Exploring Engineers’ Experiences of Interdisciplinary Collaboration in Multidisciplinary Engineering Projects: A Qualitative Study
Keywords:
interdisciplinary collaboration, multidisciplinary engineering projects, engineers’ experiences, qualitative study, semi-structured interviews, thematic analysisAbstract
This study aimed to explore engineers’ lived experiences of interdisciplinary collaboration in multidisciplinary engineering projects and to identify the relational, communicative, organizational, and learning processes that shape effective cross-disciplinary work. This qualitative study was conducted using a conventional thematic analysis approach. Participants were 24 engineers working in multidisciplinary engineering projects in Tehran, Iran. They were selected through purposive sampling to ensure variation in engineering discipline, professional experience, organizational role, and project type. Data were collected exclusively through semi-structured interviews, each lasting approximately 45–75 minutes. Interviews focused on participants’ experiences of working with engineers and professionals from other disciplines, perceived facilitators and barriers to collaboration, communication practices, conflict management, leadership support, and learning outcomes. Data collection continued until theoretical saturation was achieved. All interviews were audio-recorded with participants’ consent, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using NVivo software. The analysis followed iterative coding, category development, constant comparison, memo writing, and theme refinement. Five main categories emerged from the analysis: negotiating disciplinary languages and mental models; coordination through boundary objects and integrative routines; relational trust and psychological safety; leadership and project governance as collaboration scaffolds; and interdisciplinary learning and professional identity development. Participants described interdisciplinary collaboration as both necessary and challenging. While disciplinary diversity improved problem-solving and project innovation, it also created misunderstandings, delays, jargon-related confusion, and conflicts over priorities. Effective collaboration depended on shared project goals, early clarification of roles, structured coordination meetings, use of common design documents, respectful communication, and leaders who actively mediated disciplinary boundaries. The findings suggest that interdisciplinary collaboration in engineering projects is not merely a technical process but a socially negotiated practice requiring communication competence, trust, boundary-crossing capacity, integrative leadership, and reflective learning. Multidisciplinary projects benefit when organizations create formal and informal structures that enable engineers to translate disciplinary knowledge, manage conflict constructively, and develop shared ownership of complex project outcomes.
Downloads
References
Aboelela, S. W., Larson, E., Bakken, S., Carrasquillo, O., Formicola, A., Glied, S. A., Haas, J., & Gebbie, K. M. (2007). Defining interdisciplinary research: Conclusions from a critical review of the literature. Health Services Research, 42(1 Pt 1), 329–346. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6773.2006.00621.x
Akkerman, S. F., & Bakker, A. (2011). Boundary crossing and boundary objects. Review of Educational Research, 81(2), 132–169. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654311404435
Borrego, M., Karlin, J., McNair, L. D., & Beddoes, K. (2013). Team effectiveness theory from industrial and organizational psychology applied to engineering student project teams: A research review. Journal of Engineering Education, 102(4), 472–512. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20023
Borrego, M., & Newswander, L. K. (2008). Characteristics of successful cross-disciplinary engineering education collaborations. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(2), 123–134. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2008.tb00962.x
Borrego, M., & Newswander, L. K. (2010). Definitions of interdisciplinary research: Toward graduate-level interdisciplinary learning outcomes. The Review of Higher Education, 34(1), 61–84. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2010.0006
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Carlile, P. R. (2002). A pragmatic view of knowledge and boundaries: Boundary objects in new product development. Organization Science, 13(4), 442–455. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.13.4.442.2953
Carlile, P. R. (2004). Transferring, translating, and transforming: An integrative framework for managing knowledge across boundaries. Organization Science, 15(5), 555–568. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1040.0094
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Edmondson, A. C. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350–383. https://doi.org/10.2307/2666999
Edmondson, A. C., & Harvey, J.-F. (2018). Cross-boundary teaming for innovation: Integrating research on teams and knowledge in organizations. Human Resource Management Review, 28(4), 347–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2017.03.002
Edmondson, A. C., & Lei, Z. (2014). Psychological safety: The history, renaissance, and future of an interpersonal construct. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1, 23–43. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031413-091305
Fiore, S. M. (2008). Interdisciplinarity as teamwork: How the science of teams can inform team science. Small Group Research, 39(3), 251–277. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496408317797
Klein, J. T. (1990). Interdisciplinarity: History, theory, and practice. Wayne State University Press.
Klein, J. T. (2010). A taxonomy of interdisciplinarity. In R. Frodeman, J. T. Klein, & C. Mitcham (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of interdisciplinarity (pp. 15–30). Oxford University Press.
Lattuca, L. R., Knight, D. B., & Bergom, I. M. (2013). Developing a measure of interdisciplinary competence. International Journal of Engineering Education, 29(3), 726–739.
Lattuca, L. R., Knight, D. B., Ro, H. K., & Novoselich, B. J. (2017). Supporting the development of engineers’ interdisciplinary competence. Journal of Engineering Education, 106(1), 71–97. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20155
National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, & Institute of Medicine. (2005). Facilitating interdisciplinary research. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/11153
Nguyen, M., & Mougenot, C. (2022). A systematic review of empirical studies on multidisciplinary design collaboration: Findings, methods and challenges. Design Studies, 81, 101120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2022.101120
Richter, D. M., & Paretti, M. C. (2009). Identifying barriers to and outcomes of interdisciplinarity in the engineering classroom. European Journal of Engineering Education, 34(1), 29–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/03043790802710185
Star, S. L., & Griesemer, J. R. (1989). Institutional ecology, translations, and boundary objects: Amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907–39. Social Studies of Science, 19(3), 387–420. https://doi.org/10.1177/030631289019003001
Stokols, D., Hall, K. L., Taylor, B. K., & Moser, R. P. (2008). The science of team science: Overview of the field and introduction to the supplement. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 35(2 Suppl), S77–S89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2008.05.002
Trevelyan, J. (2007). Technical coordination in engineering practice. Journal of Engineering Education, 96(3), 191–204. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2007.tb00929.x
