From struggles to resource gains in interprofessional service networks: Key findings from a multiple case study

ABSTRACT

In interprofessional service networks, employees cross professional boundaries to collaborate with colleagues and clients with expertise and values different from their own. It can be a struggle to adopt shared work practices and deal with “multivoicedness.” At the same time, networks allow members to engage in meaningful service provision, gain a broader understanding of the service provided, and obtain social support. Intertwined network struggles and resource gains have received limited attention in the interprofessional care literature to date. The aim of the study was to investigate the learning potential of the co-existing struggles and resource gains. This article reports findings from two interprofessional networks. Interviews were conducted with 19 employees and thematically analysed. Three types of struggles and six types of resource gains of networking were identified. The struggles relate, first, to the assumptions of networking following similar practices to those in a home organisation; second, to the challenges of dealing with the multivoicedness of networking; and, third, to the experienced gap between the networking ideals and the reality of cooperation. At the same time, the network members experience gains in emotional resources (e.g., stronger sense of meaningfulness at work), cognitive resources (e.g., understanding the customer needs from alternative perspectives), and social resources (e.g., being able to rely on other professionals’ competence). Learning potential emerged from the dynamics between coexisting struggles and resource gains.

KEYWORDS:

• Interprofessional learning
• interprofessional networks
• learning potential
• resource gains
• services for divorcing families
• struggles
• supervised probationary freedom

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the editors and the anonymous reviewers of the journal for their valuable comments and suggestions to improve the quality of the article. The authors also express their sincere thanks to the project coordinator, Dr. Laura Seppänen, for cooperation and Dr. Eija Korpelainen for her contribution to the data gathering and analysis. Two case organisations are gratefully acknowledged for their cooperation in data collection and for interesting discussions on the findings.

Declaration of interest

The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of this article.

Funding

The data originate from the project funded by the Finnish Funding Agency for Innovation (grant number 40182/11), the Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, the Aalto University School of Science, and the University of Helsinki. The article was finalised with the support by School of Education at the University of Tampere (present affiliation of the first author).

Additional information

Funding

The data originate from the project funded by the Finnish Funding Agency for Innovation (grant number 40182/11), the Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, the Aalto University School of Science, and the University of Helsinki. The article was finalised with the support by School of Education at the University of Tampere (present affiliation of the first author).