Pilot Analysis of the Motivation Assessment for Team Readiness, Integration, and Collaboration (Matricx) Using Rasch Analysis

Abstract

Healthcare services and the production of healthcare knowledge are increasingly dependent on highly functioning, multidisciplinary teams, requiring greater awareness of individuals' readiness to collaborate in translational science teams. Yet, there is no comprehensive tool of individual motivations and threats to collaboration that can guide preparation of individuals for work on well-functioning teams. This prospective pilot study evaluated the preliminary psychometric properties of the Motivation Assessment for Team Readiness, Integration, and Collaboration (MATRICx). We examined 55 items of the MATRICx in a sample of 125 faculty, students and researchers, using contemporary psychometric methods (Rasch analysis). We found that the motivator and threat items formed separate constructs relative to collaboration readiness. Further, respondents who identified themselves as inexperienced at working on collaborative projects defined the motivation construct differently from experienced respondents. These results are consistent with differences in strategic alliances described in the literature-for example, inexperienced respondents reflected features of cooperation and coordination, such as concern with sharing information and compatibility of goals. In contrast, the more experienced respondents were concerned with issues that reflected a collective purpose, more typical of collaborative alliances. While these different types of alliances are usually described as representing varying aspects along a continuum, our findings suggest that collaboration might be better thought of as a qualitatively different state than cooperation or coordination. These results need to be replicated in larger samples, but the findings have implications for the development and design of educational interventions that aim to ready scientists and clinicians for greater interdisciplinary work.

Team science and the physician–scientist in the age of grand health challenges

“…Gaetano Lotrecchiano, assistant professor of Clinical Research, Leadership, and Pediatrics at George Washington University, presented facilitation tools to help accomplish the task of team building. He emphasized that personal interests and motivations are important to uphold and must not be lost in assessing the interests of the team . Collaborative leadership resources include the important welcome letters that orient team members to the project's components and frame the expectations of teamwork.…”

“…He emphasized that personal interests and motivations are important to uphold and must not be lost in assessing the interests of the team. 3,4 Collaborative leadership resources include the important welcome letters that orient team members to the project's components and frame the expectations of teamwork. Strategies for identifying potential team members were further explored by Griffin Weber, associate professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School.…”

Inter-Professional Education, Inter-Professional Practice and Team Science: Learning Together; Working Together

“…This is also the area that is developing at an exciting new pace, integrating team theories, methodologies, frameworks of working cohesively. Team competencies and dynamic models of working are also highly relevant (31)(32)(33)(34)(35)(36).…”

Measuring motivation for team science collaboration in health teams

“…This finding led to the plotting of a hierarchy of motivators based on degree of self-reported past experience working in teams (Figure 1). More details regarding the development and validation of the MATRICx can be found in previous reports 24,25 . Ultimately, the present MATRICx consists of only motivator items with two corresponding scales: cooperative (low formalization, low interdependence, autonomous groups share information to support each other's organizational activities) for those with little to no experience and collaborative (integration, higher formalization, parties work collectively through common strategies toward common goals) for those with more experience (Figure 2).…”