The integration of diverse disciplinary and practitioner knowledge is essential for addressing complex and interconnected sustainability challenges we face today. This study explores the theoretical underpinnings that support collaboration in transdisciplinary teams, focusing on team evaluation, reflexivity and psychological safety, and how these factors enhance knowledge integration to drive impactful research outcomes.

Transdisciplinary teams often encounter significant challenges. Individuals within these teams bring their unique cultural, political and social contexts to their work. The intentional blending of disciplines and professional experiences not only influences the design, conduct and delivery of key outputs, but also complicates the negotiation of a common research agenda, trust building and the balancing of different perspectives. Teams are often required to sit in contested spaces and iterate towards possible solutions. This can be an uncomfortable process for research teams. Within this context, psychological safety becomes critical, empowering team members to test ideas, highlight concerns and challenge norms without fear of repercussions. Fostering a team culture that values diverse perspectives, prioritises cultural safety and supports inclusive decision making can enhance the integration of varied knowledge streams.

This 18-month case study of a transdisciplinary sustainability science team incorporating social scientists, human geographers, economists, ecologists and government policy experts, illustrates how a practical team-based evaluation process, that emphasises co-production within a team, can contribute to bringing together different perspectives to inform sustainability actions. This process, with cycles of reflection, learning and action, draws on shared reflections on team dynamics, task distribution and well-being, to improve collaboration and guide collective efforts. Sentiment analysis of these reflections highlights the fluctuations in morale that transdisciplinary teams experience, with phases of uncertainty and change connected to more negative sentiments while positive sentiments are tied to periods of greater connection and delivery of outputs. Tracking and openly discussing these reflections provides multiple benefits. From a research perspective, this process provides insights on new capability that might be needed and highlights where individuals could benefit from additional support. It is also important for predicting potential disruption and implementing timely support measures. The inclusion of external government collaborators in this process also provides invaluable insights into the applicability and usability of research outputs in real-world settings. This study advocates for investment in and prioritisation of regular feedback and reflection mechanisms in transdisciplinary teams. Monitoring team sentiments can provide useful indicators of team health and overall progress towards expected outcomes. The team-based reflection process itself can also contribute to an environment where team members articulate concerns and collaboratively navigate changes, thus strengthening the foundations for innovative and effective transdisciplinary research in sustainability science.