That's an excellent and crucial first step! Agreeing on author order and contributions early is one of the most proactive things you can do to ensure a smooth, fair, and professional collaboration. It prevents misunderstandings, resentment, and last-minute conflicts.

Here's a comprehensive guide to help you facilitate this discussion effectively:

---

Guide: Agreeing on Author Order and Contributions Early

Why It's Crucial to Do This Early

• Prevents Conflict & Resentment: Differing expectations about authorship are a leading cause of academic and professional disputes. Addressing it early avoids these headaches.


• Clarity & Accountability: Everyone knows their role, what's expected of them, and how their efforts will be recognized. This can increase motivation and productivity.


• Fair Recognition: Ensures all significant contributors receive appropriate credit for their work.


• Professionalism: Demonstrates a mature and organized approach to collaborative work.


• Journal/Publisher Requirements: Many journals now require an "Author Contribution Statement" upon submission, detailing each author's role. Having this pre-agreed makes submission much easier.


• Motivation: Knowing your contribution and its recognition can be a powerful motivator.

How to Facilitate the Discussion and Agreement

Step 1: Initiate the Discussion Early (The Kick-off Meeting)

• Schedule a dedicated meeting: Make this the first official discussion after the initial project idea is formed. It can be virtual or in-person.


• State the purpose: Clearly articulate that the meeting is to discuss authorship and contributions to set clear expectations from the outset. Frame it positively – "Let's ensure everyone gets fair credit and understands their role."

Step 2: Define "Authorship"

Not everyone has the same definition of what qualifies for authorship versus an acknowledgment. It's vital to establish a shared understanding.

• Refer to common guidelines:


• ICMJE (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors) — "Vancouver Group" criteria are widely accepted in many fields:


• Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND


• Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; AND


• Final approval of the version to be published; AND


• Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.


• Important Note: All four conditions must be met. Acquisition of funding, general supervision, or administrative support alone do not justify authorship. These typically warrant an acknowledgment.


• **Discuss what you collectively consider authorship:** How do these guidelines apply to your specific project?

Step 3: Brainstorm and List All Potential Contributions

Think broadly about all the tasks required for your project. This is where a Contributor Roles Taxonomy (CRediT) can be incredibly useful. CRediT provides a standardized list of 14 roles that can be used to represent the contributions of researchers.

• Conceptualization: Ideas; formulation of research goals and aims.


• Methodology: Development or design of methodology; creation of models.


• Software: Programming, software development, implementing computer code.


• Validation: Verification of the overall replication of results; testing of hypotheses.


• Formal Analysis: Application of statistical, mathematical, computational, or other formal techniques to analyze data.


• Investigation: Conducting a research process, specifically performing experiments, collecting data.


• Resources: Provision of study materials, reagents, materials, patients, lab samples, animals, instrumentation, computing resources.


• Data Curation: Management activities to annotate (produce metadata), scrub data, maintain research data (including re-useable data repositories).


• Writing – Original Draft: Preparation, creation and/or presentation of the published work, specifically the initial draft.


• Writing – Review & Editing: Preparation, creation and/or presentation of the published work by those from the original research group, specifically critical review, commentary or revision.


• Visualization: Preparation, creation and/or presentation of the published work, specifically visualization/data presentation.


• Supervision: Oversight and leadership responsibility for the research activity planning and execution.


• Project administration: Management and coordination responsibility for the research activity planning and execution.


• Funding acquisition: Acquisition of the financial support for the project leading to this publication.

Action: Go through these or similar categories and list who is expected to contribute to each, and to what degree.

Step 4: Propose Initial Contributions and Author Order

Based on the brainstormed contributions:

• **Each co-author outlines their expected contributions:** Have everyone articulate what they plan to do for the project. Be specific.


• Discuss the first author: This is typically the person who has done the most conceptual work, data analysis, and original drafting of the manuscript.


• Discuss the last author: Often the senior author, project lead, or mentor who oversees the work, secures funding, and provides significant intellectual input throughout. In some fields, it can also signify the head of the lab or research group.


• Discuss middle authors: These are individuals who meet authorship criteria but whose contributions are less extensive than the first author. Their order usually reflects the relative significance of their contributions.


• Corresponding author: Decide who will be the point of contact for the journal and readers. This person is responsible for the integrity of the work and communication. It can be the first or last author, or another significant contributor.

Action: Tentatively assign roles and an initial author order based on expected contributions. Emphasize that this is a working document and subject to change.

Step 5: Document Everything

This is non-negotiable.

• Create a shared document: A Google Doc, Notion page, or even an email summary that everyone agrees upon.


• Include:


• Project title


• Proposed author order (with the understanding it's preliminary)


• Each author's expected contribution using CRediT roles or clear descriptions.


• Responsibilities of the corresponding author.


• Date of agreement.


• A clause stating that authorship will be re-evaluated at key milestones (e.g., after data collection, after first draft).

Step 6: Agree on Review & Revision Schedule for Authorship

• Set check-in points: Plan to revisit the author order and contributions at specific stages of the project (e.g., after the data is collected, after the first full draft is written, or midway through the project).


• Be flexible: Real contributions often evolve as the project progresses. Someone might take on more than anticipated, or less. The agreement needs to reflect actual effort.


• Address changes transparently: If someone's role changes significantly, openly discuss how that impacts their authorship and order.

Key Considerations & Best Practices

• Transparency is paramount: Foster an environment where everyone feels comfortable discussing contributions openly and honestly.


• Focus on the work, not ego: Remind everyone that the goal is the successful completion and publication of the project, with fair credit for all.


• Acknowledge all contributions: If someone doesn't meet authorship criteria but provides valuable support (e.g., technical assistance, general advice), ensure they are acknowledged appropriately in the manuscript.


• Mentorship: If there's a mentor involved, discuss their role and expected contribution early. Often, they are the last author.


• What if someone leaves the project? Discuss this contingency. What happens if a co-author drops out or fails to deliver on their expected contributions?


• Conflict Resolution: Briefly agree on a process if disagreements arise later (e.g., discuss it as a group, seek advice from a neutral senior colleague).

---

By taking the time to have this discussion and document your agreements, you'll lay a strong foundation for a productive and harmonious collaboration. Good luck!