What Most People Get Wrong About Interdisciplinary Practice
You know the feeling. You leave a team meeting thinking everyone agreed on the plan. Two weeks later, the caregiver tells you the OT said something completely different. The school is doing their own thing. And your learner? Caught in the middle of mixed messages that make progress harder and stress higher.
Interdisciplinary practice mistakes are common, and they rarely come from bad intentions. Most of the time, they come from unclear systems, different training backgrounds, and meetings that feel productive but don’t actually produce shared decisions. If you’re a BCBA working with speech therapists, occupational therapists, schools, or medical providers, you’ve probably lived this frustration.
This article will help you spot the most common collaboration failures before they spread. More importantly, it will give you a simple, dignity-first system for shared planning, clear roles, and better follow-through.
Start Here: Dignity, Safety, and Shared Responsibility
Before we talk about meeting agendas and communication scripts, we need to name the real risk. When interdisciplinary teams don’t coordinate well, learners get confused. They hear different expectations from different adults. Routines change without warning. Stress goes up. Progress stalls.
This isn’t about finding someone to blame. Most collaboration mistakes are process problems, not people problems. The speech therapist isn’t trying to undermine your plan. The school team isn’t ignoring your recommendations on purpose. Usually, the system just doesn’t support true coordination.
Strong interdisciplinary teams keep a few things non-negotiable. Learner dignity comes first, always. Assent matters, even when adults disagree about methods. Families are partners with real expertise, not just people who receive instructions. And everyone respects scope of practice boundaries without using them as weapons.
Here’s a practical way to think about boundaries. Scope of practice defines what your profession is allowed to do. Scope of competence defines what you personally are trained to do well. Collaboration works best when you’re clear about both.
The SLP leads on language systems and AAC design. The BCBA supports practice opportunities and reinforcement across settings. The OT leads on motor and sensory components of daily living skills. The BCBA supports task sequences, prompting, and motivation. Overlap is normal. The goal is to be explicit about who leads what, not to guard territory.
A quick self-check before you “fix the team”
Before your next meeting, ask yourself a few honest questions. Am I assuming my plan is the only right plan? Did we actually ask what matters to the learner and caregiver? Do we have consent to share what we want to share?
These questions aren’t about doubting your clinical skills. They’re about making sure the team stays learner-centered instead of discipline-centered.
Dignity-focused collaboration can be broken down into concrete behaviors: value the learner’s identity and culture, build relational trust with families, give learners voice and choice in tasks and materials, and treat families as true partners in decisions. When you keep these principles visible, even disagreements become easier to navigate.
Want a simple way to keep dignity and safety front-and-center in team meetings? Download our learner-centered meeting checklist (template).
If you want more guidance on keeping [assent in the plan when adults disagree](/interdisciplinary-practice/assent-in-team-decisions), or need a refresher on [scope-of-practice basics for teamwork](/interdisciplinary-practice/scope-of-practice-basics), those resources can help.
Define the Terms (So the Team Stops Talking Past Each Other)
One of the simplest interdisciplinary practice mistakes is assuming everyone means the same thing when they say “team.” They don’t.
Multidisciplinary usually means parallel services. Each discipline works on their own goals, creates their own plan, and shares updates with the group. The plans may not connect.
Interdisciplinary means shared planning. Disciplines work together toward common goals, with strategies that build on each other.
Interprofessional describes different licensed roles working as a coordinated team with shared accountability.
Why does this matter? If your team thinks they’re interdisciplinary but acts multidisciplinary, you’ll have meetings where everyone talks but nobody decides anything together. Your meeting style should match your model.
A plain-language example
Imagine a learner working on using an AAC device. In a multidisciplinary setup, the SLP creates communication goals, and the ABA provider creates behavior goals. They might overlap or conflict without anyone noticing.
In an interdisciplinary setup, the team agrees on one shared communication outcome. The SLP leads on device programming and language targets. The BCBA supports motivation, practice opportunities, and generalization. The goals match and build on each other.
Use our one-page “team terms” handout to align language before your next meeting.
For a deeper dive into the differences, check out our guide on [multidisciplinary vs interdisciplinary (plain language)](/interdisciplinary-practice/multidisciplinary-vs-interdisciplinary).
The Biggest Mistake: Treating Collaboration Like “Updates” Instead of Shared Planning
This is the core failure pattern behind most interdisciplinary breakdowns. Teams hold regular meetings. Everyone reports on what they did. The meeting ends. Nothing actually gets decided together.
Updates-only meetings are backward-looking. They’re status reports. Each person shares their piece, maybe someone asks a clarifying question, and then you move on. The problem is that updates don’t create alignment. You can have a meeting where everyone talks and still leave with conflicting plans.
Shared planning is forward-looking. It includes shared goals everyone commits to, clear roles so each person knows what they own, shared measures so you all agree on what success looks like, and next steps with owners and deadlines.
Why do teams get stuck in updates-only mode? Usually, it’s time pressure. Sometimes there’s no clear lead, so no one feels empowered to push for decisions. Sometimes people avoid conflict. Whatever the cause, the cost is real: duplicated work, conflicting strategies, caregivers asked to do three different “home programs” at once.
What to do instead
Change the question you ask at meetings. Instead of “What did you do?” try “What will we do together next?”
Before you close any meeting, make three decisions together: What is our shared goal? Who owns the next step? When will we check in again?
If routine updates are eating up meeting time, send them asynchronously. Use a shared document or brief email. Save live meeting time for decisions and cross-discipline alignment.
Try our “3 decisions” meeting close-out script and see the difference in follow-through.
If you want a ready-made structure, see our [team meeting agenda template that drives decisions](/interdisciplinary-practice/team-meeting-agenda-template).
Communication Failure Patterns (What They Look Like in Real Life)
Most teams don’t fail because of one big blowup. They fail because of small, repeated communication breakdowns that nobody names. These failures cluster into predictable patterns.
Unclear channel means no one knows where information should live. Did you email it? Put it in the shared folder? Mention it at the meeting? Without a consistent system, important information falls through the cracks.
Unclear audience means the caregiver gets different instructions from different providers. The family is left to figure out which advice to follow.
Unclear meaning means the same word has different definitions across disciplines. “Behavior” means something specific to a BCBA but sounds judgmental to a teacher. “Prompt” can mean very different things depending on training.
Unclear timing means messages arrive too late to be useful.
Silent disagreements are the trickiest. The meeting feels polite. Everyone nods. Then people go back to doing conflicting things because the real disagreement was never surfaced.
Examples across settings
In the clinic, techs might get trained on a new strategy, but the OT was never told. Now the approaches clash during shared sessions.
In school, the IEP team agrees in the room, but then someone sends an email that contradicts what was decided.
At home, the caregiver is asked to implement three different “home programs” at once, none of which coordinate.
Prevention starts with matching the channel to the topic. For sensitive or complex issues, high-fidelity communication works better than a quick text. Secure messaging allows two-way clarification. Structured tools like SBAR help reduce ambiguity.
Use our “same-day recap” note format to reduce confusion after meetings.
For scripts you can use in difficult conversations, see our guide on [communication scripts for hard conversations](/interdisciplinary-practice/communication-scripts).
Barriers and Root Causes (Why Interdisciplinary Work Is Hard)
Understanding why collaboration is difficult helps you fix the right problems instead of blaming people.
Systems barriers are the most common. There’s no shared calendar, no shared notes, no clear process for who talks to whom about what.
Culture clashes happen when different disciplines interpret the same data differently. A BCBA sees a function-based intervention. A counselor sees an emotional need. Neither is wrong, but without a shared frame, it feels like conflict.
Power dynamics matter more than people admit. Hierarchies can stifle open communication. If leadership doesn’t actively reduce these dynamics, important information gets lost.
Role confusion goes both ways. Role blurring can create overlap and conflict. Rigid “stay in your lane” thinking can block needed flexibility. The solution is clarity, not rigidity.
Language barriers aren’t just about jargon. Discipline-specific words mean different things, and that creates semantic breakdowns.
Barrier vs. fix
When you notice unclear roles, create a role map with owners for next steps. When jargon causes confusion, build a shared definitions list. When follow-up fails, send a recap note after every meeting and schedule the next meeting before you end the current one.
Leadership that models psychological safety makes a huge difference. When people can disagree without fear, they surface problems earlier.
Grab our “barriers to fixes” worksheet to plan your next team reset.
For more on role clarity, see our [role clarity worksheet for teams](/interdisciplinary-practice/team-role-clarity).
Mistakes in Goals and Measurement (Where Teams Drift Fast)
Even teams that communicate well can drift when their goals don’t align. One of the most common mistakes is letting each discipline pick goals without a shared priority list.
When goals don’t connect, you get conflicting expectations. The learner hears one thing in clinic, something different at school, and something else at home. Progress looks “good” in one place and “stuck” in another, simply because everyone is measuring different things.
The better move is to start with one or two shared outcomes. These should be socially significant and relevant in all settings—things like transitions, managing distractions, or functional communication. Then each discipline provides supports that point toward those shared outcomes.
Shared measures mean everyone uses the same metrics for success. If “progress” means something different to the SLP than to the BCBA, you’ll spend meetings arguing about whether things are working instead of figuring out what to do next.
A simple shared-measure plan
Pick one or two shared outcomes and describe them in plain language. Define what success looks like in clinic, school, and home. Decide who tracks what and how often the team reviews it together.
Families can act as central coordinators here because they see the whole picture across contexts.
Use our shared goals worksheet to align outcomes across clinic, school, and home.
For more on this, see our guides on [shared goal setting across disciplines](/interdisciplinary-practice/shared-goal-setting) and [how to pick measures that matter to daily life](/interdisciplinary-practice/data-that-matters).
Trust, Respect, and “Territory” Conflict (Without Taking Sides)
Disagreement is normal in interdisciplinary work. Different training, different perspectives, different priorities. The mistake isn’t having conflict. It’s treating disagreement like disrespect.
Another common problem is using scope of practice as a weapon. “That’s not your lane” becomes a way to shut down conversation instead of clarify boundaries. This doesn’t serve the learner.
The better approach is to name shared purpose first. You all want learner safety, dignity, and participation. Start there. Then use curiosity questions instead of defensive ones. “Help me understand what you’re seeing” invites collaboration. “That’s not how we do it in ABA” shuts it down.
Plan for conflict before it happens. Decide as a team how you’ll handle disagreements when they come up.
Role-respect scripts
When perspectives differ, try something like this: “I hear your recommendation from an OT perspective. From my role as a BCBA, I’m concerned about how this might affect motivation. Can we find common ground that protects the learner?”
Mirroring helps reduce defensiveness: “If I heard you right, your primary concern is the sensory environment. Is that correct?”
“I” statements keep things collaborative: “I feel concerned when we change the routine without notice. I’d like to discuss how we can coordinate better.”
Try our conflict-to-clarity script in your next tough team moment.
For a deeper dive, see our guide on [conflict resolution for interdisciplinary teams](/interdisciplinary-practice/conflict-resolution).
Documentation and Privacy Basics (What to Share, When, and Why)
Privacy in interdisciplinary work is often handled poorly in both directions. Some teams over-share because it feels helpful. Others under-share and leave the team guessing. Neither serves the learner well.
Under HIPAA, covered entities must limit protected health information to the minimum necessary for the purpose. However, there are exceptions for disclosures to a provider for treatment, disclosures to the individual, disclosures under valid authorization, and disclosures required by law.
Under FERPA, education records usually require prior written consent before disclosing personally identifiable information. School officials with a legitimate educational interest can sometimes access records without consent, but the rules vary.
ABA providers often face dual compliance. If you’re providing school-based services, you might fall under FERPA. If you’re providing clinic-based services under a medical contract, HIPAA applies.
Beyond legal requirements, the BACB Ethics Code (2.09) requires clear permission before sharing protected health information, even when a legal exception might technically allow it.
A practical “safe share” checklist
Before sharing information with the team, ask yourself: Do we have permission to share this? Who specifically needs to know this to support the learner? Can I share a summary of goals and supports instead of raw notes?
When in doubt, summarize rather than copy. Share what the team needs to coordinate care, not everything you have in the file.
Download our privacy-minded team update template (designed for minimum-necessary sharing).
For more background, see our guide on [privacy and consent basics for collaboration](/interdisciplinary-practice/privacy-consent-basics).
A Repeatable Collaboration Protocol (Do This on Monday)
Here’s a simple system you can use right away.
Step 1: Prep. Before the meeting, circulate the agenda and any relevant data. Give people time to review.
Step 2: Shared agenda. Focus on decisions, not updates. What are we deciding today?
Step 3: Clear roles. Assign a facilitator and note-taker. Be explicit about who owns each next step.
Step 4: Shared measures. Agree on what will show progress. Define success in terms everyone understands.
Step 5: Follow-up. Send a recap note within 24 hours. Include decisions made, action items with owners and deadlines, open questions, and the date of the next meeting.
Pre-meeting packet
You don’t need a complicated document. A one-page learner snapshot works well: strengths, needs, preferences, top priorities in plain language, current supports that help, what to avoid, and questions you need the team to answer.
Meeting agenda
Structure the agenda around the decisions you need to make: What is the shared goal? What is the plan in each setting? Who does what by when? How will we know it worked? How will we handle disagreements?
Get the full collaboration protocol pack: agenda + recap note + shared goals worksheet.
See our [repeatable collaboration protocol for teams](/interdisciplinary-practice/collaboration-protocol) and [follow-up notes that prevent drift](/interdisciplinary-practice/follow-up-notes) for downloadable tools.
Examples of Interdisciplinary Communication That Works
Knowing what to say matters. Here are practical scripts you can adapt.
Requesting input without sounding demanding: “I’d value your perspective on how we’re approaching transitions. What are you seeing in your sessions that might help us adjust the plan?”
Aligning on a shared goal without forcing agreement on methods: “Can we agree that the priority is independent communication during snack time? I’m open to different approaches for getting there.”
Summarizing a plan in plain language for caregivers: “Here’s what we’re all working on together. At school, they’re focusing on using the device during group time. At home, the goal is using it to request preferred items. We’re all measuring the same thing: unprompted requests.”
Escalating safety concerns respectfully: “I want to raise something that’s been on my mind. I’ve noticed some behaviors that concern me from a safety standpoint. I’d like the team’s input before we decide next steps.”
SBAR-style prompt
SBAR is a structured communication tool that adapts well to ABA collaboration.
Situation: What’s happening now. Background: What matters for context. Assessment: What you think is going on and your uncertainty. Request: What you need from the team.
Example: “Situation: Aggression during transitions increased this week. Background: It’s happening most after lunch. Sleep has been poor, and OT noted sensory overload in the cafeteria. Assessment: I think we’re seeing escape plus sensory discomfort, and current transition demands may be too fast. I’m not certain. Request: Can we agree on one transition routine and one data method?”
Copy/paste our communication scripts for OT, speech, school teams, and medical providers.
For setting-specific guidance, see our guides on [how to collaborate with school teams and IEPs](/interdisciplinary-practice/school-collaboration) and [how to communicate with medical providers](/interdisciplinary-practice/medical-provider-communication).
Quick Checklist: Spot the Mistakes Before They Spread
Use this checklist as a cover sheet for your next meeting.
Shared purpose check. Have we confirmed that dignity, assent, and safety are guiding our decisions?
Shared definitions check. Do we all mean the same thing when we use key terms?
Shared planning check. Did we make decisions together, or did we just share updates?
Role clarity check. Does every next step have an owner and a deadline?
Measurement check. Are we tracking the same outcomes using the same definitions of success?
Privacy check. Do we have consent to share what we’re sharing?
Follow-up check. Is the recap sent? Is the next meeting scheduled?
One-sentence rule
If it isn’t written down with an owner and a next check-in, it isn’t a plan.
Print the checklist and use it as your meeting cover sheet.
For a printable version, see our [interdisciplinary meeting checklist](/interdisciplinary-practice/meeting-checklist).
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the difference between interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary practice?
Multidisciplinary means disciplines work in parallel with separate plans. Interdisciplinary means disciplines plan together toward shared goals. In a multidisciplinary setup, the OT might work on sensory goals while the BCBA works on behavior goals, and the plans might not connect. In an interdisciplinary setup, both providers agree on shared outcomes and coordinate their strategies.
What are the most common interdisciplinary practice mistakes?
Treating meetings as updates instead of shared planning, having unclear roles and owners, using the same words to mean different things, setting misaligned goals across settings, and failing to follow up after meetings.
What causes communication failures in interdisciplinary teams?
System issues like missing shared processes, culture and training differences, power and role confusion, timing and channel problems, and avoiding conflict instead of naming it.
How can I improve interdisciplinary communication without stepping on other disciplines’ roles?
Start with shared purpose and respect for scope. Ask for input using clear, curious questions. Offer options, not orders. Write down decisions and owners. Follow up with a short recap.
What should an interdisciplinary team meeting agenda include?
The shared goal and priorities, the plan by setting, roles and responsibilities, how progress will be measured, safety and assent considerations, and next steps with a next check-in date.
How do interdisciplinary teams align goals and measurement?
Pick one or two shared outcomes. Define what success looks like in each setting. Assign who tracks what. Review together on a simple schedule.
What are common barriers in interdisciplinary research and how are they similar to practice barriers?
Both face barriers from different language and frameworks, different incentives and priorities, and coordination costs. Shared definitions, shared outcomes, and shared workflow reduce friction in any collaborative effort.
What information can I share with other providers or school teams?
Start with consent and minimum necessary. When unsure, share a summary of goals and supports rather than detailed personal information. Get guidance from supervisors when needed.
Putting It All Together
Strong interdisciplinary practice isn’t about perfect people or unlimited time. It’s about repeatable systems: shared purpose that keeps learner dignity visible, shared planning that produces real decisions, clear roles so everyone knows what they own, simple measures so you’re all tracking the same outcomes, and respectful follow-through that keeps the plan alive between meetings.
The mistakes we’ve covered are common because the systems that prevent them are often missing. Most teams don’t fail from bad intentions. They fail from unclear processes, different languages, and meetings that feel productive but don’t actually align anyone.
You can change this, starting with your next meeting. Use a decision-first agenda. Send a recap within 24 hours. Name the shared outcome you’re all working toward. Assign owners to next steps. Schedule the follow-up before you end the call.
These aren’t complicated fixes. They’re habits. And habits, practiced consistently, change how teams work together.
Download the full interdisciplinary collaboration toolkit—agenda, recap note, shared goals worksheet, and checklist—and use it in your next team meeting.
