Pluralistic Dialoguing A theory of interdisciplinary teamworking
Main Article Content
Abstract
The aim of this emerging grounded theory study was to discover the main concerns of health professionals working in interdisciplinary teams, and to explain the processes team members used to continually resolve practice problems. Data collected from forty-four participants from seven disciplines in two teaching hospitals in New Zealand, included eighty hours each of interviewing and participant observation. In this paper the theory of pluralistic dialoguing is presented. It is argued that interdisciplinary work is possible when the team replaces the discipline focus with a client-focused care and thinks differently about service delivery. Thinking cooperatively requires individual team members to dialogue with colleagues, thereby deconstructing traditional ways of thinking and reconstructing new approaches to interdisciplinary practice. Although dialoguing was an informal process occurring within clinical spaces, as the effects of health reform and restructuring intensify teams also need to establish formal dialogue groups to facilitate team practice development and support team learning in the continually changing fast-paced practice context.
Downloads
Article Details
The Grounded Theory Review is an open access journal, which means that all content is freely available without charge to the user or his/her institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles in this journal without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This is in accordance with the international Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) definition of open access.
References
Ashley, J. A. (1976). Hospitals, paternalism, and the role of the nurse.New York:Teachers College Press.
Bishop, A. H., & Scudder, J. R. (Eds.). (1985). Caring, curing, coping: Nurse, physician, patient relationships. Alabama, AL: University of Alabama Press.
Bohm, D. (1994). Thought as a system.London: Routledge.
Bohm, D. (1996). On dialogue.London: Routledge.
Bohm, D., & Peat, F. D. (1987). Science, order and creativity.New York: Bantam.
Casto, R. M., & Julia, M. C. (1994). Interprofessional care and collaborative practice: Commission on interprofessional education and practice.Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Daniel, A. (1990). Medicine and the state: Professional autonomy and public accountability. Sydney, Australia: Allen & Unwin.
Davies, C. (1995). Gender and the professional predicament in nursing.Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
De Back, V. (1999). Interdisciplinary, collaborative team practice in managed care: The provider perspective. In E. L. Cohen & V. De Back (Eds.), The outcomes mandate: Case management in health care today (pp. 207-214). St Louis, MO: Mosby.
Dodge, C. (2000). Health care without borders: The interdisciplinary approach. Geriatric Times, 1(1). Retrieved 20/04/03 http://www.geriatrictimes.com/g000604html.
Drucker, P. F. (1989). The new realities.New York: Harper-Collins.
Drucker, P. F. (1995). Managing in a time of great change.New York:Truman Talley Books/Dutton.
Freire, P., & Shor, I. (1987). A pedagogy for liberation: Dialogues on transforming education. London: Macmillan.
Gabe, J., Kelleher, D., & Williams, G. (Eds.). (1994). Challenging medicine.London: Routledge.
Gillam, S. & Irvine, S. (2000). Collaboration: in the NHS. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 46(1), 5-7.
Glaser, B. G. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity: Advances in the methodology of grounded theory. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.
Glaser, B. G. (1992). Basics of grounded theory analysis: Emergence versus forcing. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.
Glaser, B. G. (1996). Origins of grounded theory.Edited transcript of proceedings of a grounded theory workshop conducted by Dr Barney Glaser in Christchurch, New Zealand.
Glaser, B. G. (1998). Doing grounded theory: Issues and discussions.Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.
Hewitt, J. P. (1997). Self and society: A symbolic interactionist social psychology (7th ed.). Toronto, Canada: Allyn & Bacon.
Hugman, R. (1991). Power in caring professions.London: Macmillan.
Hutchinson, S. A. (1993). Grounded theory: The method. In P. L. Munhall & C. O. Boyd
(Eds.), Nursing research: A qualitative perspective (2nd. ed., pp. 180-212). New York: National League for Nursing Press.
Lax W. & Galvin K. (2002). Reflections on a community action research project: Interprofessional issues and methodological problems. Journal of Clinical Nursing 11(3), 376-386.
Leathard, A. (Ed.). (1994). Going interprofessional: Working together for health and welfare. London: Routledge.
Leathard, A. (Ed.). (2003). Interprofessional collaboration: From policy to practice in health and social care.Hove, UK: Brunner-Routledge.
Long, K. A. (2001). A reality-oriented approach to interdisciplinary work. Journal of Professional Nursing, 17(6), 278-82.
Manion, J, Lorimer, W., & Leander W. J. (1996). Team-based health care organisations: Blueprint for success. Aspen, Gaithersburg, MA.
Masterton, A. (2002). Cross-boundary working: a macro-political analysis of the impact on professional roles. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 11, 331-339.
McCallin AM (1999a). Pluralistic dialogue: A grounded theory of interdisciplinary practice. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand.
McCallin AM (1999b). Pluralistic dialogue: A grounded theory of interdisciplinary practice. The Australian Journal of Rehabilitation Counselling, 5(2), 78-85.
McCallin AM (2001). Interdisciplinary practice—a matter of teamwork: An integrated literature review. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 10(4), 419-428.
McCallin, A. M. (2003). Grappling with the literature in a grounded theory study. Contemporary Nurse, 15(1-2), 61-69.
Millward, L. J. & Jeffries, N. (2001). The team survey: A tool for health care team development. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 35(2), 276-287.
Morgan, G. (1997). Images of organisation (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Nichol, L. (1994). Forward. In D. Bohm, Thought as a system (pp. ix-xv). London: Routledge.
O’Connell K.A. (2001). Research: Barriers to interdisciplinary research. Journal of Professional Nursing, 17(4), 153-154.
Ovretveit, J. (1993). Coordinating community care: Multidisciplinary teams and care management.Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
Petersen, A. R. (1994). In a critical condition: Health and power relations in Australia. Sydney, Australia: Allen & Unwin.
Schofield, R. F. & Amodeo, M. (1999). Interdisciplinary teams in health care and human services settings: Are they effective? Health and Social Work, 24(3), 210-219.
Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organisation. Sydney, Australia: Random House.
Soothill, K., Mackay, L., & Webb, C. (Eds.). (1995). Interprofessional relations in health care.London: Edward Arnold.
Sullivan, T. J. (1998). Collaboration: A health care imperative.New York: McGraw-Hill.
Willis, E. (1989). Medical dominance: The division of labour in Australian health care. (Rev. ed.). Sydney, Australia: Allen & Unwin.
Witz, A. (1992). Professions and patriarchy.London: Routledge.
Zohar, D. (1997). Rewiring the corporate brain: Using new science to rethink how we structure and lead organisations.San Francisco: Berret-Koehler.
Zohar, D., & Marshall, I. (1994). The quantum society: Mind, physics, and a new social vision.New York:William Morrow.