The discursive construction of decision making in interdisciplinary teams

2010 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 170-182 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nikolaj Kure
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 88 ◽  
Author(s):  
Catherine Pons Lelardeux ◽  
Michel Galaup ◽  
David Panzoli ◽  
Pierre Lagarrigue ◽  
Jean-Pierre Jessel

In recent years, there has been an increasing interest for collaborative training in risk management. One of the critical point is to create educational and entirely controlled training environments that support industrial companies (in aviation, healthcare, nuclear…) or hospitals to train (future or not) professionals. The aim is to improve their teamwork performance making them understand the importance applying or adjusting safety recommendations. In this article, we present a method to design multi-player educational scenario for risk management in a socio-technical and dynamic context. The socio-technical situations focused in this article involve non-technical skills such as teamwork, communication, leadership, decision-making and situation awareness. The method presented here has been used to design as well regular situations as well as critical situations in which deficiencies already exist or mistakes can be freely made and fixed by the team in a controlled digital environment.


2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e23015-e23015
Author(s):  
Barbara Oureilidis-DeVivo

e23015 Background: Interdisciplinary teams are an indispensable characteristic of modern organizations, particularly in healthcare settings that require specialists to work together to solve multifaceted patient care problems. Multidisciplinary tumor boards (TBs) aim to coordinate multidisciplinary perspectives to help the oncology team devise the best treatment program for the patient. Yet, while this is their purpose, studies have found that TBs do not always achieve that goal effectively. Why are some tumor board (TB) teams more effective than others? This study shed light on key characteristics found among highly effective TBs. It provides a theoretical explanation of their organizational behaviors and structures and their effect on cancer treatment decision-making. The research is grounded in organizational behavior theories that have historical prominence in group decision-making, social hierarchy, and interdisciplinary collaboration, and are used to explain the phenomenon under investigation best. Methods: Qualitative research was used in the study. Data from 44 different TB observations and 18 interviews were gathered over four years at seven research hospitals in the United States and United Kingdom. The data were then coded, analyzed and synthesized with organizational behavior theory to explain the social phenomena under investigation. Results: The study revealed that certain TBs practice strong collaboration displaying high levels of partnership, cooperation, equality, and interdependency, which was incorporated explicitly into their meeting systems to achieve their common goal. Team-based characteristics such as members’ consistent shared preferences and identity, coordinated interactions, a collective learning process, and shared power and partnership are key markers found within these teams that positively influenced treatment decision-making processes and outcomes, earmarking best practices in TB groups. Conclusions: Organizational theory that suggests that for a collaborative process to be effective, team-based mechanisms need to be adopted in which each member respects, trusts, and acknowledges the skills and expertise of other disciplines in the organization, shares team values, decision-making processes, responsibilities, and planning, relies mutually upon other team members, and works outside normal professional boundaries openly and willingly. In an egalitarian structure like that of the TBs reviewed in this study, where preferences and identities are consistent and groups are collaborative, treatment decisions are less biased and incorporate multidisciplinary perspectives. Thus, this study suggests that by possessing both team- and task-based characteristics and practices, TBs engage in best practices, and thereby optimize their functionality.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Corinna Möhrlen ◽  
Ricardo Bessa ◽  
Gregor Giebel

<p>One key strategy to fight climate change worldwide is to invest in renewable energy sources (RES) and increase their integration into the power system. In recent years, we observed how extreme weather conditions, together with growing penetration levels of RES, are increasingly affecting the power system operation and planning, as well as electricity markets. The inherent uncertainty of such events and the associated uncertainty in the power generation from RES can no longer be ignored by the energy industry. In other words, current deterministic methods have reached their limit due to the inherent inability to model and convey forecast uncertainties.</p><p>Probabilistic information and forecasts have been shown to improve decision-making in many weather-related processes. By dealing with uncertainties, the end-user takes responsibility, but also gets the possibility to harvest the benefits of knowing and being able to calculate what is at stake. Last but not least, knowing the uncertainty of an event in advance opens the possibility to act upon such uncertainty rather than acting on the event itself and thereby mitigating costly side effects or being able to secure safety.</p><p>In 2020, the IEA Wind Task 36 “Wind Energy Forecasting” has for this reason started an initiative “Probabilistic Forecasting Games and Experiments” in collaboration with the Max-Planck Institute for Human Development. The main goal of this initiative is to empirically investigate the psychological barriers to the adoption of probabilistic forecasts and to enable stakeholders to understand and explore their benefit and use.  With the initiative, the IEA Wind Task 36 wants to establish interdisciplinary teams to promote testing and playing with forecast games and experiments to give end-users a “feel” of where the hidden possibilities are to improve decisions and developers a platform to:</p><ul><li>Discuss</li> <li>Educate</li> <li>Inspire</li> </ul><p>the energy and meteorology community for the development, deployment and communication of uncertainties of weather and energy forecasts to end-users for better decision making.</p><p>The task leaders have started to setup a platform with a list of forecasting games and experiments  developed by the task, in cooperation or by cooperating institutions, researchers or companies as well as invite others outside the tasks community to share links or data to games and experiments.</p><p>The initiative will be presented and the first experience with the task’s own games and experiments briefly discussed. The many open questions and considerations when looking forward towards the establishment of training and educational tools for probabilistic forecasts will be formulated and posed to the meteorological and psychological/behaviorism research community to enhance the collaboration and establish a stronger link for this interdiciplinary work. </p>


Author(s):  
Mirjam A. G. Sprangers ◽  
◽  
Tolulope Sajobi ◽  
Antoine Vanier ◽  
Nancy E. Mayo ◽  
...  

Abstract Purpose The Working Group undertook a critical, comprehensive synthesis of the response shift work to date. We aimed to (1) describe the rationale for this initiative; (2) outline how the Working Group operated; (3) summarize the papers that comprise this initiative; and (4) discuss the way forward. Methods Four interdisciplinary teams, consisting of response shift experts, external experts, and new investigators, prepared papers on (1) definitions and theoretical underpinnings, (2) operationalizations and response shift methods, (3) implications for healthcare decision-making, and (4) on the published magnitudes of response shift effects. Draft documents were discussed during a two-day meeting. Papers were reviewed by all members. Results Vanier and colleagues revised the formal definition and theory of response shift, and applied these in an amended, explanatory model of response shift. Sébille and colleagues conducted a critical examination of eleven response shift methods and concluded that for each method extra steps are required to make the response shift interpretation plausible. Sawatzky and colleagues created a framework for considering the impact of response shift on healthcare decision-making at the level of the individual patient (micro), the organization (meso), and policy (macro). Sajobi and colleagues are conducting a meta-analysis of published response shift effects. Preliminary findings indicate that the mean effect sizes are often small and variable across studies that measure different outcomes and use different methods. Conclusion Future response shift research will benefit from collaboration among diverse people, formulating alternative hypotheses of response shift, and conducting the most conclusive studies aimed at testing these (falsification).


Author(s):  
Ruth Waitzberg ◽  
Nora Gottlieb ◽  
Wilm Quentin ◽  
Reinhard Busse ◽  
Dan Greenberg

Background: Hospital professionals are "dual agents" who may face dilemmas between their commitment to patients’ clinical needs and hospitals’ financial sustainability. This study examines whether and how hospital professionals balance or reconcile clinical and economic considerations in their decision-making in two countries with activity-based payment systems. Methods: We conducted 46 semi-structured interviews with hospital managers, chief physicians and practicing physicians in five German and five Israeli hospitals in 2018/2019. We used thematic analysis to identify common topics and patterns of meaning. Results: Hospital professionals report many situations in which activity-based payment incentivizes proper treatment, and clinical and economic considerations are aligned. This is the case when efficiency can be improved, eg, by curbing unnecessary expenditures or specializing in certain procedures. When considerations are misaligned, hospital professionals have developed a range of strategies that may contribute to balancing competing considerations. These include ‘reshaping management,’ such as better planning of the entire course of treatment and improvement of the coding; and ‘reframing decision-making,’ which involves working with averages and developing tool-kits for decision-making. Conclusion: Misalignment of economic and clinical considerations does not necessarily have negative implications, if professionals manage to balance and reconcile them. Context is important in determining if considerations can be reconciled or not. Reconciling strategies are fragile and can be easily disrupted depending on context. Creating tool-kits for better decision-making, planning the treatment course in advance, working with averages, and having interdisciplinary teams to think together about ways to improve efficiency can help mitigate dilemmas of hospital professionals.


2020 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 16340
Author(s):  
Nina Schwarz ◽  
Gunnar Dressler ◽  
Karin Frank ◽  
Wander Jager ◽  
Marco Janssen ◽  
...  

Incorporating representations of human decision-making that are based on social science theories into social-ecological models is considered increasingly important – yet choosing and formalising a theory for a particular modelling context remains challenging. Here, we reflect on our experiences of selecting, formalising and documenting psychological and economic theories of human decision-making for inclusion in different agent-based models (ABMs) of natural resource use. We discuss the challenges related to four critical tasks: How to select a theory? How to formalise a theory and how to translate it into code? How to document the formalisation? In this way, we present a systematic overview of the choices researchers face when including theories of human decision-making in their ABMs, reflect on the choices we made in our own modelling projects and provide guidance for those new to the field. Also, we highlight further challenges regarding the parameterisation and analysis of such ABMs and suggest that a systematic overview of how to tackle these challenges contributes to an effective collaboration in interdisciplinary teams addressing socio-ecological dynamics using models.


2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick Simen ◽  
Fuat Balcı

AbstractRahnev & Denison (R&D) argue against normative theories and in favor of a more descriptive “standard observer model” of perceptual decision making. We agree with the authors in many respects, but we argue that optimality (specifically, reward-rate maximization) has proved demonstrably useful as a hypothesis, contrary to the authors’ claims.


2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Danks

AbstractThe target article uses a mathematical framework derived from Bayesian decision making to demonstrate suboptimal decision making but then attributes psychological reality to the framework components. Rahnev & Denison's (R&D) positive proposal thus risks ignoring plausible psychological theories that could implement complex perceptual decision making. We must be careful not to slide from success with an analytical tool to the reality of the tool components.


2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Arceneaux

AbstractIntuitions guide decision-making, and looking to the evolutionary history of humans illuminates why some behavioral responses are more intuitive than others. Yet a place remains for cognitive processes to second-guess intuitive responses – that is, to be reflective – and individual differences abound in automatic, intuitive processing as well.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document