), meaning that all team members could see and edit messages to participants, while being clear on who was responsible for each action and when it had been completed;
  • Relevant documents could be accessed and edited as needed in Google Docs throughout the event, and links to documents placed in the event plan, allowing any of the event team to access information and share it quickly and easily;
  • Planning all the activities between workshop sessions reduced the burden on the events team, as no one was having to keep all the information in their head.

Workshop highlights

We thoroughly enjoyed hosting our second workshop, and were delighted with the outcomes. These were some of our highlights:

  • We welcomed colleagues from departments of STFC that have not been extensively used in air quality research (ISIS and Central Laser Facility) and were able to fund projects making use of their technology;
  • One project was able to make use of sensors developed in a previous SAQN Scoping Study, and is developing a new piece of technology with significant commercialisation potential;
  • Having encouraged research into health aspects of air quality, we were pleased to have involvement from medical researchers, including from Public Health England, and that two of our funded projects are exploring issues around toxicology;
  • The projects teams that were not funded said they had found it a valuable experience, as they had established new collaborations, had useful feedback and been signposted to other funding sources;
  • Feedback from our participants was very positive, with most reporting that they had appreciated the opportunity to collaborate with people beyond their usual network in a friendly and encouraging environment;
  • Our workshop format has inspired another air quality network (TAPAS) to host their own Collaboration Building Workshop based on the same format.

The SAQN website is kept up to date with all the latest information and contact details for our funded projects.

This is an extract from our case study, reflecting on the lessons we learned from running two Collaboration Building Workshops.

Running a Funding Sandpit in a Digital Environment: A Case Study

Our next Collaboration Building Workshop takes place this month, and we’ve been reflecting on what we learned from the first workshop, which took place last November. Online events are likely to be more prevalent, even once lockdown restrictions are gone, so we have published a case study of our workshop. The paper outlines some of the key factors that made the workshop successful, and also shares our plans to make the next workshop even better.

The case study will be of interest to anyone looking to organise workshops, and in particular those running funding sandpits. 

Lockdown measures in Spring 2020 only account for half the observed improvements in UK air quality

Guest blogger Eloise Marais shares insights from a recently published paper, examining the causes of air quality change during the first UK lockdown.

There was widespread reporting of the air quality improvements in Spring 2020 in comparison to the previous year during the lockdown imposed from 23 March 2020 in the UK. Researchers at Universities of Leicester and Leeds, UCL and the National Centre for Earth Observation examined this dramatic drop in air pollution with a detailed model and measurements air pollution to find that lockdown measures only explain half the improvement in air quality.

This research, recently accepted by the journal Environmental Research Letters (https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/abde5d), used the GEOS-Chem chemical transport model and observations from the space-based TROPOMI instrument onboard the ESA Sentinel-5P satellite. The model includes detailed representation of sources and chemical and physical processes in the atmosphere that affect regional air quality. This allowed the researchers to tease out the factors that contributed to improvements in air quality. They estimated that emissions decreased by 20-30% on average across the UK, but by much more (>40%) in London and only marginally in Scotland. They also found that differences in meteorology and long-range transport of pollution between the two years contributed at least half of the observed air quality improvements. The relative contribution of emissions and other factors for UK regions and two UK cities (London and Manchester) are shown in the figure below for the air pollutant PM2.5

These findings support the need to consider emissions as well as meteorology in developing air pollution mitigation measures and enforcing air quality policy standards, especially if the UK adopts a stricter PM2.5 standard.

Graph showing causes of decline in UK PM2.5 during the Spring 2020 lockdown

Reflections on virtual networking and collaboration

When lockdown arrived in March 2020, it was clear that our carefully laid plans for a two day residential Collaboration Building Workshop were going to have to change. We initially thought that we might be able to hold the event in person by postponing to November, but by the summer it seemed clear that these plans would also need to be altered.

Taking the workshop online was the obvious course, but was a daunting prospect. How could people make meaningful connections with complete strangers online? Would they manage to build collaborations that could last? Were they going to develop project proposals that we could fund? But a virtual sandpit was also an opportunity; in preparing a face to face workshop, we’d had misgivings about excluding people with caring responsibilities, or who would have long distances to travel. And requiring people to travel to an event also meant contributing to air pollution. We hoped that an online event would allow us to address these issues.

Our experimental workshop finished in mid-November and we were delighted with the results. 28 researchers took part in the workshop, and between them they produced six project proposals. Our funding panel awarded Scoping Study funds to five of these proposals, and invited the sixth to re-submit, and this wasn’t just to avoid making difficult decisions: the proposals all offered good opportunities for new collaborations (see point 5 below). Feedback from the participants was very positive, both about the new working relationships they made, and about the format of the workshop itself. 100% of participants said they found the workshop ‘positive’ or ‘very positive’. One participant said they learned “lots of options for online interaction, a bit about STFC and it’s [sic] potential for future links, lots of amazing contacts! Thank you!”.

So what did we learn from our experience? These are just some of my initial reflections.

1. A good facilitator is worth their weight in gold.

We were very fortunate to work with Christine Bell from the Centre for Facilitation, whose creative ideas in designing the workshop and skillful management of each session was appreciated by everyone. One participant said the facilitation was “Amazing, really engaging and effective, can’t fault it one bit! Wish more events were run like this.”. Christine was able to create a warm, friendly atmosphere that drew everyone in and encouraged them to participate fully. Seemingly little details, such as always inviting everyone to switch on their cameras when she wanted their attention, made a huge difference to everyone’s engagement. One participant commented that in other online events she would be distracted by emails and doing other things, but in this she felt focussed and ‘in the room’. An excellent facilitator was crucial to the success of the workshop.

2. Online events allowed for real life to continue

One problem with ‘sandpit’ events is that anyone with caring responsibilities, or in a role where they can’t take two days out of the office, is immediately excluded from the process and loses out on funding. We carefully designed our timetable to fit within 10am – 3pm to fit in with school runs, and allowed enough time in between sessions for the additional work to be completed without using evenings or weekends. 26% of our participants said that they would not have been able to attend if the event had been face to face. Some participants noted that they were able to fit the workshop in around their teaching schedules, and one participant managed to deliver a project idea to the group whilst also bouncing his baby in his lap! We want to strive to make all our events as diverse and inclusive as possible, and an online format helped us to do this.

3. Avoiding ‘Zoom fatigue’

Rather than replicate the timetable of the two day event online, we decided to spread it out over two weeks, with no more than 3 hours on Zoom in a day. We also built in small breaks throughout each session, where participants were invited to turn off their cameras for 5 minutes. This allowed time for reflection and to stretch legs, without feeling ‘on display’. One of the side effects of our schedule was that participants had more time to reflect and develop their ideas in between sessions than they would have done in an intensive sandpit process. One participant commented “The format was brilliant, and in many ways actually better than an in-person workshop as it gave time for us to step away from the ideas and let them slowly develop.”

4. Collaboration, not competition

We placed an emphasis on building a community through the workshop, and spent time thinking about what leads to good collaboration. This led to a genuinely supportive atmosphere amongst the participants, rather than a cutthroat dash for the funding. Our aim as a network is to build lasting collaborations, so we were delighted to see that the projects were all new teams, with great potential for further work that will benefit the air quality community.

5. Real things happen in a virtual space

Of course, the aim of the workshop was to develop new research ideas that could be funded by SAQN. We had a maximum of six pots of £8,000 to award, and (subject to re-submission) may be able to award every one of these. The funding panel were impressed by the quality of the applications, the high standard of presentation and the ability of the teams to develop these ideas in a short space of time. We are looking forward to seeing the results of these projects over the coming months. The topics included are ammonia, machine learning, air reference units, indoor air quality and sensors for eddy covariance.

Finally, on a personal note, I have learned a huge amount about the ways we can make meaningful connections in an online environment. I am excited to apply this learning to future SAQN events, as online events offer low-cost, low-polluting ways to make lasting collaborations. Of course, there were many things about the workshop that we feel could have been improved, and we are continuing our discussions about these to make the next Collaboration Building Workshop even more successful!

SAQN Discussion Board relaunched – introduce yourself!

Our new Discussion Board is live and waiting for your contribution! We wanted to find a way for network members to make connections and discuss important topics without travelling to meetings. We’ve replaced our previous discussion board with an improved system, which works much more smoothly.

The Discussion Board can be viewed by anyone, and network members can comment and add new threads. Existing members simply need to complete the short form on the website to gain access.

To kick off the conversation, head to the Discussion Board and introduce yourself.

Air Quality Hub Launches for Local Authority Air Quality Professionals

The Air Quality Hub is a new, free online knowledge sharing resource for those working in the field of local air quality management. Focused on information exchange between local authority professionals, the Hub features a range of content areas related to strategy measures that local authorities can adopt, as well as more specific practitioner advice notes that focus on various aspects of air quality management planning, monitoring and enforcement. The Hub also includes a growing library of relevant case studies and a forum for direct peer to peer communication. The funding for the project is via a Defra air quality grant.

The Air Quality Hub will be officially launched on the 26th November and eligible practitioners are invited to join the Hub managers for an hour on Zoom @ 1pm to learn what it does and how it can help you on an ongoing basis. There are also lots of opportunities to help your fellow practitioners by contributing your own real-world experience and best practice advice.

If you’re working in local or national government, other national bodies or in academia and would like to join us, please email admin@airqualityhub.co.uk to receive joining instructions.

Academics and public sector professionals with a legitimate interest in air quality management can also access the site and forum, subject to specific approval. The Air Quality Hub is not currently available for commercial organisations.

The Low Emission Partnership, which developed and operates the Hub, is seeking case studies for a number of strategy areas that are currently under-represented on the Hub, and welcome ad hoc submissions or enquiries about becoming a regular content contributor.

Please contact admin@airqualityhub.co.uk for more information.

Air Quality & COVID-19: Report Published

We are pleased to announce the publication of the report from our May event, ‘Air Quality & COVID-19’. This report is jointly authored by SAQN, UKIEG and AQNUK as convenors of the workshop. In addition to the Executive Summary and Calls to Action, the report contains summaries of the speaker presentations, the workshop methodology, and information on ways to connect with STFC.

We are keen to encourage further interdisciplinary work with others interested in air quality challenges, and we invite the community to contact us with their responses to the Calls to Action so that we can continue the conversation. SAQN will be doing further work to identify what work is happening in the different research areas, and finding areas where STFC capabilities can contribute to the research.

Our upcoming Collaboration Building Workshop offers an opportunity to connect with researchers in different disciplines and apply for Scoping Study funding for new work using STFC capabilities. Our starting points for discussion will be the themes identified at our launch event and the calls to action from this report, as the most pressing challenges in air quality at the moment. We welcome applications from a wide range of disciplines.

Air Quality Hub – Call for Case Studies

The Air Quality Hub is a new, online knowledge sharing resource for those working in the field of local air quality management. Focused on information exchange between local authority professionals, the Hub features a range of content areas related to strategy measures that local authorities can adopt, as well as more specific practitioner advice notes that focus on various aspects of air quality management planning, monitoring and enforcement. The Hub also includes a growing library of relevant case studies and a forum for direct peer to peer communication.

Academics and public sector professionals with a legitimate interest in air quality management can also access the site and forum, subject to specific approval. The Air Quality Hub is not currently available for commercial organisations.

The Low Emission Partnership, which developed and operates the Hub, is seeking case studies for a number of strategy areas that are currently under-represented on the Hub:

  • Development planning
  • Commercial and domestic heat and power
  • Industrial and commercial regulatory interventions
  • Agricultural emissions
  • Coach initiatives
  • Rail initiatives
  • Walking initiatives (encouraging active travel)

If you are interested in submitting a case study relating to any of these areas for publication on the Hub, please contact admin@airqualityhub.co.uk for more information.