Why is Collaboration important for our personal development?

When do I Compete? When do I Collaborate?

Rahm Immanuel’s exhortation when managing the fundraising campaign for Bill Clinton’s first Presidential campaign “If your competitor is drowning, throw him an anvil,” stands in stark contrast to Kevin Gold’s search for new employees at the elite law firm he chairs, Mishcon de Reya, where he places “generosity of spirit” considerably ahead of drive and ambition. “Go hard or go home,” preaches Will I Am, whilst David Novak’s assertion that “the only way to make big things happen is to take people with you” has a growing army of followers. Which of these viewpoints, each from highly successful, respected individuals, is right? Whilst the latter appears intuitively more inclusive and equitable, the absence of these qualities isn’t necessarily a bad thing of itself. Afterall, the collective can only improve if individuals take responsibility for their own actions. Likewise, humans have become increasingly hard wired to aspire towards living comfortably, with fine foods and clothing, excellent transportation and support staff. As in the time of Jane Austin, for example, this elegant lifestyle can only be sustained by earning 20 – 30 times the national average. However, can you be considered truly Collaborative if you’re so far above the average members of your community? If you remain in the average, do you forego all rights for a comfortable and elegant life? Additionally, does remaining in the pack restrict the choices of your children and consign them to a life serving the non-collaborative practitioners who have elevated themselves to a higher rung of the social strata? In a general sense, however, we're told that Collaborators can often benefit from a wealth of personal rewards and benefits: They will interact better with colleagues and bosses; Access better and more creative ideas; Learn more; Become more emotionally intelligent; Get more support; Achieve goals faster; Receive awesome reviews; Get recommended for more experience and responsibility; Ascend the ranks of the corporate hierarchy more quickly; Attract bigger compensation packages; Achieve greater success; Enjoy better physical and psychological health; Leave a more profound and appreciated legacy.

It is commonly perceived that better collaborators are happier in their jobs; more engaged at work; more motivated to the success of the enterprise; achieve their goals more regularly; contribute more; are considerably more energized; have more balanced personal lives; and, possess deeper reserves of confidence.

Collaboration isn't passive - it requires Action....

What a lot of people don’t fully comprehend is that Collaboration is a physical, Hereclitian act where the journey and the goal become intertwined, for just as people create Collaboration, Collaboration creates people: war, business, sport and art are dotted with legends who performed at career highs whilst surrounded by committed, creative and supportive team-mates, and instructive, dedicated and organized back-rooms. Robert Oppenheimer famously showed very little appetite for leadership before or after the Manhattan Project. However, when the project and the team needed him he was able to step up and galvinise a diverse group of scientists, engineers, politicians and soldiers to create the atomic weapons that accelerated the end of WWII, saving countless lives in the process. Lord Browne’s reputation for visionary leadership was substantially built on BP’s transformation of the Andrew Field Project, a notorious “dog”, into a star performer. Without his colleagues Colin McLean and John Martin he would have been unable to inveigle key suppliers to co-invest in the project and abandon the adversarial practices that characterized their recent commercial history. Sir Bradley Wiggins became the first Englishman to win the Tour de France, benefitting from the improvement plans Dave Brailsford and Team Sky implemented across every factor that could impact on a successful outcome i.e. detailed route plans for each stage with multiple scenarios worked through, attracting Chris Froome, lightweight design, mattresses taken to next location to increase probability of a good night’s sleep for cyclists; anti-bacterial gel to reduce the likelihood of infection etc. etc. Thomas Heatherwick is Chief Exec of the highly successful creative consultancy that bears his name. Prototyping, learning from mistakes, talent and gritty, hard work are integral to a catalogue of work that includes the Olympic Cauldron but he is equally reliant on the team of designers and artisans he has assembled, and the patronage of influential people such as Boris Johnson and Alan Yentob.

In each case, not one of these gifted, energetic individuals can make and maintain the number of connections required to identify and solve the complex, dynamic problems that emerge in our societies, organisations, projects and lives. At a personal level, Collaboration has given oxygen to the passion that glows in each of these individuals, transforming it into contributions that feed, and feed off, the collective capability and organizational platform around them to create something meaningful. Such a transformative journey sounds almost Maslovian, where the person moves through five levels, from a position of relative individual weakness to fulfilling their potential and thriving as a member of a group: 1. Physiological – to stave off hunger and thirst; 2. Safety – to provide warmth and shelter; 3. Belonging and Love – to be part of a group or a family; 4. Esteem and Ego – to gain recognition, status and self-respect; and, 5. Self-actualisation – to grow competence and spiritually.

Narrative Fallacy

However, whilst this theory might be convenient, it isn’t sufficiently accurate when applied to the land acquisition group from the M25. If Skanska's Andreas Gianetti and the others simultaneously bounced from one of Maslow’s partially fulfilled needs to another they did so in a very hap-hazard, incoherent way: money didn’t matter as people weren’t bonused on land deals; careers didn’t matter as no-one was working for an increase in grade; and, no-one was thinking about the recognition that awaited in some future mass-catered awards ceremony. Marriages suffered when lives were put on hold as people worked into the night in eighth-hand pre-fabricated offices far from home to solve their part of a compelling problem, often with equally obsessed peers who they probably wouldn’t work with again. Dinners went to dogs, nativity plays and birthdays were missed and family holidays were postponed. Clearly, everyone was too busy working to contemplate Maslow’s writings about personal and spiritual development, so what was it that made players want to be there Collaborating at that time rather than anywhere else? That, it could be said, is the $5trn question….

Is there a clearer explanation for why Collaboration matters to us?

One of the closest answers in academia can be found in Jessica Pryce Jones’ work on happiness in the workplace, in particular how people pursue the 5Cs: 1. Contribution - the co-ordinated effort made by designers, engineers and cost consultants to identify and quantify the high cost elements such as runs of sheet piled walls, drainage and landfill required was first class. Likewise, their dedication to understand high risk elements that could jeopardise the programme such a pinch-points at highly trafficked slip-roads, junctions and bridges was commendable, as they pored over drawings and debated costs and programmes with sub-contractors and suppliers. Their perception of their effort was high, characterized by early mornings, late nights, meals grabbed on the run and time away from families; 2. The Conviction of the team, in other words their motivation under any circumstances, is best demonstrated by the Land Buyer proceeding to execute transactions after being told by the Project Director to desist, because he understood the viability of the deal, had faith in the tardy vendor and their solicitors, and, was utterly convinced it was the right thing to do for the scheme. He must also have felt safe enough in the group environment, and supported by other influencers, to take such a personal risk; 3. In terms of Culture everyone had a clear role, with a large degree of autonomy, and could join the dots between how their work directly assisted successful outcomes for the project. The sense of purpose was complemented by having support and advice on tap from veterans of similar highways projects and JV environments. People undoubtedly felt like they belonged to the group, particularly as momentum was building and deals were being landed. 4. Commitment could be measured by the extent that people were engaged in debating options and eagerness with which they listened for news of how negotiations on certain deals were progressing; and, 5. Confidence was built by allowing each individual to develop mastery over their part of the transaction, whether that was identifying and quantifying the opportunity for a saving or risk reduction, or structuring a deal with a landowner, or administering a governance system that gave the JV Board and their upstream stakeholders confidence their funds were being well invested. People had a real sense of belief in themselves and what they doing was meaningful.

Viscerally, Jessica's excellent theory still doesn't quite hit the spot. For example, why do we stay on indefinitely in situations that don't deliver some, or all, of the 5Cs? Particularly, if we've experienced the flow associated with high performing teamwork in the past. I'd love to hear how these examples compare against your most vivid recollections of Collaboration and your current, living case studies. The best answers will get invited to this Spring's most lively Collaboration events.....