Revisiting Relational Coordination: A Systematic Review

Abstract

Work is increasingly complex, specialized, and interdependent, requiring coordination across roles, disciplines, organizations, and sectors to achieve desired outcomes. Relational coordination theory proposes that relationships of shared goals, shared knowledge, and mutual respect help to support frequent, timely, accurate, problem-solving communication, and vice versa, enabling stakeholders to effectively coordinate their work across boundaries. While the theory contends that cross-cutting structures can strengthen relational coordination, and that relational coordination promotes desired outcomes for multiple stakeholders, the empirical evidence supporting the theory has not previously been synthesized. In this article, we systematically review all empirical studies assessing the predictors and outcomes of relational coordination published from 1991 to 2019. We find evidence supporting the existing theory and discuss how that evidence supports expanding the theory from a linear structure–process–outcomes model to a dynamic model of change. An agenda for researchers and practitioners is proposed.

A scoping review of new implementations of interprofessional bedside rounding models to improve teamwork, care, and outcomes in hospitals

“…The next most common were six studies (7.6%) guided by a patient-and family-centered care (Davidson et al, 2017) or a shared decisionmaking framework (Michalsen et al, 2019), followed by five studies (6.3%) that utilized a systems framework -e.g., Toyota production systems (Rotter et al, 2019), clinical microsystems, and systems theory (Nelson et al, 2007). Finally, three studies (3.8%) referenced an interprofessional framework (Cox et al, 2016), and three studies (3.8%) referenced model of change frameworks (Bolton et al, 2021;Kotter, 2007). Additional frameworks used by individual studies include Meleis' Transitions Theory (Meleis et al, 2000), Social-Material Practice Theory (Schatzki, 2002), AIDET format (Braverman et al, 2015), and Athletic Training Principles (Southwick et al, 2014).…”

The significance of interprofessional and interagency collaboration in reintegration after prison

“…This is a highly relevant development in light of the findings in this current study. Bolton, Logan and Gittell (2021) most recently suggested expanding the theory from a linear structure-process-outcomes model to a more dynamic model of change. This may also be considered an interesting development of the theory in this context, as the life situations and welfare needs of offenders change rapidly (Hansen, 2015;Larsen et al, 2019)…”

Relational interventions for organizational learning: An experience report

“…Extensive research shows that higher levels of RC are consistently associated with higher levels of performance, including clinical outcomes, safety, cost, patient experience, staff satisfaction and well‐being, and the capacity to innovate (e.g., 14 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 ).…”

“…The other three dimensions are qualities of relationship: shared goals for the work process, shared knowledge of each other's work, and mutual respect for each other's work (Gittell 2006) 13 RC can be measured by a validated survey, with the resulting score indicating the strength of the network of ties among the collaborating workgroups. 14,15 Extensive research shows that higher levels of RC are consistently associated with higher levels of performance, including clinical outcomes, safety, cost, patient experience, staff satisfaction and wellbeing, and the capacity to innovate (e.g., 14,[16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27].…”