Collaboration in my opinion results in a greater outcome because of the active participation of the partners. The project takes form, grows and changes because of a unified purpose, different from negotiation or compromise. Joint ownership. Collaboration could work with the right mix of n-ps, f-ps, and sm. businesses who are committed to a common goal, thus creating value in the broadest sense. The role of leadership then becomes moving the good of the whole forward and engaging all the group members.

The word I have come to mistrust is “input” because it usually means giving an opinion of someone else’s conclusion, not influencing it.

Mostly I’m trying to get across that collaboration is a component of the process, not an outcome. People get caught up on the idea, saying “We need to collaborate! We must collaborate!” without answering (or sometimes even asking), the broader question which is “What is the (shared) outcome/change we seek?”

As a Millenial, one of the criticisms of my generation is that we get caught up in trying to fix/optimize the process (“why does it work that way? it should work like this”), and are bad at actually completing tasks. Trying to parse these things out helps me make some sense of things (and hopefully makes for not-frustrating reading).

I dont really address why collaboration is important however I think it’s important to do so. By demonstrating a increase in economic value we are more likely to work together. I may do a follow up post to this!