A little less flippant, a little more feist
It is in the spirit of the age that we are all obliged to
collaborate. Whether in formal partnerships, or as members of consortia,
or in multi- or trans-disciplinary working groups, or even among colleagues
from within our own organisations, collaboration is key.
There are at least five factors influencing and shaping the
current aegis of collaboration:
"Wicked
problems" - the challenges of climate change, of obesity,
of mental health, of sustainability in the round, are complex and
multi-faceted, requiring inputs and solutions from a multiplicity of sources
"Information
overload" - the accelerating rate at which information is
produced, and the escalating challenge of distinguishing the wheat from the
chaff, mean that multiple minds and institutions are required to avoid the risk
of blissful ignorance.
"The
division of labour" - long recognised as a particularly
efficient means of completing tasks, the division of labour takes on a new hue
in a world of information overload, as well as in the context of flexible
labour markets, blurred boundaries between 'work' and 'non-work', and the shift
towards 'emotional' as well as 'rational' reasoning in decision-making.
Team work is the only way to cope.
"Funding"
- with fewer resources available, individuals and institutions are under pressure
to do more with less: three departments become one, three research studies are
conflated into a single exercise, three previously distinct policy instruments
are combined.
"Politics
and the Big Society" - a profound re-alignment of
responsibility, between and among individuals and institutions, asks new
questions: who should do what? Where once a single entity issued
instructions and money, now a collection of entities must come together to
decide whether and how to achieve something.
Having in the past few months experienced several direct examples
of collaborative environments, some of the (often under-played) challenges have
been made painfully apparent to me:
Leadership
- the established model of leadership is profoundly challenged by truly
collaborative processes. Who is in charge? Being the biggest, or
the cleverest, or the most well-informed, or the oldest or the most male or the
wealthiest or the most arrogant or the one with the biggest [insert display
item of your choice] matters less and less. Facilitative, humble,
inclusive, listening, attentive, engaging - these are the adjectives of the new
leadership. Whither such skills?
Effort
- building the environment, the
psycho-social infrastructure, for effective collaboration takes a long
time and a lot of effort. In the old world, you could perhaps bank on
spending 20% of your time on the admin and management, and 80% of your
time on 'delivery'. In the new world, perhaps it takes 80% of the time to
get all the relationships and communication and engagement and collaboration
infrastructure in place, and only 20% of the time goes on delivery. Is
the funding and resource-deployment machinery up to this yet?
Facilitation
- the art of enabling a group of people to talk and work together
seems almost like a non-job (where is the tangible output?) and it can be very
difficult to describe a good facilitator. You may know one when you see
one: but defining it in advance? Choose the 'wrong' facilitator and an
entire decision-and-delivery infrastructure could be scuppered. The
stakes are high.
Assholes
- there are some total assholes out there, people that you
would really rather avoid, yet the collaborative obligation is to accommodate
them, to get on with them, to work with them. (Recent times have included a
particularly striking example, where we had agreed to work with someone in
order to meet a client's need for a multi-disciplinary approach. The
individual's condescending arrogance, something we tolerated and managed as
best we could, finally became too much to bear when they disdainfully
humiliated a colleague in front of the client.) What do we do about such
folk? Every partnership setting will know the problem. Do we just put up
with them, in the spirit of collaboration? Or does there come a point when we
say: enough. Aggregate welfare has fallen. Inclusivity has its
limits. We have better things to do than work with assholes; we can
achieve the same goals, in a better way, in a way characterised by respect and well-being.
We can and should be muscular about our collaboration.
Many challenges ahead, obviously. I find myself
looking forward with relish. The need for collaboration is not going to
go away, and we all need to adapt. New forms of leadership, new models of
facilitation, a willingness to make the effort - all good. Dealing with
assholes - no, not any more. Play by the rules, the rules we have
collectively determined, or go and play by yourself.
Comments
“Wicked Problems – Social Messes: Decision support Modelling with Morphological Analysis”. Springer, 2011.
You can see a description at Springer here:
http://www.springer.com/business+%26+management/technology+management/book/978-3-642-19652-2
Regards,
Tom Ritchey
SweMorph
David