In the collaboration module, Pr. Hansen has formalized the way companies can go from bad collaboration to disciplined collaboration by reducing four types of barriers. The four authors of The New Arithmetic of Collaboration formalize the steps that goes from undisciplined collaboration to disciplined collaboration and the benefit you can reap from climbing the “collaboration ladder”. It is a useful complement to the 4 barriers theory: Highlighting that there are indeed different levels of collaboration with corresponding drawbacks and benefits addresses the misconception that collaboration is a panacea to any company’s problems. It may also provide a “horizon” for implementing collaboration as a corporate strategy. The paper focuses on partnership between companies, yet the theory is applicable to various business unit across a single company.
The authors perceives four rungs for the collaboration ladder: collaboration as a zero-sum game (accidental engagement, 1+1<2), unadventurous collaboration (Transactional cooperation, 1+1=2), win-win collaboration (Intentional collaboration, 1+1=3) and what could be defined as disciplined collaboration (1+1=11). How these rungs are defined is still fuzzy but I find interesting the imagery of climbing a collaboration ladder.
The author’s theory has also been applied to policy, for example, the recent trip of President Obama to India.
2 replies on “The collaboration ladder”
In the article, the author believes Infosys is one of the few firms to approach the fourth rung.
“Infosys shared its experience and learning of the certification process with all its Indian competitors and helped them to get certified at the same level, making the entire Indian IT sector globally competitive.”
Call me an uncle schrooge but why would they help the competition. There must be more to the story.
It might be true where competition is a zero-sum game. Yet, some companies notice that helping their providers and even their competitors can be part of a grand bargain. It’s not idealism, it’s good business. Take the example of chocolate manufacturer who openly share expensive research to protect their natural capital: http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2010/09/how_chocolate_can_save_the_world.html
The logic is: You may have all the know-how to service a market. Yet, you need to preserve / create your natural capital. In the case of Infosys, the natural capita that it might want to create is the reputation of the Indian certification industry. Certification, if not well performed, can cost millions in law suits. Companies are pretty conservative and risk-averse to changing certifiers. Therefore, raising the profile of the whole certification in India, a country infamous for its low safety standards, is a sensible idea for Infosys