During Thursday’s Collaborative Introductory Learning Program, we were discussing teamwork and the importance of trust and willingness to take criticism.  One attendee asked what to do if one of the team members won’t debrief.

These types of questions often come up on our Friday Happy Hour too. The answer we almost always hear from Carol Hughes from the Orange County, California practice group is that they have protocols that require their members to participate in such activities. Part of their protocols even allow the professionals to elect whether they receive criticism in the team setting or individually by one of the team members.

The practice protocols were adopted by her group many years ago. Practice group members must agree to abide by the protocols and must reassert that agreement every year. Yes, they have lost membership over this requirement, but each professional in their practice group is now assured that their team members aspire to the highest of standards and follow the protocols as prescribed. Their protocols also require on-going advanced training.

This type of practice group setting contrasts with many groups whose goal is to train and have a practice group filled with as many Collaborative professionals as possible.

There is something to be said for both models. Obviously, the more Collaboratively trained professionals, the likelihood is that there will be more Collaborative cases. But there is something to be said for having the highest quality of Collaborative practice within your practice group.

Maybe there is a middle ground to be found.

What kind of practice group is yours?  Are numbers the most important goal?  Is the quality practice of Collaborative more important than numbers?  Or do you offer a blend?