PubMed · 7707254
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
J Bauer. 1995. Think win-win.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7707254/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
North-South health development cooperation often includes research financed largely by external donors. The cooperation varies between projects and programmes with regard to subject area, mix of disciplines involved, research methods, training components and project management arrangements. A variety of problems is encountered, but they are rarely described and discussed in published project reports. We authors conducted a study of a small number of European health researchers collaborating with researchers from the Third World. We focused upon projects involving both biomedical and social science researchers, and apart from a literature review three methods were applied: self-administered questionnaires to European researchers, semistructured interviews with five IHCAR researchers, and written summaries by the three authors, each on one recent or ongoing collaborative project of their choice. Most collaborative projects were initiated from the North and are monodisciplinary or partly interdisciplinary in the sense that researchers did independent data collection preceded by joint planning and followed by joint analysis and write-up. There may be disagreements concerning remuneration such as allowances in relation to fieldwork and training. Socio-cultural misunderstanding and conflict was reportedly rare, and no serious problems were reported regarding authorship and publishing. It is concluded that collaborative research is a complex and poorly understood process with considerable potential and worth pursuing despite the problems. Difficulties related to logistics and finance are easily and freely discussed, while there is little evidence that transdisciplinary research is conducted or even discussed. We recommend that published and unpublished reports on collaborative research projects include more detailed accounts of the North-South collaborative arrangements and their management, ethical and financial aspects.
A participatory action research design using a combination of qualitative methods was used to induce a conceptual definition of multidisciplinary collaboration and to develop a measure of the concept among health care workers. Conclusions from the study include strategies to foster multidisciplinary collaboration among health care workers when health care delivery systems are being reengineered.
PURPOSE: Mutuality is explored as an interaction style for providers and clients that encourages accountability. SIGNIFICANCE: Accountability by both providers and clients is necessary to manage health care costs and outcomes. ORGANIZING FRAMEWORK: Walker and Avant's method of concept analysis. SCOPE: Literature from 1930 to 1996. Mutuality is compared to autonomy, reciprocity, consumerism, negotiation, participation, collaboration, and paternalism. CONCLUSIONS: Mutuality is shown to balance power and respect, and to promote productive provider-client communication. This interaction style for partnership relationships fosters positive and lasting health care outcomes. IMPLICATIONS: Nurses are challenged to develop the skill of eliciting give and take, and creative, mutual exchanges.