A Model for Interdisciplinary Collaboration

Abstract

Social workers have worked with colleagues from other disciplines since the early days of the profession; yet, they were without clear models to guide this interdisciplinary work. The author uses multidisciplinary theoretical literature and conceptual and research pieces from social work literature to support the development of such a model. First, current trends relevant to interdisciplinary practice are noted to emphasize its importance. The article describes a two-part model. Part one of the model consists of five components that constitute interdisciplinary collaboration between social workers and other professionals: interdependence, newly created professional activities, flexibility, collective ownership of goals, and reflection on process. Part two of the model consists of four influences on collaboration: professional role, structural characteristics, personal characteristics and a history of collaboration. Implications for social work practice are discussed.

Effectiveness of a multidisciplinary facial function clinic

“…Review of the published literature finds more or less equivocal remarks on the evidence for effectiveness and utility of multidisciplinary approaches. [20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30] One of the reasons why there is no direct evidence regarding the success of teamwork in healthcare is the [31][32][33][34][35][36] Another reason would be the technical difficulty in conducting analyses of multidisciplinary approaches. Important factors that hinder such efforts include poor definition of team types and theoretic concepts, variability of populations, and healthcare settings support and infrastructure.…”

Observed successful collaboration in social work practice: coherent triads in Swedish juvenile care

“…Research is not enough, however, to support the hypothesis of collaboration's necessarily improving the client's situation or reducing work overlap (Beresford 2000;Bronstein 2003;Graham and Barter 1999;Hesjedal, Hetland, and Iversen 2015;Lopez et al 1998;Sundqvist et al 2015;Weinstein, Whittington and Leiba 2003;Anell and Mattisson 2009, 57-5, 92, 109-12;Johansson 2011, 74-5). According to Reitan (1997Reitan ( , 1998, a structural unwillingness to collaborate with other organizations exists.…”

“…Collaboration is an important aspect of social work, with previous collaborative research showing that conflicts are common between collaborating actors and organizations and authorities that are supposed to cooperate (Beresford 2000;Bronstein 2003;Graham and Barter 1999;Hesjedal, Hetland, and Iversen 2015;Lopez et al 1998;Sundqvist et al 2015;Weinstein, Whittington and Leiba 2003;Basic 2012Basic , 2013Basic , 2015aBasic , 2015b. 1 Institutional Care (abbreviated NBIC), or Statens institutionsstyrelse (abbreviated SiS) 2 , and the social services in Sweden.…”

“…An example of responsibilities that the coordinator was required to monitor was the arrangement of school and leisure activities after a young person's stay in an institution Basic 2012Basic , 2013Basic , 2015aBasic , 2015bBasic, Thelander Previous research regarding collaboration between organizations and administrative authorities demonstrates the normalness of conflicts. Despite that, collaborations are considered beneficial, and trying to collaborate across the borders of organizations is a cooccurrence phenomenon in today's society (Beresford 2000;Bronstein 2003;Graham and Barter 1999;Hesjedal, Hetland, and Iversen 2015;Lopez et al 1998;Sundqvist et al 2015;Weinstein, Whittington and Leiba 2003;Anell and Mattisson 2009;Axelsson and Bihari Axelsson 2007;Basic 2012Basic , 2013Basic , 2015aBasic , 2015b.…”

Teamwork Within Mental Health Services in Ireland: Resource Paper

“…23 If many people in the team are involved in a decision making process, the wider ownership leads to a greater perceived legitimacy of decisions and increased support for their implementation. 117 However, it is also important to make sure that, in common with the principles described earlier regarding team size (see Section 4.3.2), there are the minimum number of people involved to achieve an effective outcome. There needs to be some discretion for 'practitioner-only' decisions, otherwise the team is likely to become mired in protracted meetings around minutiae.…”