Do you pass or share?

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 and analysing and deciding were 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 evaluating 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 upon creating routes and staging posts for passing information between partners rather than upon sharing, analysing, evaluating and exploiting information with partners.

Anyone who watches television news bulletins about failures of joined-up working knows the truth of this. The police, social and health services have worked hard at building pathways between their respective organisations for sharing vital information about potentially vulnerable people. All too often, however, the information is received and "processed" without its deeper meaning (the opinions, attitudes and contextual knowledge the various agencies have and hold about it) being shared. 

When information is passed rather than shared it can become inactive, dormant: a packaged product to be moved or stored rather than the flowing fuel of insight. Someone receiving or processing such information is more likely to read its label and pigeon-hole it rather than open it up and explore it.

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 between partners become storage space for parked information.

Actions speak louder than labels

Most organisations label their activities: social services, health services, education services.  As soon as you label something you create a boundary around it that separates it from everything else: other services, organisations; the public; the people that use the service.

These 'boundary labels' filter and blinker people's thoughts and direct people's actions down specific routes, separating and fragmenting rather than joining up and integrating. If collaboration does take place it does so at the level of the labelled service; information is passed from one service to another rather than shared, discussed and developed in real time by all those individuals who have an interest in it. 

Susan is admitted to hospital after a long period of care and support at home. Her records are passed to the new service. But does everyone involved in Susan's case acknowledge, discuss and use the valuable information they contain? Do they use it to inform and enhance Susan's hospital care and treatment?

Passing something to social, health or some other service can become equivalent in people's minds to taking action to maintain or improve something; addressing and fixing the label is assumed to ensure that the parcel will actually be delivered to the right place at the right time and that the person who receives it will appreciate its importance and know what to do with it. 

To encourage and enhance collaboration use actions to describe your work. Actions liberate people's thinking. They invite people to take part. They dissolve boundaries between services and organisations, joining up and integrating rather than separating and fragmenting.  Preventing, promoting, intervening, supporting, protecting, caring, training, safeguarding, reaching, engaging: actions make things straightforward, personal and immediate. They describe physical behaviour that everyone can identify with, understand and find ways to contribute to, whatever their status, role, knowledge, expertise or experience.

Susan is admitted to hospital after a long period of care and support at home. She has a copy of her records and treatment plan. She can help 'inform and shape' the treatment and care she receives in partnership with the professionals. The actions of 'caring and treating' have become more important than acknowledging and negotiating labelled professional boundaries. If there is a collaborative initiative encouraging this approach it is most likely called 'Supporting the Patient's Journey to Recovery' or 'Supporting Your Journey to Recovery'  It definitely will not be called 'Patient Care and Hospital Services'.  

   
For more about collaboration go to: Sleeping-with-the-Enemy-Achieving-Collaborative-Success-2nd-Edition 
      
            

Do you do what you prefer to do or as the situation demands?

As I was doing some research this week I came across this newsletter from the Health Services Management Centre of the University of Birmingham:

http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/Documents/college-social-sciences/social-policy/HSMC/publications/Newsletters/Volume-16-No-2.pdf

The article by Deborah Davidson 'The Courage to Think and Act Differently' is an interesting read and is very relevant to those who seek to lead collaborative efforts and work in partnership.

I will not simply repeat the content of Deborah's short article; you can read it yourself in under ten minutes. All I will say is that it invites us to think very carefully about whether we habitually frame issues and problems in ways that suit our preferences for dealing with them, rather than in ways that suit the situations and contexts within which they exist.

This is something really worth thinking about, especially if you are working within the demanding, wicked issue focused world of collaborative working, which requires us to think, decide and act in new, innovative and challenging ways.


For more about collaboration go to: Sleeping-with-the-Enemy-Achieving-Collaborative-Success-2nd-Edition

        

Bite-size pieces: a checklist for collaborative conversations

Here is a 'top ten' checklist for collaborative conversations. I quick read through before meeting with partners will encourage mutual understanding, help develop relationships and support collaborative effectiveness:

1. I am talking with you not at you.
2. I am very curious about you and your story.
3. I am finding out about your view of the world and the problems and issues you feel we must address.
4. I am listening to understand rather than gain information that helps me prepare my next argument.
5. I am asking questions because I want to listen to and appreciate your answers rather than gain confirmation of my own views.
6. I am aware of what I am saying, how I am saying it and the effect it is having on you.
7. I am not afraid to say I am unsure or that I do not understand.
8. I am saying what is on my mind and what you need to know rather than what I think you want to hear.
9. I am aware that I do not have all the answers; that is why I am talking to you.
10. I am working hard at unearthing and challenging my long held assumptions about you and our work.

(Acknowledgement to https://www.educe.co.uk/)

Look out for signals of discontinuity and change

The rise of the Internet is signalling a move away from information and products broadcast at passive people to information and products created with the involvement of active people. The Open Source Movement is recognising these signals and creating platforms for the development and sharing of high quality, user generated, freely available software. (The Apache Software Foundation is a good example.)

The technology driven reduction in mid-skilled jobs is signalling a shift away from traditional middle-class office or factory based jobs towards careers in high technology areas or specialist manual areas, such as caring and hospitality, that technology cannot automate. Collaborations that help people into work are recognising these signals and looking for ways to make high technology and specialist manual jobs more accessible. (The Anita Borg Institute is an example of an organisation that works with partner businesses to help women and under-represented minorities into high technology careers. The Opportunity Partnership helps young people gain the skills necessary for specialist manual work in the care and hospitality industries.)  

The retirement of the 'Baby Boomer' generation is signalling a change to the look, feel and nature of later life and the potential contributions older people are willing and able to make to society. Collaborations focused upon the needs of older people are recognising these signals and looking for ways to enhance the contributions older people can make to society. (Encore.org is an example of an organisation that works with others to enhance the contributions and quality of life of older people.)

The achievement of a critical mass of qualified, graduate women is signalling a change to the look, feel and nature of the workplace and the amount of influence women are willing and able to have upon it. Collaborations that promote the interests of working women are recognising these signals and seeking to use the influence of the growing number of well-educated working women to encourage and support the ambitions of all women within the workplace. (The previously mentioned Anita Borg Institute, with its support for the mentoring of women in high tech industries, is a good example of this.)

Increasingly easy access to information is signalling a change in our relationship with Governments and businesses and in the amount of influence we can have over their activities. Collaborations focused upon changing the nature of Government and citizens' relationships with it are recognising these signals and seeking ways of encouraging people to use their newly acquired powers. (Wiki Leaks is a high-profile example of a global collaboration that is changing the relationship and power dynamics between Governments and citizens.)

Smart Mobile technology is signalling a change in the way we communicate and go about our day to day work; it is immeasurably increasing the flexibility, scope and versatility of our interactions with not only other people but also the systems we use and need. Collaborations working to enhance the health and quality of life of people in the developing world are recognising these signals and seeking ways to exploit mobile technology to enhance the effectiveness of their work and support the achievement of their goals. (Vodafone's collaboration with private, public and 3rd sector partners that uses mobile technology to save lives through vaccination in sub-Saharan Africa is a good example).

The above are recognised signals of discontinuity, signals that point towards radical and significant changes that are happening to a greater or lesser extent all over the globe. As you can see, clever collaborations have sought to align themselves with the direction of travel of these signals, so strengthening the effectiveness of their activities.

What signals of discontinuity and change does your collaboration need to look out for? How can it take advantage of them to further its cause and achieve its aims? How can it effectively align its strategy and goals with the new directions and priorities these signals are pointing towards, so enhancing its relevance, credibility, influence and effectiveness?


For more about collaboration go to: Sleeping-with-the-Enemy-Achieving-Collaborative-Success-2nd-Edition

Stop Press! 3rd Edition now out: click on the link to your top right... 

Feedback and change!

Feedback is important to any group of people working together. This is especially so when people from separate businesses and organisations come together to collaborate.

The following model can help partners identify the type of feedback they may need to deliver and address; it will also help them think in a focused way about its purpose and effects:



(Copyright Charles M Lines)


Unspoken feedback is sometimes felt and at best hinted at through partners' actions and reactions. It could be significant or trivial but because it remains unsaid there is no way of knowing. It will, however, sometimes create ‘an atmosphere’ that if not addressed can cause problems between partners. (This type of feedback is likely to appear during a partnership's latency phase). If there are problems between partners or 'an atmosphere' within the collaboration it could be because ‘things need to be aired’. Look out for partners' actions and reactions. Do not be hesitant about asking partners why they are acting or reacting in a particular way. You may find out something very valuable that could lead to reinforcing, modifying or transforming feedback, or you could be reassured that any concerns are merely trivial or ‘passing’ and easily dealt with. 

For example, partners may be having doubts about their ability to contribute to the collaboration's work but be reluctant to admit this. This may lead to them becoming more and more hesitant and withdrawn during meetings and other activities. Taking these partners to one side and respectfully asking why this is happening could encourage them to express their concerns. You can then reassure them as to the value of their contribution and/or explore ways in which they could be helped and supported in their role.            

Passing feedback is not significant in terms of partners' and the collaboration's effectiveness. For example, people often suggest areas for improvement that are in fact expressions of personal preferences. It is true that taking personal preferences into account can sometimes be crucial to the activities of a collaboration and the delivery of its services, but on other occasions it is not. Carefully consider how valuable such feedback is to partners and the collaboration. Do you really need to share and address this feedback? What purpose will be served by doing so? Will acting on it only result in wasted time and effort?

Reinforcing feedback takes the form of positive comments or compliments about partners' and/or the collaboration's effectiveness. How can you encourage partners and the collaboration to build upon these? Could any shortcomings in other areas be addressed by building upon this positive, reinforcing feedback? For example, a partner may have received feedback about their strong communication and PR skills. How could these skills be used to enhance the collaboration's overall image and visibility?

Modifying feedback points out potential areas for improvement within otherwise acceptable levels of performance. For example, people may be very happy with the quality of a service or product but occasionally frustrated by what they see as unnecessary delays in providing it. Will addressing this issue improve the effectiveness of partners and the collaboration? How will it improve things? What options can you identify and discuss with partners' to address it?

Transforming feedback is crucial to partners' and the collaboration's effectiveness. For example, changes in Government policy and cuts in funding may require a collaboration that is charity and volunteer based to receive hard messages about becoming more business focused and efficient. This feedback must be given and addressed in a clear and unambiguous way and separately from any other. You will need to think carefully about how and when you deliver and discuss this feedback. What style of feedback would suit the partners receiving it? Are you sure that you have all the facts relating to it? Are you clear about what you want to say? What are your own feelings about the issue and could they affect the way you give the feedback? What are the partners' views and  feelings concerning the issue? What do they think should be done to address it?

Keep in mind that feedback implying a significant need for change on the part of partners and the collaboration can be perceived as threatening and lead to defensiveness and resistance. So think carefully about the level and type of feedback you need to give, explore and discuss. What type of feedback would best suit the issues, collaborative context and partners involved? Sometimes emphasising strengths and suggesting and exploring options can be more effective than ‘reading the riot act’ or over-enthusiastically championing change. Always think about the partners on the receiving end of your feedback. What will work best for them, you and the collaboration overall?    

Autonomy, Mastery and Purpose

I have been familiarising myself with the work of Daniel H. Pink, who has identified the above three aspects as crucial to motivation.

It strikes me that these aspects are also crucial for effective collaborative working.


Autonomy

Is your collaborative initiative sufficiently independent to ensure it has a separate identity? Can it make decisions and implement actions without having to gain unnecessary approval from others? Can it go about its business and achieve its aims in ways that it, rather than anyone else, believes to be the most suitable and effective?  


Mastery

Does your collaboration have access to the expertise, knowledge, skills and qualities it needs to achieve its goals effectively? Is it able to develop and add to these to meet the changing demands of its environment and those of the people it is seeking to support and help? Does it encourage its members to stretch and challenge themselves and master new skills and new ways of doing things?


Purpose

Is the overall purpose or vision of your collaboration clear? Is it inspiring? Do people buy into it? Are people clear about how their various activities (and any money the collaboration may make) support and enable the collaboration to achieve its aims?

In short, if you want to be motivated get involved in collaborative working and use the above three aspects to help guide its development!