There is a lot of talk about collaboration. It is seen as a value, a cultural pillar, a business objective. We invest in tools, create cross-functional channels, organize workshops and expand steering committees.
But in most cases, what we call collaboration is not collaboration at all: it is coordination. This confusion has very real consequences for the organization of work, the quality of deliverables, and team engagement.
In short:
- Collaboration is often confused with coordination, but they have different purposes: coordination organizes the execution of prescribed work, while collaboration allows people to design together what has not yet been defined.
- Coordination relies on roles, processes, and tools to manage complexity and optimize execution without questioning the objectives or design of the work.
- Collaboration involves uncertainty, co-construction, and the emergence of solutions through interaction, requiring a framework of trust, time, and acceptance of error.
- This confusion has negative effects: poorly adapted tools, organizational overload, and disappointment with expected results (innovation, engagement, efficiency).
- Clarifying the need (collaborate or coordinate) is essential for choosing the right practices: lightness and clarity for coordination, a framework conducive to co-creation for collaboration.
Coordination is organizing the work that needs to be done
Coordination aims to streamline the execution of work that has already been designed: who does what, when, and in what order. It is a response to the growing complexity of value chains, functional interdependencies, and interlocking projects. It relies on processes, explicit roles, and planning tools. It is essential to collective performance, but it remains within the realm of execution (Don’t mistake team work for parallel work).
We adjust and synchronize, but we do not question the purpose or design of the work.
Collaboration is producing something together that has not yet been defined
Collaboration, on the other hand, begins where coordination ends. It occurs when the problem has not yet been clearly defined, when solutions must emerge from interaction, when value arises from the confrontation of ideas rather than the alignment of tasks.
Collaborating is not working together on a shared document or in a team meeting. It is co-producing, accepting uncertainty and back-and-forth exchanges. Above all, it means giving up linearity and absolute control over the process.
When coordination aims to replicate perfection ad infinitum, collaboration comes into play when we have no idea what perfection looks like.
This is what Drucker called knowledge work: work that cannot be designed without those who perform it.
An ambiguity that hurts everyone
This confusion between coordination and collaboration has three adverse effects.
First, tools that are unsuited to the task at hand. Collaborative platforms are deployed when what is really needed is better planning (Are collaboration tools really about collaboration?). Or, conversely, rigid processes are imposed where debate and co-construction are needed. The result is under-use, misuse, and cognitive overload.
Next comes organizational fatigue. Teams find themselves multiplying exchanges, meetings, and validations, believing they are collaborating, when in reality they are managing increasing organizational complexity without any real gain in value (Digital Infobesity: When Collaboration Tools Degrade Productivity, QWL and Amplify Mental Workload).
And finally, disappointment with the results. We expect new ideas, innovation, and engagement, but what we get is friction, confusion, and sometimes disengagement. All this because the conditions for true collaboration are not in place: time, trust, recognition, and the right to try and make mistakes.
An organizational design challenge
To truly transform the way we work together, there is one and only one question to ask: Do we need to collaborate or simply coordinate better?
If it’s coordination, let’s clarify roles, optimize flows, and provide light tools.
If it’s collaboration, let’s create a framework of trust, give time, and accept iteration.
Collaboration cannot be imposed. However, it can be designed, facilitated, and cultivated. It requires a different managerial approach, less focused on control and more on creating the conditions for success. The challenge here is to improve the system: not individuals, but the framework that enables performance to emerge.
Bottom line
By mixing coordination and collaboration, we fail at both. We complicate what should remain fluid and hope for collective intelligence where there is only a juxtaposition of tasks.
The businesses that are most successful in this area are not those that collaborate more, but those that collaborate better, and only when it makes sense.
Collaboration is not fostered by adding tools, meetings, or workflows, but by clarifying intentions and developing the right work habits to choose the right approach at the right time, depending on the context and objectives.
Image credit: Image generated by artificial intelligence via ChatGPT (OpenAI)
Related articles:
Do new organization models scale ?
Employees don’t have time to waste narrating their work
What new capabilities did organizations acquire in the last 7 years ?
How to Manage Complexity without Getting Complicated
The problem with effective collaboration: it makes people useless
Does the web really decrease transaction costs ?
