571
Views
23
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Articles

Multidisciplinary collaboration as a loosely coupled system: Integrating and blocking professional boundaries with objects

Pages 19-30 | Published online: 10 Dec 2009

References

  • Argyris, C., Schön, D. A. (1996). Organizational learning II. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
  • Callon, M. (1986). Some elements of a sociology of translation: Domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St Brieuc Bay. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
  • Carlile, P. R. (2002). A pragmatic view of knowledge and boundaries: Boundary objects in new product development. Organization Science, 13(4), 442–455.
  • Corwin, R. G. (1981). Patterns of organizational control and teacher militancy: Theoretical continuities in the idea of loose coupling. In A. C. Kerckhoff (Ed.), Research in the sociology of education and socialization ( pp. 263–293). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
  • D'Amour, D., Ferrada-Videla, M., San Martin Rodriguez, L., Beaulieu, M.-D. (2005). The conceptual basis for interprofessional collaboration: Core concepts and theoretical frameworks. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 19, 116–131.
  • Gamoran, A., Dreeben, R. (1986). Coupling and control in educational organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 31(4), 612–632.
  • Glassman, R. B. (1973). Persistence and loose coupling in living systems. Behavioral Science, 18, 83–98.
  • Gundlach, M., Zivnuska, S., Stoner, J. (2006). Understanding the relationship between individualism-collectivism and team performance through an integration of social identity theory and the social relations model. Human Relations, 59(12), 1603–1632.
  • Hislop, D. (2005). Knowledge management in organizations. New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Koff, N. A., Defriese, A. M., Witzke, D. B. (1994). Loosely coupled systems as a conceptual framework for interdisciplinary training. Educational Gerontology, 20, 1–14.
  • Kvale, S. (1996). An introduction to qualitative research interviewing. London: Sage Publications, Inc.
  • Latour, B. (1987). Science in action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  • Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Law, J., Singleton, V. (2005). Object lessons. Organization, 12(3), 331–355.
  • Miller, J. G. (1978). Living systems. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  • Mol, A. (2002). The body multiple: Ontology in medical practice. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
  • Nieman, A. (2002). Boundary negotiations in popular culture: ‘Intermediate dependent entities’ and the ideological context of science policy. Unpublished Preprint. Bath Spa University College.
  • Schuhmann, R. (2005). The enterprise of public administration: Scholarship as a loosely coupled system. Public Administration and Management: An Interactive Journal, 9(4), 45–67.
  • Shaw, M., Heyman, B., Reynolds, L., Davies, J., Godun, P. (2007). Multidisciplinary teamwork in a UK regional secure mental health unit a matter for negotiation. Social Theory & Health, 5, 356–377.
  • Sjøvold, E. (2006). Teamet - utvikling, effektivitet og endring i grupper. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.
  • Star, S. L., Griesemer, J. R. (1989). Institutional ecology, ‘translations’ and boundary objects: Amateurs and professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907–39. Social Studies of Science, 19(3), 387–420.
  • Thompson, J. D. (1967). Organizations in action. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  • Timmermans, S., Berg, M. (2003). The gold standard – the challenge of evidence-based medicine and standardization in health care. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
  • Tjora, A. (2006). Writing small discoveries: An exploration of fresh observers' observations. Qualitative Research, 6(4), 429–451.
  • Weick, K. E. (2001a). Management of organizational change among loosely coupled elements. In K. E. Weick (Ed.), Making sense of the organization ( pp. 380–404). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
  • Weick, K. E. (2001b). Sources of order in underorganized systems: Themes in recent organizational theory. In K. E. Weick (Ed.), Making sense of the organization ( pp. 33–56). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.