THE CREATION OF A CULTURE OF
COLLABORATION
James M. Campbell
UPB, Medellin
October 1, 2014
Only a few generations ago,
the present stretched relatively unaltered from a distant past into a dim
future. Today the past is ever less predictive, the future is ever less
predictable, and the present scarcely exists at all. Everything is accelerating
change….Dee Hock[i]
SUMMARY
I begin by looking at what collaboration is and why it is necessary to
speak of a Culture of Collaboration. Then I will present a model of
collaboration that has five fundamental dimensions and detail some of the
typical activities that are characteristic of each of the dimensions. This
model was developed by Laura Bronstein but was adapted by Debra Parker Oliver, Elaine M. Wittenberg-Lyles, and
Michele Day for work with Palliative Care and Hospice Teams.[ii]
It is a very
useful tool for people engaging in collaborative activities to examine the
state of their collaboration. Finally based on my own experience I will talk
about two fundamental challenges to be faced in creating and sustaining
collaborative activities.
WHAT IS COLLABORATION AND WHY
IS IT CRUCIAL?
Collaboration is defined as “to
work jointly with others or together especially in an intellectual endeavor.”[iii]
Dr. Sandor Schuman, a professor and author in the field of communication,
collaboration, and consensus building, wrote in 2011; “Science on FIRE—Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research and Education, a symposium sponsored by the
American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), recognized that ‘interdisciplinary research will have to be
taken to new levels to address exceedingly difficult challenges’ because
the demands of complex problems require that experts from different disciplines
and backgrounds have to work together, share and integrate information, and
develop and test solutions that none of them alone could imagine. And as I
noted in Creating a Culture of Collaboration, collaboration is seen as
the way to address complex problems, add value, and achieve desired outcomes in
fields as diverse as business, science, recreation, health care, social work,
engineering, governance, and libraries.”[iv] The
quote at the beginning of the paper is from a book by Dee Hock, who invented
the global VISA card system. Our rapidly evolving and ever more interconnected
world means that the complex problems we face require inclusive solutions. It
is no longer possible for one person or even a single discipline to posses all
the information and resources necessary to satisfactorily resolve such problems
and issues.
Collaboration will not happen in an organization that is structured in a
strict hierarchical command and control mode. The culture in such an
organization emphasizes individual performance, strict control of the
information flow, and the necessity of following orders. Such a culture is very
unfriendly to a collaborative approach to work. Collaboration happens in a
group or organization where the culture promotes; a focus on the sharing of
responsibility and accomplishing the task regardless of who receives the
credit, the transparent sharing of information and a decision-making process
that encourages wide participation by all those concerned. The complexity of
today’s world and the problems we face requires that we move into a new mode of
grappling with this complexity. A collaborative culture promotes a coming
together of people with diverse but relevant knowledge and skills whose focus
is on finding effective solutions to the complex problems before us. Collaboration
is more that a way to organize problem solving, it is a culture that must be
built in our institutions if we are to effectively deal with the world we have
before us.
FIVE FUNDAMENTAL DIMENSIONS OF
COLLABORATIVE ACTIVITIES[v]
Collective Ownership of Goals
This refers to the necessity to ensure that every person involved in the
collaborative activity is clear on the goals of the activity; is committed to
and takes responsibility for their professional contribution to the activity;
understands that the success or failure of the activity is dependent on the
contribution of all the people participating in the collaborative effort; and
is willing to engage in behaviors that ensure constructive disagreement and
deliberation among those involved. The creation of the collective ownership of
goals is best achieved by involving all those in the collaborative effort in
the process of establishing the goals. This includes the joint designing,
defining, and developing of the goals; along with the development of the action
plan for their accomplishment
Interdependence
Interdependence is the
recognition of all members of the collaboration that the achievement of the
activity’s goals is dependent upon the contribution of every member. It
requires a mutual respect for the professional role and contribution of every member
and a firm grasp of their own professional role in the collaboration. This will
be enabled by finding ways for the members to spend both informal and formal
time together, ensuring effective oral and written communication, and by
creating an atmosphere where all members feel safe in expressing their
professional opinions and where these opinions are valued as necessary to the
accomplishing of the goals of the activity.
Flexibility
Flexibility is part of interdependence but recognizes the need for more
than simply interdependence. Often in collaborative situations disagreements
will arise which require a willingness to reach productive comprises in order
for the work to move forward. This often requires a certain degree of empathy
between the people involved which recognizes the valid concerns of others.
Occasionally there may be a need for someone to alter their role in the group
and take on other responsibilities for the sake of the group’s goals. A too
rigid adherence to one’s professional role can sometimes endanger the success
of the whole project.
Collaborative Activities
This refers to activities, projects, programs, etc. that could not be
accomplished by any one person in the collaborating group acting on their own. These
activities require the expertise of all the participating members and will
enable them to participate in achievements that they would not be able to
accomplish on their own. Collaboration can often create the possibility for new
and creative ways for dealing with problems and challenges in the life of a
group or an organization that would not occur in the absence of collaboration.
Reflection on Process
It is important to the success of a collaborative effort that the
participants take time to reflect on how they are working together and how they
might make their collaboration more effective. This includes; reflecting on
personal relationships, the process of accountability, and evaluating the work
processes for possible improvement.
Typical responses when these
five categories are used to measure the effectiveness of collaboration.[vi]
Collective Ownership Goals
Professionals from other disciplines with whom I work
encourage family members’
participation in the treatment process.
(R) My colleagues from other disciplines are not
committed to working together.
My colleagues from other disciplines work through
conflicts with me in efforts to resolve
them.
When colleagues from different disciplines make
decisions together they go through a
process of examining alternatives.
My interactions with colleagues from other disciplines
occurs in a climate where there is
freedom to be different and to disagree.
Clients/patients/students participate in
interdisciplinary planning that concerns them.
Colleagues from all professional disciplines take
responsibility for developing treatment
plans.
(R)
Colleagues from all professional disciplines do not participate in implementing
treatment
Interdependence
I utilize other professionals in different disciplines
for their particular expertise.
I consistently give feedback to other professionals in
my setting.
Professionals in different disciplines in my setting
utilize me for a range of tasks.
(R) Teamwork with professionals from other disciplines
is not important in my ability to help
clients.
(R) The colleagues from other professional disciplines
and I rarely communicate.
The colleagues from other disciplines with whom I work
have a good understanding of the
distinction between my role and their role(s).
(R) My colleagues from other disciplines make
inappropriate referrals to me.
I can define those areas that are distinct in my
professional role from that of professionals
from other disciplines with whom I work.
I view part of my professional role as supporting the
role of others with whom I work.
My colleagues from other disciplines refer to me
often.
(R) Cooperative work with colleagues from other
disciplines is not a part of my job
description.
(R) My colleagues from other professional disciplines
do not treat me as an equal.
My colleagues from other disciplines believe that they
could not do their jobs as well without my professional discipline.
Flexibility
I am willing to take on tasks outside of
my job description when that seems important.
(R) I am not willing to sacrifice a degree
of autonomy to support cooperative problem solving.
I utilize formal and informal procedures
for problem-solving with my colleagues from other
disciplines.
(R) The professional colleagues from other
disciplines with whom I work stick rigidly to their
job descriptions.
Colleagues from other disciplines and I
work together in many different ways.
Collaborative
Activities
Distinct new programs emerge from the collective work
of colleagues from different
disciplines.
Organizational protocols reflect the existence of
cooperation between professionals from
different disciplines.
Formal procedures/mechanisms exist for facilitating
dialogue between professionals from
different disciplines (ie, at staffings, inservice,
rounds, etc)
(R) I am not aware of situations in my agency in which
a coalition, task force, or committee
has developed out of interdisciplinary efforts.
Working with colleagues from other disciplines leads
to outcomes that we could not achieve
alone.
Creative outcomes emerge from my work with colleagues
from other professions that I could not have predicted.
Reflection on Process
Professionals from different disciplines are
straightforward when sharing information with
clients/patients/students.
My colleagues from other disciplines and I often
discuss different strategies to improve our
working relationships.
My colleagues from other professions and I talk about
ways to involve other professionals in
our work together.
(R) Colleagues from other disciplines do not attempt
to create a positive climate in our
organization.
I am optimistic about the ability of my colleagues
from other disciplines to work with me to
resolve problems.
I help my colleagues to address conflict with other
professionals directly.
Colleagues from other disciplines are as likely as I
am to address obstacles to our successful
collaboration.
My colleagues from other disciplines and I talk
together about our professional similarities
and differences including role, competencies, and
stereotypes.
(R) My colleagues from other professions and I do not
evaluate our work together.
I discuss with professionals from other disciplines
the degree to which each of us should be
involved
in a particular case.
CHALLENGES TO EFFECTIVE COLLABORATIVE
ACTIVITIES
The Challenge of Trust
In my experience the first fundamental
issue that is always present when launching a collaborative work effort is
trust. This occurs for a number of reasons:
·
People are not acquainted
·
People are used to a hierarchy of responsibility
·
People are afraid of losing professional status
·
People are used to individual accountability
·
People are not used to sharing credit
·
People are suspicious of others’
motives and intentions
·
People fear being judged inadequate
Dealing with the issue of trust requires investing adequate time in the
beginning of a collaborative effort to overcome the distrust that people will
bring with them to the initial meetings. I have found in working with teams
that taking a day or a day and half with a team or group to create a Charter[vii] will
enable people to move beyond distrust and lay a solid foundation for their
collaborative engagement in the common work. A Charter is like a constitution
that the group creates to enable their work. It has three dimensions:
·
Defining the group’s task: It is important that even if
they are given an assignment by a larger organization that they work together
to understand that task, articulate it in their own words and create their own
plan for accomplishing the task. I have been asked to work with groups that had
been working together for awhile but were having problems. When I told them
that I wanted to have a discussion about their objectives they inevitably say
that that is not necessary since everyone knows what the objectives are.
However when we do talk about them, different understandings of the objectives
emerge. This is a primary source of difficulty in a group seeking to work
collaboratively.
·
Delimiting responsibility: By indentifying and assigning
various responsibilities from the very beginning a group can avoid one of the
fundamental struggles in collaborative groups. It will avoid misunderstandings,
create clear lines of accountability and enable effective implementation of the
group’s goals and objectives. I have seen groups where because this did not happen
the group was consumed by disagreements about what had or had not happened and
who was responsible.
·
Determining How to Work Together: If a group thinks about how
they will make decisions, communicate, conduct their meetings, etc. before they
get into the actual work they can avoid a great deal of frustration and
confusion. It is much harder to decide how to deal with a disagreement within
the group in the midst of the disagreement than it is to say beforehand how you
will handle disagreements. I have seen someone in a group feeling left out
because they were not consulted or present when a decision was made. Other
times people did not get an urgent communication and again feel left out and
neglected. These kinds of events which may seem trivial have a very unhelpful
impact on people and their willingness to stay engaged in the common task.
The key elements of each dimension are:
Defining a Group’s Task
1.
Working together to establish the group’s purpose. I believe that it is
important to distinguish between a group’s purpose and their working objectives
and goals. A group’s purpose is its raison
d’éntre or reason for being. It is not time bound and will remain constant
even though the working objectives may change with time. It is the focus which
should inform a group’s decisions and planning over the long term. An example
from my own experience is the purpose statement of the Institute I worked for: “Concerned for the Human Factor in Global
Development.” This statement was created in 1972 and is still in use today.
Obviously over the years how the Institute worked to fulfill that purpose
changed but the focus of the purpose reminded the same. While this is
particularly important for a group working together over an extended period of
time it can also be very helpful to a group engaged in a short term project.
2.
Rather than having a work plan handed to them it is very powerful for
the group to sets its goals and objectives and build the work plan to
accomplish them. It is helpful to define goals as the final result of the
group’s work and objectives as intermediate check points along the way to
accomplishing the final goal. The creating of this work plan is fundamental to
ownership, commitment and motivation. The way I explain this is that if you
participate in creating something you develop a sense of ownership—“it is our
plan, we created it.” When you own something you care about it, it is important
to you. When you care about something you have a commitment to it and it is
this commitment that releases your motivation. You work hard to make sure the
plan succeeds because it is YOUR plan.
Delimiting Responsibility
3.
Identifying roles and responsibilities and deciding how those will be
fulfilled is an important step in building trust. It is important to ensure
that the group is enabled to ask the question; “What roles and responsibilities
are needed to get our work done?” If a group does not need a secretary then
they should not name a person to that role. Also they should not name a person
to a role simply because they have filled that role previously. Finally they
need to talk about how they want the responsibilities to be assigned. For
example instead of having a designated leader conduct all the group meetings
they may want to rotate that assignment so that everyone has a chance to be in
front of the group. Working through this together will avoid a lot of confusion
and even disagreements later on.
Determining How to Work Together
4.
There are a number of key considerations for a collaborative group that
I pull together and call Procedures.
These procedures define how a group will work together. I will briefly define
seven of them:
a.
Ground Rules or Group Norms: Every group has ground rules for how they
work together, however most of the time they are understood and not
self-consciously created. There are two types of ground rules: 1. Procedural
rules deal with how the groups operates—“we start on time and end on time”. 2.
Relational rules deal with how people relate to each other in the group—“we
focus on issues not on personalities”. A list of six to ten such guidelines
will help a group to more effectively interact and avoid time wasting
distractions.
b.
Meetings: Deciding ahead of time when,
where and how meetings will be held helps to ensure that people can be present
and ready for the event. It is also important to decide how the agendas for
meetings will be created and distributed. An adequate agenda is one of the most
important factors in enable a group to have productive meetings.
c.
Guidelines for Communications: Because there are so many ways
to communicate today and often a great deal of information to be shared it is
important to decide ahead of time what information is shared and how it will be
shared. This can go a long way in avoiding confusion and frustration. It also
means that information or requests for action will not be unintentionally overlooked
or become lost in the rush of other work and demands.
d.
Making Decisions: A collaborative group needs at least several decision-making procedures. They also
need to build a list of the typical decisions they have to make and to decided
ahead of time both how they will make the decision and who will be involved in that procedure. Doing
this work beforehand will avoid many problems and frustrations for group members.
e.
Dealing with Disagreements: Disagreements are going to happen in the best run teams. They are part of what goes on when any
group of people are working together. However
the challenge is to manage them in a creative and responsible manner. Carefully
managed these occasions can be a
source of creativity and insight into many difficult situations.
f.
Introducing a New
Member: Bringing a new member into the group can be
seen as a real burden by the group. No one
has time to orient the new member, etc.
The charter can be an excellent orientation tool
for the new member. In addition taking time for some sharing of past
experiences, anticipations, etc. both from the group and the
new person will be very helpful.
g.
Helping a Member
Leave: A member leaving the group can be
very disruptive. Goals, roles, assignments, etc. will have to be
redistributed and redefined. The group needs to
agree on how they will say good-bye and address the
work that needs to be done. They also need to make sure that all
vital knowledge or information that the person possesses is made available to
the group before the
person actually departs. The charter can be a key tool here in
helping to make sure that nothing is being overlooked and things can be
redistributed and redefined more easily.
Building trust is not an easy task and it usually
requires considerable time. However, it is essential in a collaborative working
situation. Finally, while trust takes time to create, it can be destroyed in a
second through a careless word or an unthinking act. Trust is a precious
commodity and needs to be guarded as such.
The Challenge of Leadership
Style
The second fundamental challenge in building a culture
of collaboration has to do with the style of the group’s leadership. If the
group is being led by a person who is oriented toward a hierarchical command
and control style of leadership then a culture of collaboration will be
extremely difficult to engender. The hierarchical style is about the control of
information. Information is power and a hierarchy is designed to feed
information to the top of the hierarchy where the decision-making takes place.
As the only place where all the necessary information for decision-making is
available the top of the hierarchy is able to maintain control of the whole
situation. This is anathema to a collaborative culture.
A collaborative culture requires a facilitative style
of leadership[viii].
This is an approach to leadership that has to do with empowering and enabling
the group’s members to do their best. The matrix on page nine presents the two
styles of leadership, what kind of shift is involved in moving from one to the
other and what happens in a group when this occurs.
Over the years I have identified the following
operating guidelines[ix]
as fundamental for a leader seeking to enable a collaborative working group.
This should be seen as a kind of checklist for someone seeking to develop their
skill as a facilitative leader:
1.
Keep purpose, goals and approach relevant and
meaningful
2.
Builds commitment and confidence
3.
Strengthens the mix and level of skills in the group
4.
Creates opportunities for others
5.
Does real work (not full time leader)
6.
Encourages full participation
7.
Promotes mutual understanding
8.
Fosters inclusive solutions
9.
Teaches new thinking skills
10.
Ensures the sharing of all relevant and valid
information
11.
Enables free and informed choices
12.
Enables every member to participate in discussions and
decision-making
13.
Encourages trust and confidence in the group and
between individual members
14.
Ensures full and open dialogues where disputes and
disagreements are focused on the group’s task and are resolved creatively and
inclusively
15.
Promotes the development of new skills needed by the
team—especially interpersonal and decision-making skills
16.
Creates space where the group can explore alternative
and creative approaches to its task
17.
Challenges the group and individuals to push the edge
of their knowledge and skill
18.
Takes time for evaluation and reflection on the
group’s experience and journey
19.
Holds the group’s mission and goals before it all
times
20.
Structures meetings to ensure effective task-oriented
and motivating events
21.
Shares leadership roles for the sake of leadership
skill development
Operating as a facilitative leader requires that the
leader trust the group and empowers them to create the future of their
collaborative effort. (S)He, like all the members of the group, is entrusting their
future to the corporate wisdom and efforts of the group. When I am preparing to
lead a planning session with a group I always ask their leader if (s)he is
ready to trust their future to the group.
CONCLUSION
A collaborative culture is hard work. However in our
complex and rapidly changing world it is becoming more and more necessary. In
such a world collaboration is not a nice idea it is an imperative. While there
will always be a place and role for the solitary genius most of the world’s
complex problems that humanity has created in the last hundred years will be
solved by groups made up people with diverse backgrounds and perspectives.
Learning to work collaboratively in such an environment while challenging can
also be deeply rewarding. Over the years in my work with various groups I have
observed that once a group has had a successful collaborative experience the
members do not want it to end and look for other such opportunities.
|
Moving
from a traditional to a facilitative leadership mode
|
||||
|
Category
|
Traditional
Leader’s Values
|
Facilitative
Leader’s Values
|
Shift
from ____
to____
|
Operational
Implications for Group
|
|
Group
Process
|
-Only self reliance
-Power/control
-Source of knowledge—only
knowledge centre
-All responsibility
-Centralized relationships
-Hierarchy/elite closed
|
-Organic, flowing,
flexibility, fostering
-Fragmented
-Open
-Trust
-Mutual Responsibility
-Democratic
-Promoting others
|
-Power to empowering
-Defensive to promotion of
others
-Hierarchy to open, organic
system
-Me to us
-Individual to team
|
-Fragmentation/shared
-Greater co-ordination
-Evaluation and
learning—not for fault finding
-Open channels, transparent
-EQ. Sensitivity is
interpersonal
-More time coordinated
-More individual initiative
|
|
Group
Structure
|
-Top down approach
-Controls, norms, time…
-Effective time manager
-Effective division of
tasks
|
-Openness
-Sharing
-Flexibility
-Trust
-Participatory
decision-making
|
-From top down to bottom up
-From control to sharing
leadership
-From concentrating skills
to sharing skills
-From hierarchy to
participation
|
-Empowering
-Joint commitment
-Everybody contributes
-A group is more
intelligent
-Sharing of different
skills
-Mutual respect
|
REFERENCES
[i] Hock, Dee. (1999) Birth of the Chaordic Age, Berrett &
Koehler Publishes, 1999.
[ii] Bronstein, L. R.
(2002). Index of interdisciplinary collaboration. Social Work Research, 26 (2),
113-126.
Bronstein, L. R. (2003). A model for interdisciplinary
collaboration. Social
Work, 48 (3), 297-
306.
Oliver, D. Wittenberg-Lyles, E., and Day, M. (2007).
Measuring interdisciplinary perceptions
of collaboration on hospice teams. American Journal of Hospice
and Palliative Medicine,
24
(1), 49-53.
Wittenberg-Lyles, E., Oliver, D., Demiris, G., and
Regehr, K. (2010). Interdisciplinary
collaboration in hospice team
meetings. Journal
of Interprofessional Care, 24 (1),
264-273.
[iii] http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/collaborate
[v] Bronstein, L. R. (2002). Index of interdisciplinary
collaboration. Social Work Research, 26 (2), 113-126.
Bronstein, L. R. (2003). A model for
interdisciplinary collaboration. Social Work, 48 (3),
297-306
Oliver, D. Wittenberg-Lyles, E., and Day, M. (2007).
Measuring interdisciplinary perceptions of collaboration on hospice teams. American
Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine, 24 (1), 49-53.
[vi] Bronstein, L. R. (2002). Index of interdisciplinary
collaboration. Social Work Research, 26 (2), 113-126.
Bronstein, L. R. (2003). A model for
interdisciplinary collaboration. Social Work, 48 (3),
297-306
Oliver, D. Wittenberg-Lyles, E., and
Day, M. (2007). Measuring interdisciplinary perceptions of collaboration on hospice
teams. American Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine, 24 (1),
49-53.
[vii] Adapted from: Weaver,
Richard G. & Farrell, John D. (1999) Managers as Facilitators: A
Practical Guide to Getting Work Done in a Changing Workplace,
Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 23-39.
[viii] Campbell, James M.,
The Academy for Leadership Skills Development, Session Two—The Team Leader as
Facilititor.
[ix] Campbell, James M.,
The Academy for Leadership Skills Development, Session Two—The Team Leader as
Facilititor.
