Facilitating Collaboration in Professional Practice - Essay Example

?Reflection on Collaboration in Professional Practice Introduction The module Facilitating Collaboration in Professional Practice aims to develop better understanding of the interrelationship among healthcare professionals in relation to health care. It intends to develop communication and interprofessional skills through work presentations. This work is a reflection of my role in the multi-professional group I am in. In order to fulfil the reflection, the Gibbs Framework for Reflection is used. Stage 1- Description of the event According to the Gibbs Framework for Reflection (as cited in Bulman & Schutz, 2004, p. 165), the first stage is the description of the event; and it includes what ones position is, who else are present, what is the purpose of being there, what one is doing, what others are doing, what are the strategies used to communicate, and what the results are. As a part of the Facilitating Collaboration in Professional Practice Module, students were introduced to intellectual, practical, and transferable skills required to function in a group. Thus, the evaluation of the module included reflecting ones own position in a groups and describing how power, conflict, and other ethical issues are managed within the group. As a part of the module, lectures and events took place for nearly one week. My group had ten students from different allied health professions ranging from operating department practitioners, diagnostic radiographers, therapeutic radiographers, physiotherapists, and occupational therapists. The project that was given to my group was to develop a campaign and logo on educating and raising awareness about the various allied healthcare professions and opportunities. The campaign had to be aimed at primary school children, year eleven school children, and graduates with access to an unlimited budget. Initially, the group engaged in certain activities like some card games, sharing fluid equally in three containers, and reflecting on the task achievement. The third task involved developing a high and strong structure using straw, and admittedly, the group failed to achieve the last task. After that, the group was given the details of the task to be accomplished, and instantaneously, some members started selecting tasks that suited them and some were left out without any role. As I found myself left out without any roles, I insisted that I would do a leaflet or a poster. Then, a member who had some experience in management and knowledge became the person to lead the group. As there was less chance of face to face meetings, it was decided that the remaining meetings would take place online, and the only face-to-face meeting was the final presentation on completion of the project. It turned out that some members could not get any roles at all, and some members just gave up their hard work as they lost the initial momentum. Admittedly, some members performed their tasks well and the project progressed well. Also, many members actively took part in the online chat forum and made useful suggestions, comments and motivations. However, probably as a result of their personality, some turned out to be poor communicators and negotiators. In addition, as a result of the online mode of interaction, it was not possible to identify the attitude of various members, and the element of conflict was less likely to be noticed. I turned out to be in the role of a resource investigator, implementer and team worker. Stage 2- Developing self awareness The second stage of the reflection, according to Gibbs Framework for Reflection, is developing self awareness or describing ones thoughts and feelings (ibid). here, I have to admit that the entire team work acted as a means to identify my skills as a team player. Before the group was formed, I had never felt that working in a group was such a difficult task. To illustrate, for the first time, I understood that performing in a team is not only about performing ones own role, but it is also about helping others do their roles, ensuring reasonable participation of all, and allocating proper roles to each member, ensuring proper communication and so on. At first, I was happy when the group was formed because I found myself left with a rather creative role which involved less of communication and interaction. However, I was disappointed with the fact that many members were too ‘tunneled’ in their vision that they did not care about the other members and their roles. I was rather irritated by the way different members performed in the group. It seemed to me that they had forgotten all the rules of collaboration in allied health professions. However, as one with some idea on management took over leadership, there came certain degree of cohesion in the group. As the Belbin Team Role model was used to decide the role of each member, it turned out that I became a resource investigator, implementer and team worker. Admittedly, I was not happy with the role of a communicator as I was not a good communicator myself. Thus, my duty was to ensure that all aspects and information of Allied Health Professions appeared in the presentation. At first, I was alarmed by the important role I was assigned, but as I looked into the situation again, I found myself in a powerful position that was vital for the successful completion of the project. Also, I found that I could do a lot to ensure that all aspects of collaboration in teams were better implemented. The point I understood was that I could not perform my roles well if I did not receive support and suggestion from other members. I found the approach of many members highly motivating and encouraging in completing the task. There, I realised that I too am supposed to behave in the same way in the online discussion forum that was the only way of communication for my team. Thus, I tried my best to ensure that all members are encouraged in performing their role, and to see that all feel as an important part of the team. However, despite all these efforts, some members were not happy with the roles they got. While some found the task unachievable, some found totally left out of the entire project without any roles. Though I had the feeling that the project completion would be an easy task, as the team was formed, I found that ensuring proper team work was more difficult than task completion. In total, it can be said that though the team managed to successfully complete the project, it was not the result of effective application of the principles of collaboration in allied health profession teams. Stage 3- Evaluation The third stage of Gibbs Framework for Reflection is evaluation to see what was good and what was bad (ibid). Admittedly, there were a lot of things in my team that worked spectacularly well. The first point is the consistency and high degree of motivation various members presented in their respective roles. Most members seemed happy cooperating and listening to others and contributing positively in the online discussion forums. The second thing is the relatively less amounts of conflict and power struggle that existed in the group. Though certain members found themselves neglected and did not cooperate, others were able to perform their duties in the team well. Another point I am satisfied about is my role as a resource investigator, implementer and a facilitator. Admittedly, though I was rather unaware about my ability to perform such an active role, I feel that I was able to do my task satisfactorily. One point that did not go well is the area of ensuring equality. Admittedly, some members were not happy with the fact that they were neglected in the role allocation. Instead of identifying and understanding their skills and knowledge, they were left out without any roles. The second point that created some turmoil is the improper communication. First of all, the communication had to take place online, and hence, different members had problems understanding each other. However, I noticed that many members took utmost care to use such language that was free from jargons so that all others understand the meaning well. However, a few members were not careful about language or interaction. Stage 4-Analysis The fourth stage in Gibbs Framework for Reflection is analysis (Bulman & Schutz, 2004, p.165). It involves looking deeper into the different aspects of the task. Thus, the first point of consideration is my own role in the team. As already mentioned, I did not consider myself as a good negotiator until I got the role of resource investigator and implementer. In order to understand my feelings in the role I was assigned, the Belbin Team Role Theory is utilised. According to Belbin, ones behaviour is influenced by many factors ranging from ones own personality, internalised values and motivations, and external working environment (Utley, 2011, p. 284). There are factors like experience, current values and motivation, and mental abilities (ibid). To illustrate, when the Belbin Team Role Self-Perception Inventory (BTRSPI) is used, it is found that I am able to recognize and make use of new opportunities though slowly. In addition, I have the feeling that my technical knowledge and experience are usually my main assets. Also, I have the ability to tell if a particular idea fits a particular situation well. Thus, though I found myself a mediocre communicator, it turned out that depending on my cooperative nature, mild, perceptive and diplomatic communication, I got the role of a team worker. In addition, it became evident that I have the skills to listen to others and incorporate them into the tasks so that friction is greatly averted. Some other points about me that became evident through the analysis were that I was disciplined, reliable, conservative and efficient. Also, I possessed the skills to turn ideas into actions. Thus, I was given the role of an Implementer too. Also, though I never considered myself as an extrovert and good communicator, it turned out to be that the situation made me a communicator too. Here, in order to explain the situation, I think it is beneficial to utilize the Belbin Role Theory. According to Belbin, personality is just one among the various factors that influence ones behavior (ibid). Despite the fact that I was rather less communicative in nature, I started communicating as the situation required me to do so. One can say that it was rather the field constraints and role learning that made me behave as a resource investigator in the project. Admittedly, a resource investigator is supposed to be extrovert, enthusiastic and communicative, and I was less of these qualities. However, as Belbin points out, though personality traits are constant, ones behaviour is susceptible to ready changes. Thus, ones team role preferences are likely to change depending on the influence of various factors. In my case, there was the fear of getting no roles in the project if I failed to act in time. At first I was left without any roles as some more active ones immediately took up their own roles. The situation made me act immediately and speak up in order to ensure that I get a reasonable role in the project. Thus, I ended up a resource investigator, implementer and team worker. The next point is the various elements of being interprofessional. According to Hammick et al (2009, p.16), being inter-professional involves knowing what to do, having the skills to do, and conducting oneself in the right way. Out of them, it is pointed out that the first point in being interprofessional is to ensure effective communication (ibid). It involves using a language that everyone in the interprofessional team understands. Such a language, admittedly, will be free from jargons and acronyms. The second point of communication is to listen to others (ibid). Now, a look into my own performance proves that I was above average in communication. Though I communicated well with others, I have to admit that I did not come up with so many newer ideas as others would have liked. However, being a team worker, I was ready throughout the project to listen to others. The second point of being interprofessional is being aware about the knowledge and skills of others so that the people who can best meet various requirements are identified and utilised. Here, I have to admit that the team as a whole was a failure as it did not provide any specific role to a number of members. This resulted in considerable degree of discontent in the team. However, as far as I was able to do as a resource investigator, implementer and team worker, I managed to justly provide various responsibilities to various members so that they all feel included in the project. However, in the case of the team as a whole, there was severe lack of concern about others’ roles. Many members seemed having tunnel vision of team work. They forgot the fact that the core values of being interprofessional are respect, confidence, and engagement, sharing, and caring (Murray et al, 2006, p.5). First of all, the team lacked the mutual respect as many members, including me, started looking at others with certain degree of disrespect. The ones who were left out without important roles started developing discontent towards the ones who undertook important roles. Also, the ones who got important roles felt that some people are not willing to cooperate. As the discontent existed from the very beginning, even in the online forum, many people did not contribute positively. Here, it is wise to incorporate the principles of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs to understand why some members did not actively take part in the project. According to Maslow (cited in Rosdahl & Kowalski , 2008, p.65), members are prone to feel frustration on various grounds; they are frustration of self-actualisation needs, frustration of esteem needs, frustration of love needs, frustration of safety needs, and frustration of physiological needs. Here, it is beneficial to remember the claim by Handy (1991, p.261) that communities of common interest thrive as long as the interests are common and that when the interests diverge, the teams will fall apart. Evidently, in the case of my team, the main issues were self-actualisation needs, and frustration of esteem needs. Many members found their skills unacknowledged and hence their roles irrelevant. So, there was no feeling of self actualisation. In addition was the problem related to esteem. The ones who got no roles and the ones who got irrelevant roles found their esteem severely hurt. It should be read along with the organisational theory that points out that people react depending on how they perceive they are treated. Once they feel they are treated unfairly, they will lose enthusiasm and will give up their efforts; and the different ways they usually adopt in such situations are increased absenteeism and reduced quantity and quality of work (Jones & Mathew, 2008, p.113). In the case of my team too, there was increased level of absenteeism reduced contribution to collective activity. This lack of motivation was aggravated by the lack of face to face communication. As the entire communication had to take place online, the hidden conflicts remained unnoticed and unsolved. As Jaspers, M (2003, p.32) points out, though conflict is not observable outwardly, it did not mean that it did not exist, perhaps interest and grievances merely remained unspoken, and thus, outside of the decision making arena. It is likely for the more powerful to ignore the demands of the less powerful; and lack of opportunity in decision making can lead to conflict (ibid). Stage 5-Conclusion The next step of Gibbs Framework for Reflection is conclusion. In this stage, one is supposed to develop an insight into ones own behaviour and that of others and understand how the behaviour resulted in the particular outcome. Admittedly, the team managed to achieve its target of preparing a presentation. However, while many members contributed positively, some other members did not actively take part in the project. The reasons are lack of communication, especially face to face communication that would have helped in finding and solving hidden interests and related conflicts, lack of properly set targets, and lack of feedback on how well each one is performing. Another drawback was the lack of understanding about the various personality traits. Stage 6-Action plan The last stage of reflection is action plan. The first step will be to use the Belbin Team Role Self Perception Inventory (BTRSPI) along with Observer Assessments (OA) of all members to decide the various roles they should be assigned to. Thereafter, for each member, proper role will be set and feedback will be provided at various stages of progress. In addition, proper communication will be ensured so that the ones who are likely to possess hidden interests can be identified. Lastly, there will be motivation taking into consideration Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. References Bulman, C & Schutz, S 2004, Reflective Practice in Nursing, Wiley-Blackwell, US. Hammick, M, Freeth, DS, Goodsman, D & Copperman, J 2009, Being Interprofessional, Polity, UK. Handy, C 1991, The Age of Unreason, Business Books, USA. Jones, GR & Mathew, M 2008, Organizational Theory, Design, and Change, Pearson Education India, India. Jasper, M 2003, Beginning Reflective Practice, Nelson Thornes, UK. Murray, P, Poole, D & Jones, G 2006, Contemporary Issues in Management and Organizational Behavior, Cengage Learning, Australia. Rosdahl, CB & Kowalski, MT 2008, Textbook of Basic Nursing, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, US. Utley, RA 2011, Theory and Research for Academic Nurse Educators: Application to Practice, Jones & Bartlett Publishers, US. Read More