In this article, organizational psychologist and PhD student at BI, Claus H. Jebsen, focuses on what makes collaboration challenging. He also points out what you as a manager can do to strengthen collaboration across functions, units and organizations.
Before we go into the text, reflect on the following for yourself:
-
What major task are you responsible for, or helping to solve?
-
What other actors, such as roles and functions, are involved in solving this task and contributing to the work process?
-
What do you feel is the quality of interaction between the various players?
Everyone wants good interaction. The dominant mindset is that it is something you have - or should have had - but which can be destroyed or weakened because of something that happens - or that doesn't happen and should have happened. This is reinforced by the fact that in everyday speech we talk about interaction as personal qualities, "get in touch with Anne, she's good to work with, but you have to stay away from Heidi." Personal qualities should not be excluded - and each and every one of us can benefit from being subjected to the light of scrutiny in terms of how we make others want to work with us. For many of us, this is a lifelong learning journey, and anyone who thinks they are done developing is at least done.
My starting point is that collaborative competence requires active, targeted and sometimes systematic focus. A framework for tasks that depend on multiple contributors can be drawn from the theory and practice of Relational Coordination developed by Jody H. Gittell based on research in the aviation industry, health, BAE, finance, etc.
Take the three points above as a starting point and reflect on the following:
-
To what extent do the various stakeholders have common goals in solving the task?
Most often, the various stakeholders have their own goals (sub-goals). This becomes a problem when the objectives compete or there is no consistency in the various efforts. For example, if the used car manager at a car dealership bids too low for your old car and/or the new car manager at the same dealership does not offer good enough discounts, the car dealership may also lose you as a customer in the aftermarket. -
To what extent do you share expertise?
Larger tasks are often divided into smaller tasks that are solved by specialists in their own areas. This often creates a "siloing" of expertise where we no longer know what information the other person needs to contribute to the task solution. -
To what extent is there mutual respect for the different contributions?
All organizations are characterized by internal status differences. It's a fair point that some are harder or more expensive to replace than others. Often this has consequences, for example, for who is listened to or who is recognized for contributions. Where the task is dependent on EVERYONE's contribution, all contributions must be acknowledged; without a porter in the hospital, the surgeon will not have a patient to operate on. Without the secretary in place there will be a mess in the systems. -
It is not a goal to have more meetings than necessary, but do you have frequent enough contact with those involved in the task solution to have (established) a relationship?
You may have found that it's easier to contact someone you've met before than someone who is just a name. A lot of interaction, especially across the board, takes place with roles and functions you don't know. I'm not advocating that you have to become private or personal, but being able to establish relationships that can help solve a common task is - naturally enough - crucial to the task solution. -
When information is exchanged in collaborative processes, it must be precise.
An essential piece of information that is often omitted in communication is WHY the information is important. Increased justification of information helps the recipient to understand the content and intention, and the information is perceived more precisely, i.e. the way you want it to be perceived. -
When information is exchanged in collaboration processes, it must be done in a timely manner.
Information that arrives too early or too late is less useful. In collaboration processes, it must therefore be clarified when you need to communicate/inform about what. -
Do you have a problem-solving communication blaming.
Even though someone else may be to blame for the difficulties and problems that arise, it is essential that we work together to find a solution. This is perhaps first and foremost a question of attitude; should the guilty party bear the burden or should I contribute to the solution?
Gittell found that high scores on these seven dimensions lead to increased quality, efficiency, customer and employee satisfaction. It is possible to map the quality of the various relationships on each of these dimensions, either using a digital tool or as a qualitative process.
If you are to lead or contribute to interaction with multiple stakeholders, you also need to care about stakeholder relationships for which you are not explicitly responsible. This is what I call taking 100% responsibility.
