Inter-disciplinarity is about doing more together than we can apart. While the understanding of the complexity of the social determinants of health (SDH) is leading to more multidisciplinary action in community and population health, it is too often done as parallel play. Much has been learned about the continuum of how we can work together in community; such as Arthur Himmelman’s often sited definitions of networking, coordinating, cooperating, and collaborating in his work, Collaboration for a Change (http://www.himmelmanconsulting.com). Experience still shows, however, that there is much yet to be learned about how to apply these concepts in the real world.
More and more, communities are coming together to identify shared concerns; and even shared goals addressing their concerns. Yet the fact is that for too many communities, these actions are primarily motivated by compliance with external requirements, such as the Affordable Care Act (ACA), which mandates the assessment of community health needs every three years and incentivizes population health improvements.
Working on shared goals is not the same as coaction, which is about taking action together. This requires going even further than participating in community planning, and even sharing resources. It requires having the individual, institutional and political will to change both the system and how you carry out business in your corner of that system. As communities work towards overcoming the hurdle of parallel tunnel vision in understanding and addressing their greatest population health needs, the goal posts must keep moving further downfield to coaction.
In upcoming conversations, we’ll address the issues of how the replication of traditional power dynamics in community health initiatives limits their capacity to achieve their stated shared long-term goals; among other topics. We’re interested in your thoughts, questions, and suggestions. Please keep the conversation going!
More and more, communities are coming together to identify shared concerns; and even shared goals addressing their concerns. Yet the fact is that for too many communities, these actions are primarily motivated by compliance with external requirements, such as the Affordable Care Act (ACA), which mandates the assessment of community health needs every three years and incentivizes population health improvements.
Working on shared goals is not the same as coaction, which is about taking action together. This requires going even further than participating in community planning, and even sharing resources. It requires having the individual, institutional and political will to change both the system and how you carry out business in your corner of that system. As communities work towards overcoming the hurdle of parallel tunnel vision in understanding and addressing their greatest population health needs, the goal posts must keep moving further downfield to coaction.
In upcoming conversations, we’ll address the issues of how the replication of traditional power dynamics in community health initiatives limits their capacity to achieve their stated shared long-term goals; among other topics. We’re interested in your thoughts, questions, and suggestions. Please keep the conversation going!
RSS Feed