A Meta-design Framework to Support Multidisciplinary Teams’ Online Collaboration

Author(s):  
Li Zhu
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fernando Gonçalves ◽  
Daniel G. Streicker ◽  
Mauro Galetti

Nowadays, restoration project might lead to increased public engagement and enthusiasm for biodiversity and is receiving increased media attention in major newspapers, TED talks and the scientific literature. However, empirical research on restoration project is rare, fragmented, and geographically biased and long-term studies that monitor indirect and unexpected effects are needed to support future management decisions especially in the Neotropical area. Changes in animal population dynamics and community composition following species (re)introduction may have unanticipated consequences for a variety of downstream ecosystem processes, including food web structure, predator-prey systems and infectious disease transmission. Recently, an unprecedented study in Brazil showed changes in vampire bat feeding following a rewilding project and further transformed the land-bridge island into a high-risk area for rabies transmission. Due the lessons learned from ongoing project, we present a novel approach on how to anticipate, monitor, and mitigate the vampire bats and rabies in rewilding projects. We pinpoint a series of precautions and the need for long-term monitoring of vampire bats and rabies responses to rewilding projects and highlighted the importance of multidisciplinary teams of scientist and managers focusing on prevention educational program of rabies risk transmitted by bats. In addition, monitoring the relative abundance of vampire bats, considering reproductive control by sterilization and oral vaccines that autonomously transfer among bats would reduce the probability, size and duration of rabies outbreaks. The rewilding assessment framework presented here responds to calls to better integrate the science and practice of rewilding and also could be used for long-term studying of bat-transmitted pathogen in the Neotropical area as the region is considered a geographic hotspots of “missing bat zoonoses”.


Author(s):  
Bryan Howell ◽  
Curt Anderson ◽  
Nile Hatch ◽  
Chia-Chi TENG; ◽  
Neal Bangerter ◽  
...  

Over that last few decades there has been a significant rise in interest for design-led entrepreneurship and innovation. This has brought about the need to expand on the principles and methods of human-centred design by incorporating knowledge from multiple disciplines, such as management, business, and entrepreneurship studies. This expansion aids designers, engineers, and marketing practitioners who strive to create innovative, meaningful and relevant services, business models and experiences. More often than not, ventures operate under very limited resources, and practitioners are often required to fulfil several roles. The concept of ‘multidisciplinary teams’ widely spread in this sphere often bears little resonance in these contexts. Designers possess valuable competencies that can have a significant impact on the venture, especially driving user and context-centred strategy and processes for the introduction, legitimization and scaling-up stages. However, engaging with these areas of practice requires skills and capacities that overlap traditional disciplinary roles. In doing so, the boundaries between design and engineering, branding and communications, cultural and behavioural insight, marketing and management strategy are blurred. As educators in design innovation, how do we explore, define and balance interdisciplinary relationships between design, engineering, management, business and entrepreneurship theories, methods, language and models of education? The purpose of the entrepreneurship in design education track is to discuss methods, models, case studies, research, insights and unexpected knowledge in benefits and limitations of design entrepreneurship education. In particular, the three papers presented in this track demonstrate different approaches to entrepreneurship and design education.


Author(s):  
Linda MEIJER-WASSENAAR ◽  
Diny VAN EST

How can a supreme audit institution (SAI) use design thinking in auditing? SAIs audit the way taxpayers’ money is collected and spent. Adding design thinking to their activities is not to be taken lightly. SAIs independently check whether public organizations have done the right things in the right way, but the organizations might not be willing to act upon a SAI’s recommendations. Can you imagine the role of design in audits? In this paper we share our experiences of some design approaches in the work of one SAI: the Netherlands Court of Audit (NCA). Design thinking needs to be adapted (Dorst, 2015a) before it can be used by SAIs such as the NCA in order to reflect their independent, autonomous status. To dive deeper into design thinking, Buchanan’s design framework (2015) and different ways of reasoning (Dorst, 2015b) are used to explore how design thinking can be adapted for audits.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tayana Soukup ◽  
Ged Murtagh ◽  
Ben W Lamb ◽  
James Green ◽  
Nick Sevdalis

Background Multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) are a standard cancer care policy in many countries worldwide. Despite an increase in research in a recent decade on MDTs and their care planning meetings, the implementation of MDT-driven decision-making (fidelity) remains unstudied. We report a feasibility evaluation of a novel method for assessing cancer MDT decision-making fidelity. We used an observational protocol to assess (1) the degree to which MDTs adhere to the stages of group decision-making as per the ‘Orientation-Discussion-Decision-Implementation’ framework, and (2) the degree of multidisciplinarity underpinning individual case reviews in the meetings. MethodsThis is a prospective observational study. Breast, colorectal and gynaecological cancer MDTs in the Greater London and Derbyshire (United Kingdom) areas were video recorded over 12-weekly meetings encompassing 822 case reviews. Data were coded and analysed using frequency counts.Results Eight interaction formats during case reviews were identified. case reviews were not always multi-disciplinary: only 8% of overall reviews involved all five clinical disciplines present, and 38% included four of five. The majority of case reviews (i.e. 54%) took place between two (25%) or three (29%) disciplines only. Surgeons (83%) and oncologists (8%) most consistently engaged in all stages of decision-making. While all patients put forward for MDT review were actually reviewed, a small percentage of them (4%) either bypassed the orientation (case presentation) and went straight into discussing the patient, or they did not articulate the final decision to the entire team (8%). Conclusions Assessing fidelity of MDT decision-making at the point of their weekly meetings is feasible. We found that despite being a set policy, case reviews are not entirely MDT-driven. We discuss implications in relation to the current eco-political climate, and the quality and safety of care. Our findings are in line with the current national initiatives in the UK on streamlining MDT meetings, and could help decide how to re-organise them to be most efficient.


2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan Basham ◽  
Valerie E. Appleton ◽  
Cass Dykeman

American schools make rather wide use of teams. Multidisciplinary teams (MDTs), teacher assistance teams, student assistance teams, teaching teams, department teams, grade-level teams, and schoolwide teams are common. Further, teams are thought to be a key catalyst for the implementation of school reform. This article will first review the research on team building in educational settings. Then step-by-step instructions on how to conduct team building will be presented.


2020 ◽  
Vol 70 (suppl 1) ◽  
pp. bjgp20X711569
Author(s):  
Jessica Wyatt Muscat

BackgroundCommunity multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) represent a model of integrated care comprising health, social care, and the voluntary sector where members work collaboratively to coordinate care for those patients most at risk.AimThe evaluation will answer the question, ‘What are the enablers and what are the restrictors to the embedding of the case study MDT into the routine practice of the health and social care teams involved in the project?’MethodThe MDT was evaluated using a mixed-method approach with normalisation process theory as a methodological tool. Both quantitative and qualitative data were gathered through a questionnaire consisting of the NoMAD survey followed by free-form questions.ResultsThe concepts of the MDT were generally clear, and participants could see the potential benefits of the programme, though this was found to be lower in GPs. Certain professionals, particularly mental health and nursing professionals, found it difficult to integrate the MDT into normal working patterns because of a lack of resources. Participants also felt there was a lack of training for MDT working. A lack of awareness of evidence supporting the programme was shown particularly within management, GP, and nursing roles.ConclusionSpecific recommendations have been made in order to improve the MDT under evaluation. These include adjustments to IT systems and meeting documentation, continued education as to the purpose of the MDT, and the engagement of GPs to enable better buy-in. Recommendations were made to focus the agenda with specialist attendance when necessary, and to expand the MDT remit, particularly in mental health and geriatrics.


2018 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 81-96 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erboon Ekasingh ◽  
Roger Simnett ◽  
Wendy J. Green

ABSTRACT Greenhouse gas (GHG) assurance is increasingly used by companies as a means to increase stakeholder confidence in the quality of externally reported carbon emissions. The multidisciplinary nature of these engagements means that assurance is performed primarily by multidisciplinary teams. Prior research suggests the effectiveness of such teams could be affected by team composition and team processes. We employ a retrospective field study to examine the impact of educational diversity and team member elaboration on multidisciplinary GHG assurance team effectiveness. Results show that team processes such as sufficiency of elaboration on different team member perspectives significantly increases the perceived effectiveness of the teams. While educational diversity is not found to directly improve perceived team effectiveness, it is found to have a positive effect through increasing perceived sufficiency of elaboration. These findings have important implications for standard setters and audit firms undertaking GHG assurance engagements.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document