Page 163 - Štremfel, Urška, and Maša Vidmar (eds.). 2018. Early School Leaving: Cooperation Perspectives. Ljubljana: Pedagoški inštitut.
P. 163
lational expertise as a prerequisite for effective multi-professional collaboration ...
being key competencies for successful teamwork is clearly visible from the
aforementioned studies and, when combined with the call to develop col-
laborative competency (Manilall & Rowe, 2016), it nicely taps into Edwards’
(2010) relational perception of competency and concept of relational exper-
tise. Her focus is therefore on the relational aspect of competence, where the
individual competence of one practitioner is inherently bound to the com-
petence of other practitioners (Bing-Johnson et al., 2016).
Relational expertise
Edwards (2005) coined the term relational expertise. She sees it as the abili-
ty to recognise and respond to the standpoints of other professionals, while
at the same time utilising the knowledge that underpins one’s own practice.
The development of this concept is the result of the relational turn in exper-
tise, shifting from an analytical focus on the behaviour of individual pro-
fessionals to observing their actions while working with others (Edwards,
2005). This changes the perspective from seeing professionals as the sole re-
positories of exclusive sets of knowledge, working within well-established
practices and procedures, to the ‘modern age’ professional who is required
to work across the boundaries of their own expertise on complex problems
with practitioners from other fields or with clients, beyond the safety and
comfort of the bureaucratic procedures used by their own organisations.
This then forces them, instead of following pre-established organisational
procedures, to rely on their own specialist knowledge and expertise while
working with others to negotiate common means to accomplish their group
tasks. Professional expertise is thus no longer so closely aligned with one’s
social position, but is something that must be negotiated while working on
shared problems. For these negotiations to happen, the expertise of each
professional needs to be made visible to others (Edwards, 2010).
The results of various studies Edwards (2005, 2010, 2012, 2015, 2016)
conducted in the fields of education and social care point to: (1) relational
expertise; (2) common knowledge; and (3) relational agency as being “three
(interdependent) gardening tools” needed for successful inter-profession-
al work. The gardening metaphor stems from a re-interpretation of profes-
sional cross-boundary work whereby professionals are no longer seen as
operating like engineers or architects but more like gardeners. Together,
these three tools facilitate fluidity, responsiveness and horizontal boundary
crossing across diverse areas of expertise (Edwards, 2011).
163
being key competencies for successful teamwork is clearly visible from the
aforementioned studies and, when combined with the call to develop col-
laborative competency (Manilall & Rowe, 2016), it nicely taps into Edwards’
(2010) relational perception of competency and concept of relational exper-
tise. Her focus is therefore on the relational aspect of competence, where the
individual competence of one practitioner is inherently bound to the com-
petence of other practitioners (Bing-Johnson et al., 2016).
Relational expertise
Edwards (2005) coined the term relational expertise. She sees it as the abili-
ty to recognise and respond to the standpoints of other professionals, while
at the same time utilising the knowledge that underpins one’s own practice.
The development of this concept is the result of the relational turn in exper-
tise, shifting from an analytical focus on the behaviour of individual pro-
fessionals to observing their actions while working with others (Edwards,
2005). This changes the perspective from seeing professionals as the sole re-
positories of exclusive sets of knowledge, working within well-established
practices and procedures, to the ‘modern age’ professional who is required
to work across the boundaries of their own expertise on complex problems
with practitioners from other fields or with clients, beyond the safety and
comfort of the bureaucratic procedures used by their own organisations.
This then forces them, instead of following pre-established organisational
procedures, to rely on their own specialist knowledge and expertise while
working with others to negotiate common means to accomplish their group
tasks. Professional expertise is thus no longer so closely aligned with one’s
social position, but is something that must be negotiated while working on
shared problems. For these negotiations to happen, the expertise of each
professional needs to be made visible to others (Edwards, 2010).
The results of various studies Edwards (2005, 2010, 2012, 2015, 2016)
conducted in the fields of education and social care point to: (1) relational
expertise; (2) common knowledge; and (3) relational agency as being “three
(interdependent) gardening tools” needed for successful inter-profession-
al work. The gardening metaphor stems from a re-interpretation of profes-
sional cross-boundary work whereby professionals are no longer seen as
operating like engineers or architects but more like gardeners. Together,
these three tools facilitate fluidity, responsiveness and horizontal boundary
crossing across diverse areas of expertise (Edwards, 2011).
163
