COLUMNS

SUPPORT RESEARCH

FROM THE CEO

An “A” in collaboration

Nancy Dickenson-Hazard

If I remember correctly, our children were introduced to the concept and practice of collaboration in sixth grade. It began with group projects in science and history and quickly escalated to most other subjects during their secondary and collegiate experiences.

As parents, our initial reaction was: “This is great. Our children are learning to work cooperatively with others while learning the subject matter.” We believed these types of assignments would provide valuable lessons, skills and tools in the art of teamwork that would be useful throughout life.

Over the long haul, this has proven true, but not without complaint—complaints such as one person not doing his or her work, or a student goofing off during group work sessions or—my personal favorite—“We never would have gotten an A if I hadn’t done all the work.” Of course, these reactions provided teachable moments that, as parents, we dutifully took advantage of. One never knows, however, what gets through in these moments of stress.

The subject of collaboration came up recently at a family dinner, so I asked our son and daughter how this type of assignment was working out for them in their college courses. Since both are making A’s, we assumed collaboration was working out well. Surprisingly, the same complaints we heard in sixth grade were voiced. Then came the “but.” Both said they had learned a few things about working on teams—namely, collaboration works best when teams:

Focus on purpose and result.
Set clear expectations up front.
Organize well and set a time frame.
Play to the strengths and interests of each member.
Decide, act and stick together.
Celebrate when finished.

Though fairly short and simple, their list gets to the core of successful collaboration.

Collaboration is one of the most arduous activities an individual or organization undertakes. Yet most agree that working together or collaborating makes sense, particularly in a world where time, human and financial resources are limited (Echols, 1997). So why is it so difficult to achieve successful collaboration?

According to Tyler-Wood (1999), three factors contribute to “sloppy” collaborations. “The first is not being clear and explicit about the goals and outcomes desired from the collaboration/clarity within your own organization and clarity by those with whom you plan to collaborate. The second is to assume that all involved are defining the process and content of collaboration in the same way. The third and most serious is to treat collaboration either as some ‘soft’ process that anyone can do and/or to assume that if you spell it out on paper, you’ve created collaboration” (pp. 6-7).

While overcoming or avoiding these pitfalls may seem simple, in reality it requires diligence to determine how well equipped you, your group or your organization is to achieve effective collaboration. This type of diligence often leads to asking and answering the right questions. Why do we want to collaborate? What is the purpose? What are the desired outcomes? What will be the costs? What will be the benefits? Will we devote the time that is necessary to accomplish the outcome? Do we have the necessary resources to commit? What are the criteria for choosing a partner? What are our areas of cultural compatibility and liability? What are the indicators of congruence or divergence of values? How can we create relationships and structure that foster trust, accountability and transparency (Tyler-Scott, 1997)? Answers to these questions need to be considered anytime collaboration is a possibility.

Collaboration—co-laboring for a common purpose—involves the notion of cooperation. When a purpose for collaboration is accepted, together with the responsibility to achieve that purpose, the parties involved agree to “co-make” the result. To do this, all must “behave positively towards the purpose, whether one wishes to or not” (Ilchman, 1977).

People and organizations respond to a common purpose based on their perception of that purpose. They will bring their points of view, their agendas and their desired outcomes, each valuable in its own right, but not always conducive to shared action and purpose. Each collaborator must commit to act and cooperate for the stated purpose regardless of personal wishes. Otherwise, the collaboration will “co-make” little else than confusion, frustration and discontent.

To avoid this pitfall, many groups who come together to collaborate for a common purpose follow the practices my children have learned from years of school projects: Be focused; have expectations; be organized; use each member’s strengths and interests; and decide, act and celebrate together. It’s simple and succinct, and it works. It’ll get you an “A.” RNL

Nancy Dickenson-Hazard, RN, MSN, FAAN

References:

Echols, R.C. (1997). Leadership and collaboration. Leading Ideas, 2(2), 1, 7.

Ilchman, W.F. (1997). Collaboration, cooperation and philanthropy. Leading Ideas, 2(2), 3-4.

Tyler-Scott, K. (1997). Reflections. Leading Ideas, 2(2), 2.

Tyler-Wood, I. (1999). The collaboration edge: Does your organization have it? Leading Ideas, 4(2), 1, 6-7.