The following chart -- which I didn't steal from anyone -- shows the top five differences between a collaboration that has no chance of generating positive change and one that is designed to sustain systems change.
Focused on assigning blame or taking credit
|
Focused on outcomes
|
Stakeholders participate to protect
|
Stakeholders participate to generate value
|
Opinions rule
|
Data is king
|
Talk exceeds action
|
Actions emerge from engagement
|
Informal process
|
Intentional, rigorous process
|
During lunch today a colleague said it's the final difference that is the most important. She wondered how anyone expects change to happen in a complex system if the work isn't guided by an intentional, rigorous process. Indeed. Yet more often than not funders encourage stakeholders to collaborate but fail to provide them with the capacity required to engage in a rigorous collaboration.
I (accidentally) helped initiate a coblaboration. Some actions/impacts did result, but failed to conceive a back bone.
ReplyDeleteI think all your points differentiating the two are valid, but IMHO, the process issue is what caused the demise of the group.
This is really an excellent blog as well as its content. Christopher Thompson
ReplyDeleteThis seeding of knowledge is exhilarating to those of us seeking progressive food or nourishment in a Coblaborative Society with a narcissistic flavor versus a truly Collaborative Society where we work together for the good of all. Thank you for this elevated conscious feeding.
ReplyDelete