Transcription
Common Viewpoints
Explore the attitudes and beliefs about collaboration in more depth for each of the above viewpoints. Which one resonates most with your thinking? Which one are you?
Welcome to the toolkit for primary care and public health collaboration. Do you recognize these viewpoints? Let’s explore them now.
Cautious collaborators agree that we need to be deliberate about what collaborations might be possible and to take stalk of what collaborations we already have now. They agree that public health wants to make sure they don’t get swallowed up by primary care issues and they want to deal with issues at the population level rather than the individual level. And they agree that everyone feels they’re already doing as much as they can handle; they’re at capacity. And partners need to consistently engage in dialogue to ensure successful collaborations and strategies for success are focused at the local level, starting small.
Cautious collaborators disagree that having a clear mandate from the top would enable better collaborations. They disagree that there’s a lack of communication and that for better communications there must be more electronic communication mechanisms between the sectors.
The system driven collaborator agrees it’s important to have a clear mandate from the top to enable the rest of the health care system to effectively work together. They agree that people in different branches in the Ministry have to really believe in collaboration and write policies to have organizations work better. And that leadership at the Ministry level is very important. This group also agrees that globally funded health care models will encourage successful collaborations.
System driven collaborators disagree that differing mandates are a barrier to collaboration. They disagree that unions and funding differences are of a particular challenge. But they remain neutral on organization and interactional ideas.
Competent isolationists agree that a clear understanding of rules contribute to successful collaborations. They agree that individual professions won’t recognize the value in collaboration because of their differing education. And they believe it’s important to use the special skill sets they have. And finally, competent isolationists agree that different mandates and unstable funding are barriers to successful collaborations.
Competent isolations disagree that there is evidence on the benefits of collaboration related to long term health. In addition, they disagree that there is value in having a formal understanding and policies. And this group disagrees that geography and consistently engaging in dialogue helps collaborations.