What if collaboration was just a comfortable illusion in our organizations?
Mario Huard
Change Manager & Agile Coach Expert en adoption du changement Passez rapidement de la planification à l'action
The different facets of workplace collaboration: beyond appearances
In the contemporary professional world, collaboration has become a true watchword. However, behind this overused term lie very different realities, ranging from authentic collaboration to what Marie-Andrée Roy calls "collabillusion" - a neologism formed by merging collaboration and illusion.
Collaboration has become imperative in the modern professional world. It represents a dynamic process where multiple entities voluntarily engage to achieve a common objective, characterized by active knowledge sharing and collective decision-making. What distinguishes it is the creation of synergy that goes beyond the simple addition of individual efforts.
Collaboration is above all a dynamic process where several people or entities voluntarily commit to working together to achieve a common goal. It is characterized by active sharing of knowledge, skills, and resources, as well as collective decision-making where each participant brings their unique contribution while assuming shared responsibility for achieving results.
What distinguishes true collaboration from other forms of professional interaction is the creation of synergy that goes beyond the simple addition of individual efforts. It relies on fundamental elements such as reciprocity in exchanges, interdependence of participants, a shared vision of the desired outcome, and authentic engagement in co-constructing solutions. This approach not only allows for achieving set objectives but also generates greater added value than what each individual could have accomplished alone.
Is collaboration innate in humans?
Yes and no, it depends. Two theses clash. One must choose: humans are fundamentally good or fundamentally evil! What if the answer was somewhere in between? I will open a parenthesis and close it. It is necessary to understand the deep meaning of collaboration.
In this article, I explore the complexity of human nature through the prism of moral bipolarity, drawing on the fundamental works of Thomas Hobbes and more recent discoveries by primatologist Frans de Waal. These two thinkers, though separated by several centuries, offer complementary perspectives on the intrinsic duality of our moral behavior.
The question of natural collaboration in humans reveals a fascinating duality. Frans de Waal's research in primatology shows that empathy and cooperation are rooted in our evolutionary heritage, while our competitive tendencies, highlighted by Hobbes, persist. This moral bipolarity directly influences our organizational behaviors.
In business, this duality manifests as a constant tension between individual and collective objectives. Effective structures align these contradictory motivations to create an environment where cooperation becomes naturally advantageous.
In the professional context, these prosocial behaviors are fundamental for team cohesion and organizational effectiveness. They create what is often called the "social capital" of a company - this collective ability to work together effectively through trust and reciprocity.
What's particularly interesting about the concept of moral bipolarity is that these prosocial behaviors coexist with more competitive or selfish tendencies. The two aspects don't cancel each other out but rather form a dynamic balance that can be influenced by organizational context and leadership.
This tension between: selfishness and altruism
This tension between our selfish and altruistic tendencies forms what we might call our moral bipolarity: we are capable of both the best and worst, oscillating between cooperation and conflict, empathy and indifference. This duality is not a weakness but rather an adaptive characteristic that has allowed us to survive and thrive as a species, giving us the necessary flexibility to navigate complex social environments.
In the context of modern business, this moral bipolarity manifests daily in collaboration dynamics. Employees constantly navigate between their personal interests (career advancement, recognition, compensation) and the collective objectives of the organization.
Understanding this duality allows managers to put in place structures that align individual motivations with company needs, thus creating an environment where cooperation becomes naturally advantageous for everyone. For example, reward systems that value both individual performance and contribution to collective success recognize this bipolarity and use it as a lever for organizational performance.
"Collabillusion": the trap of appearances
Collabillusion represents a pernicious organizational phenomenon where collaboration becomes a deceptive facade, an organizational theater that undermines employee trust and engagement. This term, merging "collaboration" and "illusion," perfectly describes situations where leaders create the appearance of a participative approach while maintaining deeply authoritarian management practices. In these contexts, employees are invited to participate in elaborate consultative processes, but their contributions have no real impact on final decisions, thus creating a simulacrum of organizational democracy.
The manifestations of "collabillusion" are subtle but omnipresent. They are found in these so-called "consultation" meetings where participants gradually realize that major decisions have already been made behind the scenes. They also manifest in working groups that mobilize employee energy and expertise for weeks or even months to produce recommendations that will end up being politely ignored. "Suggestion boxes" and other collaborative platforms then become facade tools, serving more to create the illusion of listening than to generate genuine constructive dialogue.
The consequences of "collabillusion" are particularly harmful:
The impact of "collabillusion" on the organizational fabric is profound and lasting. Beyond the immediate frustration it generates, it progressively erodes employee trust in their hierarchy and organization. Collaborators, having invested time and energy in processes they discover to be fictitious, develop cynicism that can contaminate their entire relationship with work. This progressive disengagement often translates into a decrease in creativity, innovation, and performance, as employees, burned by these experiences, end up adopting an attitude of withdrawal or passive conformity.
To combat this phenomenon, organizations must engage in authentic collaboration, where employee participation truly influences company decisions and direction. This implies a profound transformation of management practices, with greater transparency in decision-making processes, systematic feedback on received proposals, and above all, a real willingness to share power and accept that solutions can emerge from all levels of the organization.
领英推荐
Managers must understand that true collaboration is not a threat to their authority, but rather a powerful lever for engagement and collective innovation.
Different types of "collabillusion"
"Collabillusion": the trap of appearances reveals a complex phenomenon that manifests in different forms in our organizations. This deceptive practice of collaboration generally emerges when traditional power structures attempt to don the appearance of modern management while maintaining their old habits. The most obvious of these manifestations is decisional collabillusion, where participative meetings are organized even though major decisions have already been made in other circles. Participants then become, unknowingly, actors in a play whose script is already written.
Typology of "collabillusion" in organizations
Between these extremes of false collaboration and authentic collaboration lies a nuanced spectrum of intermediate practices that deserve our attention. Consultative collaboration, for example, represents an approach where management maintains its decision-making authority while actively soliciting team opinions and perspectives. This form can prove relevant in certain organizational contexts, particularly when strategic issues or external constraints require centralized arbitration. The key to its legitimacy lies in transparency: the rules of the game must be clearly stated from the start.
In parallel, punctual collaboration and network collaboration offer more flexible and potentially more authentic modalities. The first focuses on specific projects with clearly defined objectives and roles, thus creating a framework conducive to sincere but time-limited participation. The second, more organic, relies on natural skills and affinities rather than formal hierarchies, promoting more fluid and potentially more innovative cooperation.
This typology of collaborative forms allows us to better understand the gulf that can exist between stated intention and reality of practices. While some organizations oscillate between these different models, others remain trapped in systemic collabillusion, where top-down communication disguises itself as dialogue and where working groups produce recommendations destined to remain dead letters. This phenomenon is all the more pernicious as it creates an appearance of management modernity while perpetuating traditional control practices.
To transcend these traps and cultivate authentic collaboration, organizations must first recognize these different manifestations of collabillusion. This awareness then allows for implementing mechanisms that promote real and meaningful employee participation. This notably implies clarifying shared decision zones, guaranteeing systematic feedback on submitted proposals, and above all, creating an environment where trust and transparency are not just keywords but daily practices.
How to cultivate authentic collaboration?
To avoid the trap of collabillusion and develop a true collaborative culture, several levers are essential:
Conclusion
Authentic collaboration is not a natural state of organizations but the fruit of conscious and constant work. Recognizing and naming collabillusion constitutes an essential first step to guard against it. Leaders and managers have a crucial role to play in creating conditions for genuine collaboration that generates value for both the organization and its members.
The challenge is not so much to avoid all forms of collabillusion - which can sometimes be tempting in urgency - but to consciously tend toward more authentic practices. For it is in the quality of this collaboration that lies an important part of performance and well-being at work.
Managers, your next management committee is the perfect opportunity to initiate change. Ask yourself this essential question: "Which recent decision would have deserved a true collaborative approach?" Choose a concrete project and transform it into a laboratory of authentic collaboration. The credibility of your leadership depends on it. Your teams expect actions, not words.