Workforce
Collaboration: A By-Product of the Technology-Driven Marketplace
by
Tracy Gibbons, Ph.D. and Randi Brenowitz
This
article appeared in Mworld, the online periodical of the
American Management Association, July 2001 and in Innovative Leader,
11/22/02.
Technology has done wonders for American management. Yet the complexity
of today's technology makes it impossible for any one person to
know all of the intricacies behind a new product's design and
development. Only 20 years ago, designing and developing a product
were more of an individual effort, and organizational design centered
on a hierarchical approach. Today companies have to accept that
rapidly emerging technologies, a global marketplace and an increasingly
competitive and complex business environment demand workplace
collaboration.
The
Collaborative Work Environment
The simplest way to define a collaborative work environment is
to think of how we arrived there in the first place. It began
with the massive introduction of computers in the mid-1980s. Better
enabled by computers and their infinite capabilities, a new breed
of "knowledge workers" was born and, in many ways, they
share the same behaviors and value sets. The more the computer
distributed power in organizations, the less we relied on traditional
models of industry. Clear divisions of hierarchy have been blurring
ever since, shifting from a manufacturing model to one of integration.
The
collaborative work environments representing this stage of the
timeline are team-based organizations with highly aligned people
and structures. In this setting, team roles, goals and operating
principles are clarified, and joint problem solving and innovation
are essential.
Getting
a company to this point is difficult. The traditional hierarchies
of most companies don't easily lend themselves to team-based structures
- especially large organizations that are complex and more difficult
to manage and modify. The non-profit Association for the Management
of Organization Design promotes the knowledge and practice of
organization design. After more than a decade of studying companies,
they state on their Web site, "
We see the emphasis
shifting on a number of dimensions
less reliance on hierarchy
and more reliance on networking and strategic alliances; less
reliance on physical labor and more reliance on knowledge workers
and technology, less reliance on isolation and more reliance on
value chains and the willingness to build strong, healthy communities."
Collaboration
Means a New Design
Organization
design is the planning and integration of the way people work
in an organization. It's also an essential business tool for building
a collaborative workplace. Although organization design previously
focused more on physically modifying an organization's structure,
information technology is changing this approach. With the technical
tools now available many types of dispersed work methods have
emerged. Home offices, drop-in work centers, electric conferencing
are symbols of what has vastly changed the focus of a company's
organization define efforts. The high-tech world is finally redefining
today's process-based organizations and changing the lines and
boxes of traditional organizational charts.
The
Random House dictionary defines collaboration as: to work, one
with another; cooperate. In many ways, a collaborative workplace
is characterized by teamwork - a new style of teamwork designed
to fit today's changed organization. Collaborative work teams
aren't necessarily without structure, nor are they without levels
of power and status. The difference lies in the fact that the
structures are set up to change rapidly and to encourage innovation.
For
example, companies such as DreamWorks or Apple Computer tend to
perfect their definition of teamwork as they grow. Decision making
power and authority are constantly changing. Or, there are companies,
especially those with extensive sales efforts, that must manage
dispersed teams where managers work in one location and their
teams are located in several other places throughout the world.
Collaborative
Work Models
The
complexity of building a collaborative environment dictates the
need for expertise in its planning and implementation. Originally,
small teams of five to 20 people characterized the collaborative
models. Increasingly, however, teams are getting larger and more
geographically dispersed. Arriving at an operating style that
works for all team members is sometimes a hurdle, which is why
companies often work with organization development practitioners.
Creating
a collaborative work environment that supports the work of engineers
shows how models should be altered to accommodate specific needs.
In engineering organizations, frequently the concept of team is
associated with a loss of creative freedom and individual uniqueness.
In an organization where the charter is to imagine and invent,
even the possibility of losing the freedom to innovate can be
traumatic.
Design
engineering work is not a matter of continuous improvement, but
rather of creation and innovation, leading to technological and
conceptual paradigm shifts. This type of work does not easily
lend itself to cross-training or pay-for-knowledge reward systems
that are typical within team-based process organizations.
The
length of feedback loops in engineering organizations is much
longer than those in manufacturing organizations. On an engineering
project, it may take years before one knows if the customer or
the marketplace thinks positively about the product. This is in
contrast to quality control or internal inspection in manufacturing
organizations, where feedback may be received in a matter of hours
or days. Traditionally, engineers were trained to be independent
workers. They are often frustrated by today's technology and the
structural constraints market demands are exerting on their work
environments. In general, engineers prefer being measured on individual
uniqueness and heroics, not on collaboration and team behavior.
Building
effective models of collaboration is challenging. Even when a
company has decided to team its special (best) talent to meet
today's critical challenges, the ensuing process cannot be underestimated.
It warrants a great deal of attention, especially regarding the
players in the collaboration. One common philosophy points toward
the three components necessary for team success: