The Partnered Learning Project

Project Handbook

A Guide to Early Planning for the Development of an Interprofessional Collaboration and Education Program in a Healthcare Setting

2.0 Institutional Readiness

Thoughtful planning and groundwork increases the likelihood of success when implementing IPC/IPE learning activities, whether intended as an ongoing program or time limited.  Assessing the environment in terms of the institutional culture and readiness for IPC/IPE learning activities is recommended as an integral part of the preparation work, regardless of the planned length of the program. 

Assessing the institutional culture and readiness

Questions to Consider:

2. Senior Management Support: What is the level of commitment shown by the senior management towards enhancing organizational support for interprofessional collaboration? For more questions, click here...

Are there inconsistencies in this support or its visibility in different sections of the organization?

3. Understanding the Program Mandate: Are the learning objectives clearly connected to established organizational priorities? Are these organizational priorities understood and shared by the intended participants? For more questions, click here...

Is there clarity between the program planners and those providing the funding for the program concerning the intended scope and future of the proposed program? For example, if there has only been funding approved for one year of the proposed training program, have you had a discussion about sustainability?

 

4. Acceptance of Learning Methodology: Are staff accustomed to participating in the type of professional development activities that are being contemplated (i.e. role playing)? For more questions, click here...

Will the proposed learning activities be regarded as relevant learning opportunities by the targeted participants? Will the learning time qualify for professional development time credits? Are there other ways to acknowledge the participant’s learning which are considered relevant by your target audience?

 

5. Realistic: Are the proposed logistical plans realistic? For more questions, click here...

Can staff take the required time away from their daily practice to participate in education sessions? …What supports can be put in place to ensure participation and engagement? Can the physical requirement of implementing the training program be satisfied? For example -- is meeting space generally available? Is there someone to manage the organizing details? Are there acceptable ways of recruiting and communicating with prospective participants?

 

6. Congruency: Are there environmental or cultural characteristics of the organization that are inconsistent or even in conflict with the key elements of the proposed content or program design? For more questions, click here...

Will there be options for follow-up or additional support available to participants for transferring the learning into practice after the event?

 

7. Foundational values:  Is there a pre-existing culture of collaboration between departments or organizations who will be jointly involved in the program? For more questions, click here...

If there is not a pre-existing culture of collaboration and partnering demonstrated through operational practices, will time be dedicated to identifying the values and capacity of each participating department, unit or organization so that the needs and expectations of each partner group are understood from the outset?

to top

Our Story

PLP Challenges and Strategies:

1. Since the PLP was designed as a research study, a learning needs assessment was not completed at the individual project locations.

   Steering Committee learning objectives for the IPC activities and participant learning objectives for the workshop were designed by the Steering Committee before the Phase I workshops were initiated. Participant learning objectives were grounded in the IPE literature and research objectives. The learning objectives were modified for each team, based on accumulating experience.




2. The research methodology specified the use of role play in the IPC learning activities. Most participants were generally unfamiliar with this learning model, or their prior exposure to working with simulation was in a testing / assessment situation. Participants seemed uncertain and uncomfortable with role play as a learning methodology.

   The IPC lead redesigned the simulation situations to more clearly focus on the learning objectives and used prior observation of the team functioning in the actual clinical setting to gain insight into the team processes and culture. These insights were used to help customize the role play scenarios.




3. A team that demonstrated a high level of team cohesion and collaboration had expectations for more advanced learning content and organizational-wide action to support growth of collaborative practice.

   The Steering Committee adjusted the plans to include feedback sessions to both the participants and the senior management that supported the project. These sessions focused on the perceived learning needs and expectations that the research workshops surfaced, with the intention that these lessons could be applied to the development of future learning programs.




4. The three partner institutions demonstrated different levels of readiness for engaging teams in professional development sessions of this nature. The short time-frame for implementation and the varied levels of engagement in the project development made it necessary to adjust the planning and communications to achieve the greatest engagement.

   The Steering Committee membership included representatives from each institution, a variety of professions and clinical educators. This mixed representation was intended to assist with identifying levels of IPC learning readiness in each location. However numerous factors influenced the selection of participant teams and the Steering Committee members did not necessarily have detailed knowledge of the teams involved. Learning needs also varied within each team. The challenges experienced as a result of implementing the same general curriculum in all situations, regardless of the team’s prior knowledge of IPC, should provide valuable data for exploration in the scholarly work arising from this study.

to Managing the Project