Passing information to other organisations is not the same as sharing it.
Passing implies distance and the negotiating of boundaries.
Sharing implies closeness and the lowering of boundaries.
To use a surprising, unsubtle but certainly very memorable example:
US aircraft bombing enemy positions in Iraq used spotters on the ground to guide them to possible targets. Initially, these spotters had to 'pass' the information back to analysts in the Pentagon who would evaluate it and decide whether or not the aircraft attacked. Whilst this passing and processing, analysing and deciding was going on the enemy were not staying put. Consequently aircraft frequently attacked positions no longer occupied by the enemy.
The system was changed, allowing pilots and spotters to talk directly, share and evaluate information in real-time and make decisions about whether or not to attack. Consequently aircraft began to attack more positions occupied by the enemy.
The above example shows the value of real-time sharing and exploring rather than serial passing and processing. It shows that creating time for face-to-face or voice-to-voice sharing and evaluation of information makes a process more efficient and effective, not less.
But when collaborating with others it is safer to pass rather than to share; you can maintain your distance and boundaries and the power and control they provide. It is riskier to share; distance and boundaries are eroded and so too your power and control. The Pentagon defence chiefs and analysts were taken completely out of the above process, losing most of their direct control over pilot decisions. (They did, however, gain statistically superior results.)
It is no surprise that businesses, institutions and organisations with power and influence are instinctively inclined, if having to collaborate, towards passing rather than sharing. If they share and their power is eroded as a result what will become of them? What will be their purpose? What will be the point of them? What will be their place in the world? What will be their unique selling point? How will they survive? How will they make a profit? How will they continue to matter?
So collaborations between powerful and influential businesses and organisations can often be cumbersome, focused on creating staging posts and routes for passing information back and forth rather than on sharing, analysing, evaluating and exploiting information together.
Anyone who watches the news bulletins knows the truth of this. The police, social and health services have worked hard at building pathways between themselves for sharing vital information about potentially vulnerable people. All too often, however, the information is opened and 'processed' without its meaning (the opinions, attitudes and contextual knowledge the various agencies have about it) being shared.
When information is passed rather than shared it becomes inactive, dormant. All too easily, it becomes a packaged product to be stored or moved rather than the flowing fuel that powers insight. People receiving such a package are very likely to read its label and pigeon hole it or pass it on (rather than open it and explore what is revealed).
Passed information all too easily becomes 'past' information that is processed and shelved rather than talked about and acted upon.
Passing and processing information encourages a functional mind-set that is lacking in curiosity. It will involve databases, emails and documents and perhaps the odd follow-up procedural phone call. Very rarely will it involve people sharing their thoughts about information face to face or voice to voice in the 'here and now'.
Sharing and exploring information encourages a creative mind-set brimming with curiosity. It will involve databases, emails and documents and perhaps the odd procedural phone call. It will always involve people sharing their thoughts about information face to face or voice to voice in the 'here and now'.
So do you play safe and pass or do you take a risk and share?
The added risk that accompanies sharing information in real-time will probably be worth it in terms of better use of time and money and increased efficiency and effectiveness.
If you play safe and continue to 'pass' your collaborations will likely become more and more time consuming and expensive as the pathways you create to move information back and forth become storage space for parked information.
For more about collaboration and partnership go to: Sleeping-with-the-Enemy-Achieving-Collaborative-Success-2nd-Edition