Meetings as a Facilitator of Multiteam System Functioning

Smith, Jordan G.; Flynn, Michelle; Shuffler, Marissa L.; Carter, Dorothy R.; Thayer, Amanda L.

doi:10.1108/s1534-085620200000020017

Cited by 1 publication

(11 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…When deciding who should attend the meeting, consider which component team members/roles may be most relevant or critical for sharing information. 1,21,30 Structure meetings to include time explicitly for cross-team information sharing, ideally when most or all component teams are represented. 21,29,30 Challenge: None of the meetings observed included a representative from every component team, limiting the opportunity for comprehensive cross-team information sharing Attempt to schedule rounds and huddles at times when the greatest number of component teams can be represented.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As meeting leader, ensure that strategizing discussions allow for crossteam activity planning, especially the specific timing of activities. 21,49,50 Challenge: When a component team is not represented at rounds or huddles, there may be a delay in them receiving updates to the strategies and plans discussed in the meeting If a component team is not represented during a strategizing discussion, ensure that someone who is attending the meeting is assigned the action of following up with that component team to relay the plan and address any additional questions or contingencies. 15,21 Pedagogy Challenge: Rounds are intended to be a learning opportunity, so attendance is most advantageous to RPs and learners from other component teams (eg, newly hired nurses) and less so for nonlearners During rounds, consider conducting pedagogically focused activities when learners are available from more than one component team (eg, RPs and newly hired RNs).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…21,49,50 Challenge: When a component team is not represented at rounds or huddles, there may be a delay in them receiving updates to the strategies and plans discussed in the meeting If a component team is not represented during a strategizing discussion, ensure that someone who is attending the meeting is assigned the action of following up with that component team to relay the plan and address any additional questions or contingencies. 15,21 Pedagogy Challenge: Rounds are intended to be a learning opportunity, so attendance is most advantageous to RPs and learners from other component teams (eg, newly hired nurses) and less so for nonlearners During rounds, consider conducting pedagogically focused activities when learners are available from more than one component team (eg, RPs and newly hired RNs). 29,30,57,58 Plan meeting schedules and agendas to prioritize the time of team members who are necessary for other meeting processes (eg, informing, deliberating, and strategizing) but may be less likely to benefit from pedagogically focused activities.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…29,30,57,58 Plan meeting schedules and agendas to prioritize the time of team members who are necessary for other meeting processes (eg, informing, deliberating, and strategizing) but may be less likely to benefit from pedagogically focused activities. 1,21,29,30,45,59 Abbreviations: MTS, multiteam system; RN, registered nurse; RP, resident physician.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Indeed, within the broader literature on meeting science, which identifies best practices for designing and facilitating meetings, 20 scholars have suggested that meetings can serve as a key mechanism for facilitating cross-team coordination. 21…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Making Every Meeting Count: A Qualitative Investigation of Multiteam Meeting Events and Their Role in Supporting Coordinated Cancer Care Delivery

Wolf

Hedrick

Begerowski

et al. 2023

JCO Oncology Practice

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PURPOSE: This research considers how cross-disciplinary cancer care meetings can facilitate coordination within the multiteam systems (MTSs) that provide inpatient hospital care. We conducted a series of interviews and observations with members of a single cancer care MTS to address the following research questions: (1) what are the key characteristics of MTS cancer care meetings (with regard to composition, focus, and structure)? and (2) how is cross-team coordination acknowledged and addressed during these meetings? METHODS: In this single-site case study of a MTS operating to provide gynecologic oncology care within a teaching hospital, two types of meetings, called rounds and huddles, were held consistently. We used qualitative methods, including interviews with health care professional subject matter experts and 30 hours of observations of cancer care meetings, and analyzed the data in three stages of qualitative coding. RESULTS: Our analyses resulted in a thematic framework detailing key processes, and subprocesses, identified as central to the activities of observed cancer care meetings. Key processes include information sharing, gaining clarity, strategizing, and pedagogy. Discussions and explanations of this framework showcase the ways in which MTS meetings can bolster cross-team coordination and facilitate MTS activities. CONCLUSION: Inpatient cancer care meetings provide opportunities to facilitate MTS coordination in several ways, yet doing so does not come without challenges. Considering these results together with insights from meeting science and MTS research, this article concludes by putting forward practical recommendations for leveraging opportunities and overcoming challenges to use cancer care meetings as tools to support cross-team coordination.

show abstract