These answers draw in part from “Stronger Together: Elevating Outcomes through Interprofessional Collaboration” by Lisa Gurdin, MS, BCBA, LABA (BehaviorLive), and extend it with peer-reviewed research from our library of 27,900+ ABA research articles. Clinical framing, BACB ethics code references, and cross-links below are synthesized by Behaviorist Book Club.
View the original presentation →Multidisciplinary teams work in parallel — each discipline assesses and intervenes independently with limited information-sharing. Interdisciplinary teams coordinate by sharing findings and aligning goals, but maintain distinct roles. Interprofessional collaboration goes furthest: roles are flexible, decision-making is shared, and the team's collective expertise is applied jointly.
For neurodiverse clients with complex needs, interprofessional models tend to produce the most coherent, family-centered care. For BCBAs trained in a field that has historically emphasized its distinctiveness, this distinction matters practically: genuinely interprofessional practice requires a level of role flexibility and shared decision-making that most ABA practitioners have not been trained for. Developing those competencies deliberately — rather than assuming clinical ABA training covers them — is the first step toward genuine collaboration.
The Ethics Code requires BCBAs to coordinate services with relevant providers when doing so is in the client's best interest. This is an obligation, not a recommendation. When a client's needs extend across disciplines — which is common for individuals with autism or other neurodevelopmental conditions — actively pursuing coordination is part of ethical practice.
Failing to do so when coordination would benefit the client raises concerns under the client welfare provisions of the Code. The standard applies most clearly in complex cases: a child with autism who also has significant sensory processing differences, motor difficulties, and language delays requires coordinated input from multiple disciplines to receive coherent care. The BCBA's obligation to coordinate services in those situations is not ambiguous — it is explicitly required by the Code.
Disciplinary centrism leads BCBAs to dismiss or under-utilize contributions from other disciplines. Research on theory of mind in neurodevelopmental conditions (Amorim et al. (2025)) involves cognitive and developmental literatures that enrich behavior-analytic social skills programming.
Ignoring those contributions narrows the evidence base practitioners draw on, limits the range of interventions considered, and can result in less effective treatment than a broader approach would produce. The practical implication for BCBAs is to regularly audit the evidence base they are drawing on in clinical decision-making: is it exclusively behavioral, or does it incorporate relevant findings from cognitive science, developmental psychology, neuroscience, and related disciplines? Expanding that evidence base requires genuine engagement with adjacent literatures rather than occasional familiarity.
Practical strategies include reading regularly in adjacent disciplines, inviting other providers to observe and comment on your sessions, using non-technical language when communicating with non-BCBA team members, and explicitly asking what other disciplines see that you might be missing. Building habits of genuine curiosity about other perspectives — rather than mere tolerance of them — is the key shift that moves a practitioner from compliance to genuine collaboration. Building genuine curiosity — rather than simply tolerating other perspectives — requires examining the reinforcement history that has shaped one's relationship to other disciplines.
Practitioners who have experienced cross-disciplinary collaboration as adversarial may need to seek out positive collaborative experiences before they can approach other disciplines with genuine openness rather than managed patience.
Professional disagreements should be addressed directly, respectfully, and through evidence. The Ethics Code requires practitioners to raise concerns through appropriate channels rather than passive disengagement or unilateral action. In practice, this means documenting concerns, communicating them clearly to the relevant colleague and supervisor, and — if the disagreement affects client welfare — escalating through the organization's formal processes.
Collaboration does not require agreement on every point. Documentation is also important: practitioners who raise concerns through appropriate channels and document those concerns protect both themselves and their clients. If a disagreement about intervention approach is not resolved and the client's welfare is at risk, the documentation of the practitioner's concern and the steps taken to address it provides both an ethical record and a basis for escalation.
The most frequently underdeveloped skills for BCBAs are translating behavioral concepts for non-technical audiences and actively listening without immediately defaulting to a behavioral explanation. Both are learnable skills that can be developed through deliberate practice, role-playing in supervision, and feedback from cross-disciplinary colleagues. They are not fixed traits — practitioners who invest in them will find interprofessional relationships significantly easier to build and maintain.
Developing these skills also benefits from mentorship: practitioners who work with supervisors or experienced colleagues who model effective interprofessional communication have learning opportunities that practitioners in isolated settings lack. Seeking out those models — even through conference attendance, professional reading, or peer consultation — accelerates development.
Integrating data from multiple disciplines produces richer functional hypotheses. Murphy et al. (2025) demonstrated that relational processing profiles in autism affect how individuals encode and retrieve information — a finding with direct implications for how BCBAs structure teaching trials, choose response prompts, and evaluate acquisition data.
This is not information behavior analysts generate independently; it requires genuine engagement with adjacent research. The practical implication is that BCBAs who read only behavior-analytic literature are operating from a narrower information base than the clinical complexity of their clients requires. Building in regular reading from adjacent disciplines — starting with whatever seems most relevant to the population being served — is a low-cost investment with high returns for clinical quality.
Information sharing across providers must be governed by appropriate consent forms and HIPAA-compliant protocols. BCBAs should confirm that release forms specify which providers may receive information and for what purpose. The expanded communication that interprofessional collaboration requires does not change the confidentiality obligations that apply to each piece of information shared.
When in doubt about a sharing decision, consult with a supervisor or ethics resource before proceeding. In practice, this means verifying before information is shared that the appropriate consents are in place, documenting what was shared and with whom, and establishing clear communication with families about who will receive what information. That transparency is itself a form of client welfare protection.
School teams operate under different regulatory frameworks (IDEA, IEP processes) and with different priorities than clinic-based ABA providers. Building productive relationships means understanding that context — attending IEP meetings prepared to listen as well as contribute, using educationally relevant language, and framing behavioral goals in terms that connect to academic and functional outcomes. Demonstrating genuine respect for the expertise of teachers and special educators creates the foundation that makes real collaboration possible.
Specific strategies that help include: learning the vocabulary of the IDEA and IEP process before attending a meeting, framing behavioral goals in terms of educational and functional outcomes rather than purely behavioral ones, and asking explicitly what the educational team needs from the BCBA rather than assuming the BCBA's clinical perspective is what the team is waiting for. Those adjustments are learnable and produce significant improvements in cross-setting collaboration quality.
Given the centrality of team-based care for the populations BCBAs serve, supervision that includes explicit training in collaboration skills — not just technical behavioral skills — better prepares practitioners for real-world practice. This might involve role-playing team meetings, reviewing case examples involving interprofessional disagreements, or having supervisees shadow meetings with other disciplines. The competencies involved are specific enough to warrant deliberate development rather than incidental acquisition over time.
That deliberate development should be visible in supervision agendas, in competency assessments, and in professional development plans. Treating interprofessional collaboration as an implicitly acquired skill, rather than a deliberately developed competency, perpetuates the training gap that leaves practitioners underprepared for the cross-disciplinary work their clients require.
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ on-demand CEUs including ethics, supervision, and clinical topics like this one. Plus a new live CEU every Wednesday.
Ready to go deeper? This course covers this topic with structured learning objectives and CEU credit.
Stronger Together: Elevating Outcomes through Interprofessional Collaboration — Lisa Gurdin · 1.5 BACB Ethics CEUs · $0
Take This Course →We extended these answers with research from our library — dig into the peer-reviewed studies behind the topic, in plain-English summaries written for BCBAs.
280 research articles with practitioner takeaways
279 research articles with practitioner takeaways
258 research articles with practitioner takeaways
You earn CEUs from a dozen different places. Upload any certificate — from here, your employer, conferences, wherever — and always know exactly where you stand. Learning, Ethics, Supervision, all handled.
No credit card required. Cancel anytime.
All behavior-analytic intervention is individualized. The information on this page is for educational purposes and does not constitute clinical advice. Treatment decisions should be informed by the best available published research, individualized assessment, and obtained with the informed consent of the client or their legal guardian. Behavior analysts are responsible for practicing within the boundaries of their competence and adhering to the BACB Ethics Code for Behavior Analysts.