Ditching the Echo Chamber: The Potential of Interdisciplinary Teams
1. Introduction
In an era of rapid technological advancement and increasing complexity, businesses are under pressure to deliver innovative solutions at unprecedented speeds. The challenges they face often span multiple domains, from technological integration to regulatory compliance and customer experience. No single discipline holds all the answers. To tackle these multifaceted problems, companies are turning to interdisciplinary teams: groups that bring together individuals with diverse backgrounds and skill sets to collaborate on shared goals.
1.1 The Difference Between Interdisciplinary and Multidisciplinary
The Merriam Webster dictionary defines ‘interdisciplinary’ as: involving two or more academic, scientific, or artistic disciplines. The prefix ‘inter-’ means ‘between’ or ‘among,’ while ‘multi-’ refers to ‘many’ or ‘much,’ as defined by Merriam-Webster. Therefore, distinction between interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary lies in how team members interact. In interdisciplinary teams, the goal is collaborative problem-solving, where members integrate their expertise to develop a solution together. Multidisciplinary teams, on the other hand, involve individuals approaching the problem from their own perspectives, working in parallel with the hope of reaching a solution. Choi et al nicely summarise this:
‘Multidisciplinarity draws on knowledge from different disciplines but stays within their boundaries. Interdisciplinarity analyzes, synthesizes and harmonizes links between disciplines into a coordinated and coherent whole.’
This article explores what makes interdisciplinary teams so effective, the key considerations for building and managing them, and how they can drive innovation through a detailed use case.
2. The Benefits of Interdisciplinary Teams
The term ‘interdisciplinary’ has become a buzzword as companies strive to optimise performance while navigating a rapidly changing social and technological landscape. The importance of interdisciplinary teams is well documented through research done in the healthcare sector, where professionals from diverse backgrounds collaborate to improve patient outcomes and resource efficiency, their advantages extend across industries. By combining knowledge and methodologies from different disciplines, interdisciplinary teams can unlock new insights, avoid blind spots, and produce more holistic solutions. However, simply assembling a diverse group does not guarantee success. The effectiveness of these teams relies on careful team composition, clear leadership, and the creation of a collaborative environment where diverse perspectives are integrated into the problem-solving process.
2.1 An Outline of the Benefits
Research consistently shows that diverse teams deliver significantly better performance. A key reason is that members from different backgrounds bring a variety of perspectives and ideas to the table, which accelerates problem-solving and fosters innovative solutions. The value of collaboration across different skill sets is well established in business. For instance, architecture has often been used to facilitate cross-departmental interaction, with designs like I.M. Pei’s workspaces emphasizing organic collaboration to speed up problem-solving. A few of the key benefits are outlined below:
2.1.1 A More Comprehensive Understanding of the Problem Leading to Better Solutions
People from different academic disciplines are likely to take distinct approaches when solving a problem, shaped by their own training, methodologies, and ways of thinking. As a result, each member will contribute a unique perspective, viewing the problem through their discipline-specific lens. With a greater variety of mindsets in the group, the team is also better able to sympathise with the views of the many stakeholders in a given situation. This diversity means the problem is not only considered from multiple angles, but the resulting solution is more likely to be meticulous and holistic, addressing different facets of the issue with fewer blind spots. Interdisciplinary teams help to eliminate groupthink, as members are naturally inclined to challenge each other's assumptions and offer alternative approaches. This dynamic aids in the creation of targeted, innovative solutions that tackle the problem across multiple dimensions, making interdisciplinary teams particularly well-suited to problems that do not fall into neatly defined categories.
2.1.2 Increased Self-Sufficiency
Interdisciplinary teams benefit from having a broad range of competencies concentrated within a single group. Each member brings a distinct skill set that complements those of others, creating a team that can tackle varied aspects of the problem independently. This internal diversity allows members to act as sounding boards for one another, enabling ideas to be refined and developed more rapidly without needing constant external input. The need to involve external teams or departments is often minimised, reducing the risk of miscommunication or oversimplification of the problem. External consultation can require complex issues to be condensed for efficiency, potentially stripping away critical details. By keeping expertise in-house, interdisciplinary teams can maintain a streamlined and agile problem-solving process, capable of addressing complex issues without compromising accuracy or depth.
2.1.3 Minimised Bias and Increased Agility
Teams composed of individuals accustomed to working within a specific framework may develop unconscious biases in their problem-solving approach. This can result in the team gravitating towards familiar, cookie-cutter solutions rather than exploring more novel alternatives. Interdisciplinary teams naturally guard against this tendency, as members with different thinking styles are more likely to challenge underlying assumptions and propose alternative strategies. The diverse composition of the team creates an environment where debate and discussion are encouraged, breaking the cycle of habitual thinking. This dynamic not only minimises bias but enhances the team's agility, allowing it to pivot and adapt quickly as new insights emerge. The result is a more robust and innovative solution that is better tailored to the unique demands of the problem at hand.
However, diversity alone is not enough. Constructing a team to unlock these benefits requires careful design and management.
3. Forming the Ideal Team
Crafting a high-performing interdisciplinary team involves more than simply gathering a group of specialists. It requires understanding what each member can contribute and how those contributions will fit together.
3.1 What Metrics to Use
One widely used framework for team composition is Meredith Belbin's Team Roles. Belbin identified nine distinct roles that individuals tend to adopt in team settings, ranging from creative thinkers to practical implementers and diplomatic coordinators. The most successful interdisciplinary teams strike a balance between these roles, combining big-picture thinkers, detail-oriented executors, and relationship-builders.
Action-Oriented Roles:
Shaper – Challenges the team, drives progress
Implementer – Transforms ideas into practical solutions
Completer-Finisher – Ensures attention to detail and quality
People-Oriented Roles:
Coordinator – Facilitates collaboration
Team Worker – Promotes team cohesion
Resource Investigator – Brings external insights and connections
Thought-Oriented Roles:
Plant – Generates creative ideas
Monitor Evaluator – Provides objective analysis
Specialist – Offers deep expertise
A team composed entirely of creative thinkers might generate bold ideas but struggle to turn them into practical solutions. Conversely, a team made up of detail-oriented implementers might execute flawlessly but fail to explore innovative ideas. A balanced team harnesses both imagination and pragmatism.
3.2 How to Manage an Interdisciplinary Team
3.2.1 Tuckman’s Model of Group Development
Alongside team composition, leadership is critical. Bruce Tuckman's model of group development provides a useful blueprint for managing interdisciplinary teams through the stages of Forming, Storming, Norming, and Performing.
Forming – Team members get to know each other.
Storming – Differences arise; conflicts must be managed.
Norming – The team establishes shared goals and workflows.
Performing – The team operates efficiently with minimal intervention.
Despite their potential, interdisciplinary teams face a number of challenges that can derail their performance if not properly addressed. Team leaders can use Tuckman’s model to guide their interdisciplinary teams through these phases of group development, ensuring a smoother transition and stronger collaboration. During the forming stage, leaders can set clear expectations and create a supportive environment, encouraging open communication and helping team members from different disciplines understand each other’s expertise.
In the storming phase, where conflicts or differences may arise, leaders should facilitate constructive dialogue and mediate tensions, ensuring that diverse perspectives are appreciated rather than divisive. Practices can be implemented to ensure that the team is able to manage any conflict that arises further down the line.
In the norming stage, leaders can reinforce shared goals by recognising early successes. Key performance indicators can be developed at this stage to guide the team moving forward.
Finally, in the performing stage, leaders can step back and allow the team to function autonomously while providing support and ensuring alignment with broader objectives.
By consciously guiding the team through each stage, leaders can maximize the benefits of interdisciplinary collaboration and ensure sustained high performance. If the team leader has successfully supported and guided the team in the forming, storming and norming stages, this will be evident in the way the team functions in the performing stage.
4. Navigating the Challenges
4.1 Communication Barriers
Communication is often the biggest barrier. Each discipline has its own jargon, assumptions, and working methods, which can lead to misunderstandings. For instance, a software engineer might refer to "architecture" in a technical sense, while a marketing professional might associate the term with brand structure. Without efforts to establish shared language and clarify terminology, these disconnects can slow down the team's progress.
4.2 Conflicting Goals
Conflicting goals can also emerge. Team members may have different priorities — one might prioritize efficiency, while another champions thoroughness. Aligning the team around a unified set of objectives from the outset is crucial to preventing these tensions from undermining the project.
4.3 Power Imbalances
Power imbalances are another common challenge. Individuals with the most relevant expertise might naturally dominate discussions, leaving others feeling sidelined. Leaders must actively facilitate inclusive discussions, ensuring that all voices are heard and no single perspective becomes overly dominant.
5. Measuring Success
A study into the attributes of high-performing interdisciplinary teams identified ten key features that contribute to their success. These features act as benchmarks for assessing team performance and can be translated into Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) to ensure continuous improvement.
The ten attributes are:
Positive leadership and management attributes
Effective communication strategies and structures
Personal rewards, training, and development opportunities
Access to appropriate resources and procedures
A balanced skill mix
A supportive team climate
Individual characteristics that encourage teamwork
Clarity of vision and goals
High-quality outcomes
Respect and understanding of team roles
To turn these into actionable KPIs, leaders should set clear, measurable targets that can be tracked over time.
On an individual level, for instance, the leadership and management attributes can be evaluated through regular feedback, assessing how well leaders foster collaboration and resolve conflicts within the team. Communication strategies and structures can be tracked by monitoring the frequency and quality of cross-functional meetings, as well as ensuring that all disciplines have a voice in decision-making processes (which, at the performing stage, should be facilitated by the team itself). Training and development can be measured by tracking participation in interdisciplinary workshops or mentorship programs designed to enhance collaboration.
On a team level, skill mix and supportive team climate can be assessed by regularly reviewing whether the team has the right blend of expertise through observing whether there are any issues the team struggles to tackle and if members feel comfortable sharing their ideas. Vision clarity can be evaluated by gauging whether all team members understand and align with the project’s goals, while respecting and understanding roles can be tracked through surveys or informal check-ins to ensure that each discipline’s contributions are valued. Finally, quality and outcomes of care, or, in the context of business, project outcomes, can be measured through deliverables, customer feedback, and the team’s overall impact on the organization’s objectives.
Regularly reviewing these KPIs ensures that the interdisciplinary team stays aligned, motivated, and able to continuously improve.
6. Use Case Example: Developing an AI Strategy for Customer Experience Enhancement
To illustrate how interdisciplinary teams work in practice, consider the example of a company seeking to implement AI-driven solutions to improve customer experience. The company wants to improve its chatbot service, leveraging AI to provide more personalized and efficient customer interactions.
The interdisciplinary team formed for this project includes:
A historian
A biochemist
A physicist
A finance professional
One of the team’s initial conversations about the project was transcribed and analysed with the help of AI to illustrate the different approaches each member took.
1. Historian (H)
Approach: H’s approach revolves around understanding the chatbot's origin, possibly reflecting a historian’s curiosity for context and background. They ask whether the chatbot was an off-the-shelf solution or custom-made, as this could inform potential limitations or structural issues.
Focus: They highlight assessing the “lineage” of the chatbot, just as a historian would trace the origins of a source, allowing for a unique angle on whether the framework or "template" limits the chatbot’s performance.
2. Biochemist (B)
Approach: B’s suggestion is practical and experimental, focusing on directly interacting with the chatbot. This approach is similar to how a biochemist might assess a lab protocol: by running through steps firsthand to identify where issues arise.
Focus: Their emphasis is on understanding the user’s experience of the process, akin to identifying functional errors in a biological system by running a test and observing results.
3. Physicist (P)
Approach: P approaches the issue analytically, prioritizing evidence and distribution methods for survey engagement. They focus on examining how feedback is gathered and the rationale behind customer satisfaction goals—similar to testing a hypothesis about customer responses.
Focus: P’s scientific mindset shines through in the way they question why improvement is necessary if feedback is positive. They probe distribution mechanics, much like troubleshooting a physical experiment to ensure results are representative.
4. Finance Professional (F)
Approach: F’s response takes a strategic, results-oriented angle, considering the value of defining goals and seeking buy-in from stakeholders. They suggest adding transparency and clarifying priorities, as a financial analyst might do when assessing the viability of an investment.
Focus: Their emphasis on defining priorities and consulting a project sponsor shows a practical, no-nonsense approach to aligning goals with measurable outcomes, aiming for clarity and accountability in the process.
Summary of Differences
Empirical (B and P) vs. Contextual (H): B and P prioritize real-time, direct feedback, with P considering distribution logistics, while H dives into background details.
Strategic Alignment (F) vs. Process-Driven (B, P): F focuses on clarifying stakeholders’ goals to provide direction, contrasting with B and P’s hands-on or investigative focus.
These different disciplinary perspectives allow for a rounded approach to problem-solving, with each lens providing a unique method for refining the chatbot experience.
7. Conclusions and Recommendations
7.1 Conclusions
In an increasingly complex business environment, interdisciplinary teams offer a powerful means of tackling multifaceted challenges. By bringing together individuals from diverse academic, scientific, and professional backgrounds, these teams can develop more comprehensive, innovative solutions that drive better outcomes. The collaborative nature of interdisciplinary teams enables them to avoid groupthink, reduce biases, and solve problems from multiple perspectives. This approach not only leads to higher-quality results but also allows teams to be more self-sufficient and agile in addressing the tasks at hand.
However, the benefits of interdisciplinary teams don’t occur automatically. As outlined, successful interdisciplinary teams depend on a well-thought-out team composition, clear communication, and strong leadership. Tools like Belbin’s team roles and Tuckman’s stages of team development can guide leaders in assembling and nurturing high-functioning teams. Additionally, turning key attributes—such as leadership quality, communication strategies, and team climate—into measurable KPIs will help track the team’s progress and ensure continuous improvement.
7.2 Recommendations
Strategic Team Formation: Leaders should consciously select team members based on both their disciplinary expertise and their ability to contribute to the team’s overall dynamics. Using frameworks like Belbin’s roles ensures that the team has a balance of thinkers, doers, and coordinators, preventing an over-reliance on any one skill set.
Clear Communication: As communication barriers are a common challenge in interdisciplinary teams, leaders should establish structures that encourage open dialogue and the clarification of terms, fostering a shared understanding across different disciplines.
Unified Goals and Expectations: At the outset of any project, leaders should align the team around a clear set of goals, ensuring that all members understand and agree on the project’s priorities. This will help prevent conflicting objectives and ensure that everyone is working towards the same outcomes.
Supportive Leadership: During the team’s development, leaders should actively manage conflict, promote collaboration, and ensure that all voices are heard, addressing potential power imbalances or dominance by certain individuals. This creates an inclusive environment where every member feels valued and motivated to contribute.
KPI Implementation: Leaders should implement key performance indicators that track both individual contributions and overall team performance. These KPIs will help identify areas for improvement and ensure that the team remains on track to achieve its goals.
By following these recommendations, leaders can build and maintain interdisciplinary teams that are not only resilient in the face of complex challenges but also equipped to innovate and thrive in today’s fast-paced business world.