From Multi-professional to Trans-professional Healthcare Teams: The Critical Role of Innovation Projects

  • François Chiocchio
  • Marie-Claire Richer


This chapter addresses change and interprofessional collaboration in health care by contrasting two forms of collaborations. The first occurs in ongoing service delivery while the other takes place in project teams that are by definition temporary. Most practitioners and scholars discuss the many challenges of interprofessional collaboration in the context of continuous change efforts. However, collaboration differs when the need for change is more radical and innovative. The chapter explains why, and offers insight on how to manage projects interprofessionally.


Healthcare Professional Service Work Project Work Decisional Latitude Maternity Ward 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



We wish to thank Stacey McNulty and her help with this chapter. This chapter was also made possible by grants from the Telfer School of Management.


  1. Ashforth BE, Saks AM (1995) Work-role transitions: a longitudinal examination of the Nicholson model. J Occup Organ Psychol 68:157–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ashforth BE, Kreiner GE, Fugate M (2000) All in a day’s work: boundaries and micro role transitions. Acad Manage Rev 25:472–491Google Scholar
  3. Barr H, Koppel I, Reeves S, Hammick M, Freeth DS (2008) Effective interprofessional education: argument, assumption and evidence (promoting partnership for health). Wiley, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  4. Bedwell WL, Wildman JL, Diazgranados D, Salazar M, Kramer WS, Salas E (2012) Collaboration at work: an integrative multilevel conceptualization. Hum Resource Manag Rev 22:128–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Besner C, Hobbs B (2006) The perceived value and potential contribution of project management practices to project success. Proj Manag J 37:37–48Google Scholar
  6. Besner C, Hobbs B (2008) Project management practice, generic or contextual: a reality check. Proj Manag J 39:16–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chiocchio F, Essiembre H (2009) Cohesion and performance: a meta-analytic review of disparities between project teams, production teams, and service teams. Small Group Res 40:382–420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chiocchio F, Grenier S, O’Neill TA, Savaria K, Willms DJ (2012) The effects of collaboration on performance: a multilevel validation in project teams. Int J Proj Organisat Manag 4:1–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chiocchio F, Rabbat F, Lebel P (2013) Training healthcare project teams: evidence despite challenges. In: 28th annual convention of the society for industrial and organizational psychology, Houston, TXGoogle Scholar
  10. D’Amour D (1999) Structuration de la collaboration interprofessionelle dans les services de santé de première ligne au Québec, Tese (Doutorado)-Université de Montreal, Montreal/Canadá, 1997. [Links]Google Scholar
  11. D’Amour D, Oandasan Y (2005) Interprofessionality as the field of interprofessional practice and interprofessional education: an emerging concept. J Interprof Care Suppl 1:8–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. D’Amour D, Ferrada-Videla M, San Martin Rodriguez L, Beaulieu M-D (2005) The conceptual basis for interprofessional collaboration: core concepts and theoretical frameworks. J Interprof Care 19:116–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Davies A, Brady T (2000) Organisational capabilities and learning in complex product systems: towards repeatable solutions. Res Policy 29:931–953CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Goldman J, Meuser J, Lawrie L, Rogers J, Reeves S (2010a) Interprofessional primary care protocols: a strategy to promote an evidence-based approach to teamwork and the delivery of care. J Interprof Care 24:663–665CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Goldman J, Meuser J, Rogers J, Reeves S (2010b) Interprofessional collaboration in family health teams: an Ontario-based study. Can Fam Physician 56:368–374Google Scholar
  16. Hall P (2005) Interprofessional teamwork: professional cultures as barriers. J Interprof Care 19:188–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hartono E (2004) Knowledge, technology and inter-firm collaboration: a model and empirical study of collaborative commerce. Doctoral Dissertation, University of KentuckyGoogle Scholar
  18. Hobbs B (2014) The specifics of project contexts. In: Chiocchio F, Kelloway EK, Hobbs B (eds) The psychology and management of project teams: an interdisciplinary view. Oxford University Press, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  19. Hood R (2012) A critical realist model of complexity for interprofessional working. J Interprof Care 26:6–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kristof ND, Wudunn S (2009) Half the sky: turning oppression into opportunity for women worldwide. Vintage Books, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  21. Mccallin A (2001) Interdisciplinary practice—a matter of teamwork: an integrated literature review. J Clin Nurs 10:419–428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Murphy PR, Jackson SE (1999) Managing role performance: challenges for twenty-first-century organizations and their employees. In: Pulakos ED, Ilgen DR (eds) The changing nature of performance. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CAGoogle Scholar
  23. Øvretveit J, Andreen-Sachs M, Carlsson J, Gustafsson H, Hansson J, Keller C, Lofgren S, Mazzocato P, Tolf S, Brommels M (2012) Implementing organisation and management innovations in Swedish healthcare: lessons from a comparison of 12 cases. J Health Organ Manag 26:237–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Paradis E, Reeves S (2013) Key trends in interprofessional research: a macrosociological analysis from 1970 to 2010. J Interprof Care 27:113–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Perminova O, Gustafsson M, Wikström K (2008) Defining uncertainty in projects—new perspective. Int J Proj Manag 26:73–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Project Management Institute (2008) A guide to the project management body of knowledge (PMBOK® Guide). Project Management Institute, Newtown Square, PAGoogle Scholar
  27. Rizzo JR, House RJ, Lirtzman SI (1970) Role conflict and ambiguity in complex organizations. Adm Sci Q 15:150–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. San Martin Rodriguez L, Beaulieu M-D, D’Amour D, Ferrada-Videla M (2005) The determinants of successful collaboration: a review of theoretical and empirical studies. J Interprof Care 19:132–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Schippers MC, West MA, Dawson JF (2012). Team reflexivity and innovation: the moderating role of team context. J ManageGoogle Scholar
  30. Sicotte C, D’Amour D, Moreault M-P (2002) Interdisciplinary collaboration within Quebec community health care centres. Soc Sci Med 55:991–1003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sundstrom E, Mcintyre M, Halfhill T, Richards H (2000) Work groups: from the Hawthorne studies to work teams of the 1990s and beyond. Group Dynam 4:44–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Suter E, Deutschlander S, Mickelson G, Nurani Z, Lait J, Harrison L, Jarvis-Selinger S, Bainbridge L, Achilles S, Ateah C, Ho K, Grymonpre R (2012) Can interprofessional collaboration provide health human resources solutions? A knowledge synthesis. J Interprof Care 26:261–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Turner R, Cochrane RA (1993) Goals-and-methods matrix: coping with projects with ill defined goals and/or methods of achieving them. Int J Proj Manag 11:93–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Turner R, Müller R (2003) On the nature of the project as a temporary organization. Int J Proj Manag 21:1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Yasin MM, Zimmerer LW, Miller P, Zimmerer TW (2002) An empirical investigation of the effectiveness of contemporary managerial philosophies in a hospital operational setting. Int J Health Care Qual Assur 15:268–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Organisational Behaviour and Human Resource Management, TELFER School of ManagementUniversity of OttawaOttawaCanada
  2. 2.Transition Support OfficeMcGill University Health CentreMontrealCanada

Personalised recommendations