Collaboration
When you see corned executives, directors of organizations that long ago have lost any importance bar self-importance, institutions and companies without any value beyond a small fenced scrap of a market on the outskirts of the single European market, one asks a question what is wrong with collaboration in such a place? Why people cannot join forces together to grow, to learn, to reach the scale, to force alliances and simply enjoy company of each other?
Perhaps a deeply rooted sense of lost trust to anyone and anything is a reason. People underwent through a painful process of cowboy capitalism, when survival instincts were sharpened and immediate benefits meant cash on the table and nothing else mattered. Yet there were Orange Revolution, there was a time of economic growth when managers became managers and loyalty of staff crept to the execs vocabulary.
Another reason could be that collaboration is not seen as a drive of business value. None has explicitly put value on having good links to other institutions, no business school made a good case study on how having collaboration with suppliers, researchers, government helped someone to sell business with a higher valuation. Funding (subsidies, programmes etc.) is not being allocated to those who are in the collaborative networks, but rather based on back-door acquaintances and kick-backs. Even on a personal level collaboration is of no help. Why to collaborate with your neighbours when you can buy permissions and your friends are always around - no need to get new ones.
How to move beyond the distrust towards a mere notion of collaboration?
Probably the first step should be to demonstrate a tangible benefits beyond either means or capabilities of those who are enticed to collaborate. Getting 1 mln euro together where one cannot get a single cent, preparing together a concept where one cannot put two word coherently in a required way.
Secondly some un-learning must be done. Desire to test a new approach and readiness to undertake a measured yet tangible risk is a driver behind collaboration. Dwelling on the tangible benefits of such collaboration (where is my money) will not make the process valuable and even less sustainable. People need to un-learn short-term thinking and develop their ability to learn long-term. Squabbling in the process of collaboration will not help parties to reach the ultimate aim they put for themselves in the first instance.
Thirdly, some die-hards should be thrown, squeezed out, eradicated from the market ruthlessly. There are individuals, organizations and companies built upon and inherently sticking to the rules of submission, refusing to collaborate and always eager to steal ideas, do everything on their own and undermining efforts of others to cooperate. Plotting behind your target's meagre ability to foresee a chance that will swipe them into oblivion is a skill that is as unique as a visionary. It is a responsibility too, - the one to be applied with a homeopathic accuracy.
Ability to collaborate is a skill, which is hard to acquire, hard to develop and even harder to implant.
Perhaps a deeply rooted sense of lost trust to anyone and anything is a reason. People underwent through a painful process of cowboy capitalism, when survival instincts were sharpened and immediate benefits meant cash on the table and nothing else mattered. Yet there were Orange Revolution, there was a time of economic growth when managers became managers and loyalty of staff crept to the execs vocabulary.
Another reason could be that collaboration is not seen as a drive of business value. None has explicitly put value on having good links to other institutions, no business school made a good case study on how having collaboration with suppliers, researchers, government helped someone to sell business with a higher valuation. Funding (subsidies, programmes etc.) is not being allocated to those who are in the collaborative networks, but rather based on back-door acquaintances and kick-backs. Even on a personal level collaboration is of no help. Why to collaborate with your neighbours when you can buy permissions and your friends are always around - no need to get new ones.
How to move beyond the distrust towards a mere notion of collaboration?
Probably the first step should be to demonstrate a tangible benefits beyond either means or capabilities of those who are enticed to collaborate. Getting 1 mln euro together where one cannot get a single cent, preparing together a concept where one cannot put two word coherently in a required way.
Secondly some un-learning must be done. Desire to test a new approach and readiness to undertake a measured yet tangible risk is a driver behind collaboration. Dwelling on the tangible benefits of such collaboration (where is my money) will not make the process valuable and even less sustainable. People need to un-learn short-term thinking and develop their ability to learn long-term. Squabbling in the process of collaboration will not help parties to reach the ultimate aim they put for themselves in the first instance.
Thirdly, some die-hards should be thrown, squeezed out, eradicated from the market ruthlessly. There are individuals, organizations and companies built upon and inherently sticking to the rules of submission, refusing to collaborate and always eager to steal ideas, do everything on their own and undermining efforts of others to cooperate. Plotting behind your target's meagre ability to foresee a chance that will swipe them into oblivion is a skill that is as unique as a visionary. It is a responsibility too, - the one to be applied with a homeopathic accuracy.
Ability to collaborate is a skill, which is hard to acquire, hard to develop and even harder to implant.
Labels: thoughts
posted by volodymyrvorobey at Sunday, May 31, 2009
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home