How to Write an Authorship Agreement: A Template for Research Collaborations

By Dr. Zubair Khalid, DVM, MS, PhD · 2026-08-28

Quick Answer

• Draft an authorship agreement before data collection starts to define who qualifies as an author and what each person must contribute.
• Use the template clauses below to specify author order, contribution categories, and a dispute resolution process that all team members sign.
• An authorship agreement cannot override journal policies or institutional research integrity rules, so review those requirements before finalizing the document.

At a Glance

Why Research Teams Need a Written Authorship Agreement

Research collaborations bring together people with different skills, expectations, and career pressures. When authorship decisions happen informally or at the end of a project, disputes become more likely. A written authorship agreement creates a shared reference point that all team members can consult when questions arise about credit, responsibility, and order of names.

The Committee on Publication Ethics Core Practices describe authorship as a matter that journals and researchers must handle with transparency and fairness. Journals expect that everyone listed as an author has made a meaningful contribution and that all who contributed meaningfully are included. An authorship agreement helps your team meet those expectations by making the criteria explicit before the work is done.

The agreement also protects junior researchers. Students and early-career staff often worry that their contributions will be overlooked when a senior investigator finalizes the manuscript. A written document that records expected contributions and author order gives every team member a clear basis for raising concerns early instead of after submission.

Core Principles of Defensible Authorship

Substantial Contribution as the Baseline

The most widely accepted standard for authorship is that a person must have made a substantial intellectual contribution to the work. This standard appears in the guidance provided by research methods references from the National Library of Medicine, which describe the expectations for responsible conduct of research.

Substantial contribution typically includes activities such as designing the study, acquiring data, analyzing results, or drafting and revising the manuscript. Activities that do not qualify include providing funding, supplying materials, supervising a lab, or editing grammar without intellectual input. Your agreement should list which activities count as substantial for your specific project.

Transparency in Author Order

Author order signals the relative contribution of each team member in most fields. The first author position usually indicates the person who did the most intellectual and practical work. The last author position often indicates the senior investigator who supervised the project. Middle author positions reflect varying levels of contribution.

Your agreement should state how the team will determine order and what changes might occur. For example, you might agree that the first author will be the person who drafts the full manuscript and responds to reviewer comments. You might agree that the senior investigator will be the last author. You should also specify what happens if someone's contribution changes during the project.

Accountability for the Final Work

Authorship carries responsibility. Every author must be able to defend the work publicly and must have access to the data needed to verify the findings. The NIH Grants and Funding policy context emphasizes that funded research must be conducted with integrity and that investigators are accountable for their work.

Your agreement should state that all authors will review the final manuscript before submission and will agree to be named as authors. This prevents situations where someone is listed without their knowledge or where an author refuses to take responsibility for the content.

Drafting the Authorship Agreement Template

Agreement Header and Project Identification

Start the agreement with basic identifying information. Include the project title, the funding source if applicable, the institutional affiliation of each team member, and the date the agreement is signed. This information makes the document easy to reference later and clarifies which project the agreement covers.

Include a section for the target journal or type of publication if known. If the team plans to publish in multiple venues, state that the agreement applies to all manuscripts arising from the project. This prevents confusion when the same data set produces several papers.

Authorship Criteria Clause

Write a clause that defines who qualifies as an author. Use the substantial contribution standard as the baseline and then list specific activities that count for your project. Common qualifying activities include:

• Conception or design of the study
• Acquisition of data through experiments, surveys, or fieldwork
• Analysis and interpretation of results
• Drafting the manuscript or revising it critically for important intellectual content

List activities that do not qualify for authorship. These typically include:

• Securing funding alone
• Providing technical help or routine data collection without intellectual input
• Supplying materials or samples
• Supervising the research group without contributing to the specific project

The EQUATOR Network provides reporting guidelines that help teams describe their methods transparently. Your authorship agreement can reference the relevant reporting guideline for your study type so that the team agrees on what methodological details must be documented.

Author Order Clause

State the method for determining author order. You can use a contribution-based approach where the team assigns relative weight to different activities. You can also use a role-based approach where the first author is the person who leads the writing and the last author is the senior investigator.

Include a provision for adjusting order as the project evolves. For example, if a team member who was expected to analyze data leaves the project, the agreement should state that their authorship status will be reviewed. If a new person takes over a substantial portion of the work, the team should discuss whether that person qualifies as an author.

Contribution Documentation Clause

Require each team member to keep a record of their contributions. This record can be a simple spreadsheet that lists dates, activities, and the amount of time spent. The record serves as evidence if a dispute arises about who did what.

The NIH Data Management and Sharing Policy describes expectations for managing research data. Your contribution records should align with your data management plan so that the team knows who generated which data and who has access to it.

Dispute Resolution Clause

Write a clause that describes how the team will handle disagreements. Start with an informal step where the disputing parties meet to discuss the issue. If that fails, name a neutral third party who can mediate. This person might be a department chair, a research integrity officer, or an ombudsperson at your institution.

State that unresolved disputes will be referred to the institutional research integrity office. The Committee on Publication Ethics Core Practices describe how journals and institutions handle allegations of authorship misconduct. Your agreement should align with those expectations so that the team knows what will happen if a dispute cannot be resolved internally.

Journal Policy Review Clause

Require the team to review the target journal's authorship policy before submission. Many journals follow the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors criteria, but some have additional requirements. The EQUATOR Network can help you identify the reporting guidelines that apply to your study design.

Your agreement should state that the team will comply with the journal's requirements even if those requirements differ from the agreement. This clause protects the team from submitting a manuscript that the journal rejects for authorship reasons.

Data Access and Verification Clause

State that all authors will have access to the data needed to verify the findings. This access should continue after publication so that authors can respond to questions about the work. The NIH Data Management and Sharing Policy describes expectations for data preservation and access that apply to NIH-funded research.

Include a statement about data ownership. If the data belong to the institution or the funder, the agreement should say so. If individual team members own portions of the data, the agreement should describe how those portions will be shared for the purpose of manuscript preparation.

Acknowledgment and Non-Author Contributor Clause

Describe how the team will handle people who contribute to the project but do not qualify as authors. These people should be acknowledged in the manuscript or in the methods section. Examples include technical staff who ran routine assays, statisticians who provided consultation but did not analyze the data, and clinicians who referred patients.

Your agreement should state that non-author contributors will be acknowledged and that the team will obtain their permission before naming them. This prevents situations where someone is acknowledged without their consent.

Implementing the Agreement in Your Research Workflow

Step 1: Schedule the Agreement Meeting

Hold a meeting at project initiation to discuss authorship. Invite everyone who will be involved in the project, including students, technicians, and collaborators from other institutions. The meeting should occur before data collection begins so that everyone understands the expectations from the start.

Step 2: Distribute the Draft Agreement

Send the draft agreement to all team members before the meeting. Ask each person to review the authorship criteria and author order clauses and to come prepared with questions. This review period gives people time to think about their expected contributions and to raise concerns in a low-pressure setting.

Step 3: Discuss and Revise Together

During the meeting, walk through each clause of the agreement. Ask each team member to describe their expected contribution and to confirm that they understand the authorship criteria. Revise the agreement as needed to reflect the team's specific circumstances.

Step 4: Sign and Distribute the Final Version

After the meeting, finalize the agreement and have all team members sign it. Distribute signed copies to everyone and store the original in the project file. The ORCID for Researchers guidance describes how researchers can maintain records of their work, and your signed agreement should be part of that record.

Step 5: Review at Major Milestones

Schedule a review of the agreement at each major project milestone. These milestones might include completion of data collection, completion of analysis, and preparation of the first manuscript draft. At each review, confirm that the author order still reflects the actual contributions and revise the agreement if needed.

Step 6: Revisit Before Submission

Before submitting any manuscript, review the agreement one final time. Confirm that all listed authors have seen and approved the manuscript and that no one who qualifies as an author has been omitted. This final review is the last chance to correct problems before the manuscript enters the publication process.

Records and Measurements for Authorship Management

Contribution Tracking Spreadsheet

Create a spreadsheet that records each team member's contributions. Include columns for the date, the activity performed, the amount of time spent, and the person who performed the activity. Update the spreadsheet at least monthly and review it at each milestone meeting.

Agreement Version History

Keep a version history of the authorship agreement. Each time the team revises the agreement, record the date, the reason for the revision, and the names of the people who approved the change. This history provides evidence that the team followed its own process if a dispute arises later.

Manuscript Approval Records

Maintain a record of manuscript approval for each submission. This record should include the date each author reviewed the manuscript and their confirmation that they approve being named as an author. The Committee on Publication Ethics Core Practices describe the expectation that all authors approve the final version of a manuscript.

Data Access Log

Keep a log of who accessed the project data and when. This log supports the data access clause of your agreement and helps the team respond to questions about data integrity. The NIH Data Management and Sharing Policy describes expectations for data access that apply to NIH-funded projects.

Common Failure Patterns in Authorship Agreements

Waiting Until Submission to Discuss Authorship

Teams that postpone authorship discussions until the manuscript is ready often face disputes. People who expected to be authors may be disappointed, and people who did the work may be overlooked. An authorship agreement signed at project initiation prevents this failure by establishing expectations early.

Using Vague Contribution Language

Agreements that say authors must have made "significant contributions" without defining what that means invite disagreement. One person may believe that collecting data qualifies, while another may believe that only analysis and writing count. Your agreement should list specific activities that qualify and specific activities that do not.

Ignoring Institutional and Journal Policies

An authorship agreement cannot override the policies of your institution or the target journal. If your agreement says someone is an author but the journal's criteria say they are not, the journal will reject the manuscript or require changes. Review the relevant policies before finalizing your agreement.

Failing to Update the Agreement

Research projects change. People leave, new people join, and the scope of work shifts. An agreement that is never updated becomes outdated and loses its value as a reference point. Schedule regular reviews and update the agreement whenever the team composition or project scope changes.

Excluding Junior Team Members from the Discussion

Students and technicians are often left out of authorship discussions because they are not perceived as decision makers. This exclusion creates resentment and can lead to disputes when the manuscript is submitted. Include all team members in the agreement meeting and give them a genuine voice in the discussion.

Limitations of Authorship Agreements

Agreements Cannot Prevent All Disputes

An authorship agreement reduces the likelihood of disputes but does not eliminate them. People may disagree about whether a contribution was substantial, or they may change their minds about the author order as the project evolves. The dispute resolution clause in your agreement provides a process for handling these disagreements.

Journal Policies Take Precedence

If your agreement conflicts with the target journal's authorship policy, the journal policy wins. Journals have the right to reject manuscripts that do not meet their criteria. Your agreement should include a clause that requires the team to comply with journal policies.

Institutional Rules May Apply

Your institution may have its own authorship policy that applies to all research conducted under its auspices. These policies may define authorship criteria, require specific disclosures, or mandate training in responsible conduct of research. Review your institution's policy before finalizing your agreement.

Agreements Do Not Replace Good Communication

A written agreement is a tool, not a substitute for ongoing communication. Teams that stop talking about authorship after signing the agreement may still encounter problems when circumstances change. Regular milestone reviews keep the agreement current and give team members a forum for raising concerns.

Professional Escalation Criteria

When To Involve Your Research Integrity Office

Escalate an authorship dispute to your institutional research integrity office when the informal resolution process fails. You should also escalate if you believe that someone has been falsely listed as an author, that a qualified author has been omitted, or that the agreement has been violated in a way that affects the integrity of the research record.

When To Contact the Journal

Contact the journal editor if a dispute arises after submission and cannot be resolved internally. The Committee on Publication Ethics Core Practices describe how journals handle authorship disputes, including the expectation that institutions will investigate and respond. The journal may delay publication while the dispute is resolved.

When To Consult a Funder

If the research is funded by an agency such as the NIH, consult the funder's policy if the dispute affects the conduct or reporting of the funded work. The NIH Grants and Funding pages describe the expectations for responsible conduct of research that apply to funded investigators.

Safety and Regulatory Context for Authorship Agreements

Research Integrity as a Professional Obligation

Authorship decisions are part of the responsible conduct of research. The National Library of Medicine research methods references describe the ethical expectations that apply to researchers, including honest reporting of contributions and accountability for published work. Your authorship agreement supports these obligations by making the criteria explicit.

Data Management Requirements

The NIH Data Management and Sharing Policy describes expectations for data management and sharing that apply to NIH-funded research. Your authorship agreement should align with your data management plan so that the team knows who owns the data, who can access it, and how it will be preserved.

Researcher Identity and Records

The ORCID for Researchers guidance describes how researchers can maintain a persistent identifier that links their work across publications and projects. Your authorship agreement should include a clause that requires each author to provide their ORCID identifier so that the team can accurately attribute contributions.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the difference between an author and a contributor?

An author has made a substantial intellectual contribution to the work and takes responsibility for the content. A contributor has helped with the project but does not meet the authorship threshold. Contributors are typically acknowledged in the manuscript instead of listed as authors.

When should the authorship agreement be signed?

The agreement should be signed at project initiation before data collection begins. This timing ensures that everyone understands the expectations from the start and that no one is surprised by authorship decisions later.

Can the author order change after the agreement is signed?

Yes, the agreement should include a provision for adjusting author order as the project evolves. If someone's contribution changes substantially, the team should review the order and revise the agreement if needed.

What should the team do if a member leaves the project?

The team should review the departing member's contributions and decide whether they still qualify as an author. If they have made a substantial intellectual contribution, they should remain an author. If their contribution was minor, they may be acknowledged instead.

How should the team handle a dispute about authorship?

Follow the dispute resolution clause in the agreement. Start with an informal meeting between the disputing parties, then involve a neutral mediator if needed. If the dispute cannot be resolved internally, escalate to the institutional research integrity office.

Does the agreement need to be reviewed by a lawyer?

Most authorship agreements do not require legal review. They are professional documents that describe the team's expectations and process. However, if the agreement involves intellectual property rights or contractual obligations with a funder, legal review may be appropriate.

What happens if the journal has different authorship criteria?

The journal's criteria take precedence. Your agreement should include a clause that requires the team to comply with the target journal's authorship policy. If the journal's criteria differ from the agreement, the team should revise the agreement to align with the journal.

How should non-author contributors be acknowledged?

List non-author contributors in the acknowledgments section of the manuscript with their permission. Your agreement should state that the team will identify non-author contributors and obtain their consent before naming them.

Using the Evidence

Related Articles

• Research Authorship: Discussing Credit, Contributions, and Order Before Submission
• Research Collaboration Agreements: Aligning Roles, Data, and Authorship Early
• What Is a Data Dictionary? A Practical Guide for Research Teams
• How to Write an Experiment Report: A Practical Template
• How to Write Expected Results in a Research Proposal: A Practical Guide

References and Further Reading

• Research Methods Resources. National Library of Medicine.
• EQUATOR Network. EQUATOR Network.
• Core Practices. Committee on Publication Ethics.
• NIH Grants and Funding. National Institutes of Health.
• ORCID for Researchers. ORCID.
• Data Management and Sharing Policy. National Institutes of Health.
• NCBI Literature Resources. National Center for Biotechnology Information.
• PubMed. National Library of Medicine.

This article is educational and does not replace institutional policy, professional advice, or applicable safety and regulatory requirements.