Nagi S Z
Milbank Mem Fund Q Health Soc. 1975 Winter;53(1):75-91.
Reactions to teamwork, whether in health care, science and research, or in other areas, are seldom neutral. While some see in it a panacea that will help solve many stubborn organizational problems, others condemn it on a variety of grounds. Impetus to the development of team approaches to the delivery of health care and concern over their performance have been tied to a number of trends: a marked increase in specialization and division of labor as a result of expansion in health-related knowledge and technology, a corresponding emphasis upon coordination, a broadening concept of health and an increase in the types of activities included under its rubric, and a manpower shortage especially in the highly trained professions. This paper reviews current studies, important findings, and points out neglected dimensions. Themes prominent in the literature include: (a) status, power, authority, and influence; (b) roles and professional domains; and (c) decision making and communication. A number of important dimensions seem to be neglected, such as the effectiveness of teams as an approach to the delivery of services, the modes of organization and the dilemma of gate-keeping decisions, and the relations of team approaches to the manpower problems.
无论是在医疗保健、科学研究还是其他领域,人们对团队合作的反应很少是中立的。有些人将其视为能帮助解决许多棘手组织问题的万灵药,而另一些人则基于各种理由对其加以谴责。推动医疗保健服务采用团队方式发展以及对其绩效的关注与一系列趋势相关:由于健康相关知识和技术的扩展,专业化和劳动分工显著增加;相应地强调协调;健康概念的拓宽以及涵盖在其范畴内的活动类型增多;以及人力短缺,尤其是在高技能职业领域。本文回顾了当前的研究、重要发现,并指出了被忽视的方面。文献中突出的主题包括:(a)地位、权力、权威和影响力;(b)角色和专业领域;以及(c)决策与沟通。一些重要方面似乎被忽视了,比如团队作为一种服务提供方式的有效性、组织模式以及把关决策的困境,还有团队方式与人力问题的关系。