Interprofessional teamwork in decentralized child welfare in The Netherlands: A comparison between the cities of Amsterdam and Utrecht

Willem J. Kortleven, Shelita Lala, Youssra Lotfi

Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

The recent transformation of child welfare in the Netherlands has improved opportunities for interprofessional working. We compared two models of teamworking within newly established interprofessional teams in the cities of Amsterdam and Utrecht, conducting a secondary analysis of semi-structured interviews collected through three broader research projects. Respondents include seventeen interprofessional team members (six from Utrecht, eleven from Amsterdam), representing a variety of teams across city, as well as two policymakers from Utrecht and one from Amsterdam. Team members were approached using convenience sampling, policymakers were purposively recruited. In different rounds of open and focused coding, we found that differences in team organization between the two cities have led to differences in the quality of interprofessional teamworking. Teamworking is best developed in Utrecht partly because team members are recruited and employed by a single organization. This has enabled a more careful process of selection and team composition than in Amsterdam, where a delegation approach entailed fragmentation as well as the risk of divided loyalty between team and mother organization. In addition, while the development of interprofessional teamwork in Utrecht is served by certain structures, teams in Amsterdam have suffered from an imbalance between freedom and structure, causing insecurity amongst staff and reduced chances of interprofessional integration. Despite the apparent success of the Utrecht model of interprofessional teamworking, interprofessional collaboration across team boundaries might suffer from the fact that teams in Utrecht, unlike in Amsterdam, do not comprise representatives of relevant partner organizations.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)116-119
Number of pages4
JournalJournal of Interprofessional Care
Volume33
Issue number1
Early online date29 Aug 2018
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2 Jan 2019

Fingerprint

Child Welfare
Netherlands
Organizations
Mothers
Interviews
Research

Keywords

  • Child protection
  • child welfare
  • decentralization
  • Interprofessional collaboration
  • interprofessional learning
  • teamwork

Cite this

@article{2dca7dcf0004494bafa270205a6de575,
title = "Interprofessional teamwork in decentralized child welfare in The Netherlands: A comparison between the cities of Amsterdam and Utrecht",
abstract = "The recent transformation of child welfare in the Netherlands has improved opportunities for interprofessional working. We compared two models of teamworking within newly established interprofessional teams in the cities of Amsterdam and Utrecht, conducting a secondary analysis of semi-structured interviews collected through three broader research projects. Respondents include seventeen interprofessional team members (six from Utrecht, eleven from Amsterdam), representing a variety of teams across city, as well as two policymakers from Utrecht and one from Amsterdam. Team members were approached using convenience sampling, policymakers were purposively recruited. In different rounds of open and focused coding, we found that differences in team organization between the two cities have led to differences in the quality of interprofessional teamworking. Teamworking is best developed in Utrecht partly because team members are recruited and employed by a single organization. This has enabled a more careful process of selection and team composition than in Amsterdam, where a delegation approach entailed fragmentation as well as the risk of divided loyalty between team and mother organization. In addition, while the development of interprofessional teamwork in Utrecht is served by certain structures, teams in Amsterdam have suffered from an imbalance between freedom and structure, causing insecurity amongst staff and reduced chances of interprofessional integration. Despite the apparent success of the Utrecht model of interprofessional teamworking, interprofessional collaboration across team boundaries might suffer from the fact that teams in Utrecht, unlike in Amsterdam, do not comprise representatives of relevant partner organizations.",
keywords = "Child protection, child welfare, decentralization, Interprofessional collaboration, interprofessional learning, teamwork",
author = "Kortleven, {Willem J.} and Shelita Lala and Youssra Lotfi",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "2",
doi = "10.1080/13561820.2018.1513463",
language = "English",
volume = "33",
pages = "116--119",
journal = "Journal of Interprofessional Care",
issn = "1356-1820",
publisher = "Informa Healthcare",
number = "1",

}

Interprofessional teamwork in decentralized child welfare in The Netherlands : A comparison between the cities of Amsterdam and Utrecht. / Kortleven, Willem J.; Lala, Shelita; Lotfi, Youssra.

In: Journal of Interprofessional Care, Vol. 33, No. 1, 02.01.2019, p. 116-119.

Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Interprofessional teamwork in decentralized child welfare in The Netherlands

T2 - A comparison between the cities of Amsterdam and Utrecht

AU - Kortleven, Willem J.

AU - Lala, Shelita

AU - Lotfi, Youssra

PY - 2019/1/2

Y1 - 2019/1/2

N2 - The recent transformation of child welfare in the Netherlands has improved opportunities for interprofessional working. We compared two models of teamworking within newly established interprofessional teams in the cities of Amsterdam and Utrecht, conducting a secondary analysis of semi-structured interviews collected through three broader research projects. Respondents include seventeen interprofessional team members (six from Utrecht, eleven from Amsterdam), representing a variety of teams across city, as well as two policymakers from Utrecht and one from Amsterdam. Team members were approached using convenience sampling, policymakers were purposively recruited. In different rounds of open and focused coding, we found that differences in team organization between the two cities have led to differences in the quality of interprofessional teamworking. Teamworking is best developed in Utrecht partly because team members are recruited and employed by a single organization. This has enabled a more careful process of selection and team composition than in Amsterdam, where a delegation approach entailed fragmentation as well as the risk of divided loyalty between team and mother organization. In addition, while the development of interprofessional teamwork in Utrecht is served by certain structures, teams in Amsterdam have suffered from an imbalance between freedom and structure, causing insecurity amongst staff and reduced chances of interprofessional integration. Despite the apparent success of the Utrecht model of interprofessional teamworking, interprofessional collaboration across team boundaries might suffer from the fact that teams in Utrecht, unlike in Amsterdam, do not comprise representatives of relevant partner organizations.

AB - The recent transformation of child welfare in the Netherlands has improved opportunities for interprofessional working. We compared two models of teamworking within newly established interprofessional teams in the cities of Amsterdam and Utrecht, conducting a secondary analysis of semi-structured interviews collected through three broader research projects. Respondents include seventeen interprofessional team members (six from Utrecht, eleven from Amsterdam), representing a variety of teams across city, as well as two policymakers from Utrecht and one from Amsterdam. Team members were approached using convenience sampling, policymakers were purposively recruited. In different rounds of open and focused coding, we found that differences in team organization between the two cities have led to differences in the quality of interprofessional teamworking. Teamworking is best developed in Utrecht partly because team members are recruited and employed by a single organization. This has enabled a more careful process of selection and team composition than in Amsterdam, where a delegation approach entailed fragmentation as well as the risk of divided loyalty between team and mother organization. In addition, while the development of interprofessional teamwork in Utrecht is served by certain structures, teams in Amsterdam have suffered from an imbalance between freedom and structure, causing insecurity amongst staff and reduced chances of interprofessional integration. Despite the apparent success of the Utrecht model of interprofessional teamworking, interprofessional collaboration across team boundaries might suffer from the fact that teams in Utrecht, unlike in Amsterdam, do not comprise representatives of relevant partner organizations.

KW - Child protection

KW - child welfare

KW - decentralization

KW - Interprofessional collaboration

KW - interprofessional learning

KW - teamwork

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85060301408&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85060301408&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/13561820.2018.1513463

DO - 10.1080/13561820.2018.1513463

M3 - Article

VL - 33

SP - 116

EP - 119

JO - Journal of Interprofessional Care

JF - Journal of Interprofessional Care

SN - 1356-1820

IS - 1

ER -