toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
I can’t speak for the others -- but I am agreeing that few things are “advisable at all times” -- including (but not limited to) collaboration.
No medical doctor should prescribe a medication without knowledge of (1) the unique circumstances of the individual patient, and (2) the potential side-effects of the solution. And these should be shared in advance – carefully, and as
appropriate – with the patient.
Much the same is true of management solutions, including those based on knowledge. Unless you understand the potential downsides (that always exist) and how to communicate these to your client, I’m suggesting that perhaps you shouldn’t
be “prescribing” that cure.
Whatever the solution is, be sure that it is client-centric and problem focused. What specific problem(s) is X intervention expected to solve, for whom, and how?
From: <main@SIKM.groups.io> on behalf of Nirmala Palaniappan <Nirmala.pal@...>
Reply-To: "main@SIKM.groups.io" <main@SIKM.groups.io>
Date: Monday, March 8, 2021 at 9:15 AM
To: "main@SIKM.groups.io" <main@SIKM.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Knowledge sharing culture #culture
That's a very valid scenario, Tom.
Unless everyone is aligned with the objective or purpose, collaboration will not happen.
But are we saying that collaboration is not advisable, at times?
On Mon, 8 Mar 2021, 19:19 Tim Powell, <tim.powell@...
I agree with you that consensus and collaboration are not identical. But they are closely related, don’t you think?
I see consensus as a necessary pre-condition of successful collaboration. How can you work together effectively (i.e., collaborate) without prior agreement as to WHAT is to be
done, and HOW it is to be done (i.e., consensus)?
Are we saying that collaboration should not be encouraged at times? I am little lost on that....because
1. Collaboration is definitely not the same as consensus (in a crisis, trying to arrive at a consensus will definitely be a drawback but collaboration would be essential, for example,
to execute a decision that’s been taken)
2. Collaboration is not akin to a switch that can be turned on or off depending on the situation - It is either built into a culture or not. There can be varying degrees of collaboration
based on the effort and type of initiatives and, of course, there has to be someone at the helm guiding the team/workforce to make the most of the collaborative culture
Am I missing something here?
Hi Murray, what you found about when to collaborate and when not to is probably correct but to me is irrelevant.
Fundamentally, in this thread we are confusing two things (and probably my fault for not being clear enough):
1. The need and benefits of a collaborative culture to support in particular a digital transformation (what I was referring to)
2. The situations when collaboration is adding value and the ones when it is not necessarily so (what some of you seems to be focusing on).
When an organisation can be described as having a truly collaborative culture, it does not mean that everyone will be collaborative all of the times!
Such a culture does not mean being collaborative to death to a point that no individual feels compelled to make a decision.
In fact, as I have already stated above, in a collaborative culture it is not about consensus at all. For the decision maker, it is about benefiting from the expertise/insights of others to make the "right" decision as informed as possible. It is about learning
from mistakes and successes (so lessons learned) for instance. It is also about leveraging employees skills/competences that are not directly needed by their current role.
Maybe we could have another thread to discuss the definition of a collaborative culture.
"The faithful see the invisible, believe the incredible and then receive the impossible" - Anonymous