Abstract
Behavioural science can be most effective when deployed as part of a multidisciplinary team. Furthermore, behavioural science is more likely than other functions to need to be part of a multidisciplinary team, as many functions touch on the way people interact with each other and with products and services. This chapter provides a brief overview of the academic literature about the benefits and challenges of working in multidisciplinary teams and describes a case study of how this works in practice. Rubinstein lays out guidelines for making multidisciplinary teamworking effective that include building trust, managing professional identities, coping with different communication styles, managing uncertainty, managing complexity, assessing quality, dealing with time pressures and availability, and the role of the leader.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Alves, J., Marques, M. J., Saur, I., & Marques, P. (2007). Creativity and innovation through multidisciplinary and multisectoral cooperation. Creativity and Innovation Management, 16(1), 27–34. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8691.2007.00417.x
Budner, S. (2006). Intolerance of ambiguity as a personality variable. Journal of Personality, 30(1), 29–50. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1962.tb02303.x
Collins, B. E., & Guetzkow, H. (1964). A social psychology of group processes for decision making. New York: Wiley.
Cowan, D. A. (1986). Developing a process model of problem recognition. Academy of Management Review, 11(4), 763–776. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.1986.4283930
Edmondson, A. C., & Nembhard, I. M. (2009). Product development and learning in project teams: The challenges are the benefits*. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 26(2), 123–138. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5885.2009.00341.x
Fay, D., Borrill, C., Amir, Z., Haward, R., & West, M. A. (2006). Getting the most out of multidisciplinary teams: A multi-sample study of team innovation in health care. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 79(4), 553–567. https://doi.org/10.1348/096317905X72128
Jackson, S. E. (1996). The consequences of diversity in multidisciplinary work teams. In Handbook of work group psychology (pp. 53–75). Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Janssen, W., & Goldsworthy, P. (1996). Multidisciplinary research for natural resource management: Conceptual and practical implications. Agricultural Systems, 51(3), 259–279. https://doi.org/10.1016/0308-521X(95)00046-8
Kanter, R. M., & Summers, D. (1988). When a thousand flowers bloom: Social, structural and collective conditions for innovation in organizations. In Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 10). Greenwich, CT: Elsevier.
Kearney, E., Gebert, D., & Voelpel, S. C. (2009). When and how diversity benefits teams: The importance of team members’ need for cognition. Academy of Management Journal, 52(3), 581–598. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2009.41331431
Love, P., Fong, P., & Irani, Z. (2006). Management of knowledge in project environments. London: Routledge.
Majchrzak, A., More, P. H. B., & Faraj, S. (2011). Transcending knowledge differences in cross-functional teams. Organization Science, 23(4), 951–970. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1110.0677
Mental Health Commission. (2006). Multi-disciplinary team working: From theory to practice. Dublin: Coimisiún Meabhair-Shláinte, Dublin. Retrieved from http://www.mhcirl.ie/File/discusspapmultiteam.pdf
Petty, R. E., Briñol, P., Loersch, C., & McCaslin, M. J. (2009). The need for cognition. In Handbook of individiual differences in social behaviour (pp. 318–329). New York: Guilford Press.
Ratcheva, V. (2009). Integrating diverse knowledge through boundary spanning processes—The case of multidisciplinary project teams. International Journal of Project Management, 27(3), 206–215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2008.02.008
Rose, B. (2016). Managing multidisciplinary teams effectively: Tips for project managers. Innovia Technology.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. The American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78.
Simon, H. A. (1987). Making management decisions: The role of intuition and emotion. Academy of Management Executive, 1(1), 57–64.
Strober, M. H. (2006). Habits of the mind: Challenges for multidisciplinary engagement. Social Epistemology, 20(3–4), 315–331. https://doi.org/10.1080/02691720600847324
Thompson, E. P., Chaiken, S., & Hazlewood, J. D. (1993). Need for cognition and desire for control as moderators of extrinsic reward effects: A person x situation approach to the study of intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64(6), 987–999.
Vegt, G. S. V. D., & Bunderson, J. S. (2005). Learning and performance in multidisciplinary teams: The importance of collective team identification. Academy of Management Journal, 48(3), 532–547. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2005.17407918
Vissers, G., & Dankbaar, B. (2002). Creativity in multidisciplinary new product development teams. Creativity and Innovation Management, 11(1), 31–42. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8691.00234
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Rubinstein, H. (2018). The Importance of Multiple Perspectives. In: Applying Behavioural Science to the Private Sector. Palgrave Pivot, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01698-2_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01698-2_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Pivot, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-01697-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-01698-2
eBook Packages: Behavioral Science and PsychologyBehavioral Science and Psychology (R0)