Most memoranda of understanding are warm about intent and silent about the two clauses that later cause every dispute: who owns the data, and how authorship is decided.
Everything else — budgets, timelines, scope — gets renegotiated as projects evolve. Those two do not renegotiate well once results exist.
The two clauses that matter most
- Data ownership, access and reuse rights, stated explicitly for each party.
- Authorship: the criteria, who decides, and what happens if contributions change.
- Both must be settled before data collection starts, not before publication.
- Vague wording here favours whichever party holds more institutional power.
Structure of a workable agreement
- Scope of work by party, with named responsibilities.
- Budget lines and who pays for what, including overheads and unforeseen costs.
- Timeline with milestones and what happens if they slip.
- Ethics approvals required on each side.
- Publication rights and embargo terms.
- Exit terms if either side withdraws.
Institutional approvals
- Vietnamese institutions may require ministry-level approval for some international agreements.
- Timelines for approval are usually longer than either side estimates.
- Ask your partner what approvals they need and how long they historically take.
- Start the paperwork before the science is finalised.
Funding structures
- Bilateral programmes exist and often require a partner on each side from the outset.
- Check whether funds can flow across borders under both funders' rules.
- Overhead rates differ significantly and are frequently missed in budgeting.
- Agree who administers shared funds and how spending is reported.
Common failure points
- Agreement signed at institutional level with no working-level detail.
- The person who negotiated it moves on and nothing is documented.
- Budget assumes costs from one country's context.
- No provision for what happens if results are commercially sensitive.
One thing worth remembering
Settle data ownership and authorship before data collection begins.
Once results exist, the same conversation carries the weight of what those results are worth — and the party with less institutional power almost never raises it at that point, which is exactly why it must be settled while the question is still abstract.
Câu hỏi thường gặp
Which clauses matter most in a collaboration agreement?
Data ownership with access and reuse rights, and authorship criteria including who decides — both settled before data collection starts rather than before publication.
What should a workable agreement contain?
Scope of work by party with named responsibilities, budget lines and who pays what including overheads, timeline with milestones, ethics approvals on each side, publication rights, and exit terms.
What about institutional approvals?
Vietnamese institutions may require ministry-level approval for some international agreements, timelines are usually longer than estimated, so ask what approvals are needed and start paperwork early.
What should you check about funding?
Whether funds can flow across borders under both funders' rules, that overhead rates differ significantly, and who administers shared funds and reports spending.
Why settle authorship while the question is still abstract?
Because once results exist the conversation carries the weight of what those results are worth, and the party with less institutional power almost never raises it at that point.
