When Discourses Collide: A Case Study of Interprofessional Collaborative Writing in a Medically Oriented Law Firm‪.‬

This qualitative case study explores interprofessional collaborative writing among attorneys, nurse consultants, and writers in a law firm. Elucidating the challenges of interprofessional collaboration, this study finds that nurse consultants and attorneys encounter discursive conflicts, epistemological conflicts, and bypassing as a result of their differing professional discourse community affiliations and complex power relations. While these conflicts can potentially decrease efficiency and lead to documents that tell muddled stories, the conflicts can also productively ensure that the firm's documents speak persuasively to their diverse professional audiences (legal, medical, and corporate). To minimize the detriments and maximize the benefits of interprofessional conflicts, the firm employs professional writers to act as discourse mediators, merging together legal and nursing perspectives into dialogic, persuasive narratives. Implications for research and pedagogy are explored. Keywords: interprofessional collaboration; cross-functional collaboration; conflict; legal writing; professional writing