Indoor environments have a large impact on health and well-being, so it is important to understand what makes them healthy and sustainable. There is substantial knowledge on individual factors and their effects, though understanding how factors interact and what role occupants play in these interactions (both causative and receptive) is lacking. We aimed to: (i) explore interactions between factors and potential risks if these are not considered from holistic perspective; and (ii) identify components needed to advance research on indoor environments. The paper is based on collaboration between researchers from disciplines covering technical, behavioural, and medical perspectives. Outcomes were identified through literature reviews, discussions and workshops with invited experts and representatives from various stakeholder groups. Four themes emerged and were discussed with an emphasis on occupant health: (a) the bio-psycho-social aspects of health; (b) interaction between occupants, buildings and indoor environment; (c) climate change and its impact on indoor environment quality, thermal comfort and health; and (d) energy efficiency measures and indoor environment. To advance the relevant research, the indoor environment must be considered a dynamic and complex system with multiple interactions. This calls for a transdisciplinary and holistic approach and effective collaboration with various stakeholders.

An important aspect of higher education is to educate students who can manage complex relationships and solve complex problems. Teachers need to be able to evaluate course content with regard to complexity, as well as evaluate students’ ability to assimilate complex content and express it in the form of a learning outcome. One model for evaluating complexity is the Structure of Observed Learning Outcomes (SOLO) taxonomy. The aim of this analysis is to address the limitations of the SOLO taxonomy in detecting the more subtle differences of the learning outcomes and to clarify the concept of learning modes. This is done by analysing the SOLO taxonomy by means of the model of hierarchical complexity (MHC). The two models are compared by examining their respective theoretical background, the definitions and descriptions of the stages of each model, as well as through evaluating examples illustrating the SOLO levels using MHC. The two models can be viewed as compatible, with MHC also being able to put the SOLO taxonomy in an adult development context, thereby emphasising the importance of developing the students’ access to complex thinking.

The dialogue map is a new pedagogical framework that provides an overview of leader and leadership development methods and is designed to facilitate dialogues about how to promote leadership development. The aim was to create and test a dialogue map. This was accomplished through an iterative process using the literature, experts on leadership development, 45 interviews, 16 questionnaire responses and 6 workshops in three large organizations with managers, professionals and human resources experts. The dialogue map is designed as a table with five categories: developmental relationships, developmental assignments, feedback-intensive processes, education and self-development activities. Each category consists of individual leader development methods and collective leadership development methods. Thirty three methods are presented. The pilot test showed that the dialogue map increased awareness about available methods and enabled more deliberate choices regarding development activities. The dialogue map contributes by providing a systematic overview of collective leadership development, not only individual leadership development. Leadership development becomes more democratized because it focuses on activities that can be done in daily work, inside and outside work, at both an individual and collective level.

Although issues concerning indoor environments and their interaction with humans span many disciplines, such as aerosol technology, environmental psychology, health, and building physics, they are often studied separately. This study describes a research project with the transdisciplinary aim of bridging such disciplinary boundaries. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with the twelve project members to explore their understanding of transdisciplinarity regarding the conceptual as well as social aspects of collective learning and leadership and the measures taken to achieve this. The interviews were coded in NVivo (QSR International, Doncaster, Australia), which was used to identify themes concerning notions associated with transdisciplinarity, collective leadership, collective intelligence, and learning. A shared understanding of transdisciplinarity meant that the researchers transcended their disciplinary boundaries by moving into each other’s fields. This collective learning process was facilitated by introductory lectures on each other’s fields, contributing to collective leadership and a safe atmosphere. We argue that a transdisciplinary approach is appropriate in order to address indoor environment issues as well other complex problems, for which additional time and resources should be allocated for individual and collective learning processes.