Collaborate to Compete

There's an interesting article in the Wall Street Journal yesterday (2/13) which considers the value of managerial styles - competitive versus collaborative.  In the past, most firms have encouraged competition within the ranks as an indicator of success and advancement.  Managers actually compete with each other for resources and talent.  One of my least favorite questions when working in a large firm for other groups is "What's your charge number?"

The article points out that in a knowledge based economy, businesses will require people who can share information and talents.  I think this is especially true as we move from top-down hierarchical models to broader, flatter organizations.  Customers also will fuel this change, since they require quick actions and decisions, and expect an organization to be able to create products and solve problems across organizational boundaries. 

If the organization is changing, and our customers expectations are changing, how do we change the culture, recognition and compensation of managers and senior execs who are more accustomed to competing rather than collaborating?

This isn't happening just within the four walls of the organizations.  Many companies are starting to collaborate with their customers, and in some cases even with competitors to create new products and services.  In that environment, managers and senior executives who can share data, build trust and obtain great work without a significant amount of direct reports will be the ones to rise to the top.

The article goes on to note that Cisco, a firm known for fast growth, has made "teamwork and collaboration" a factor in its formula for computing management bonuses.  This factor alone can have impact bonuses as much as 20%.

In organizations that are becoming more matrixed and much broader and flatter, managers rarely have the staff to accomplish all the work in any project.  In fact, most projects require skills from people across several functional areas.  Only managers who can encourage team work and collaboration, and who can encourage people to work with them across functional boundaries and company stovepipes will be successful.  The necessary skills in this regard are communication, the ability to create a vision and to help others get on board and see what's in it for them, and the ability to work across virtual and cultural boundaries.  These people aren't necessarily great at making demands, but at encouraging, cajoling and building a coalition. 

Competition isn't dead, and collaboration alone is not enough to build a business.  There needs to be competition since resources are still scarce and should flow to the best ideas.  What's changing is where those resources come from and what it takes to get them.

Comments

[Random Name]

Years ago, I participated in a start-up company that tried to invent desktop publishing.

While they were trying to come up with a viable product (which they never did), I was directed to run a small typesetting department to generate some income. (My wife and I had operated a small phototypesetting company.)

The would-be hotshot executives who started the company suggested I have the production employees compete with each other as motivational technique. The idea was so irrelevant and inappropriate as to be meaningless. For one thing, each job was unique, so there was no basis for competition. Secondly, on big projects work had to be divided up and required cooperation and trust, not artificial competition. It was prime example of people operating out of an ideological fixation rather than practical sense. Although this example doesn't represent the core reason the company failed spectacularly in a year's time, it was symptomatic of a seriously flawed mindset.