The Culture of Collaboration

BusinessWeek.com Launches Collaboration Column

Internal competition wreaks havoc in organizations, compromising collaboration and reducing value. The cost is often hidden, but it can be significant. That’s why my first column on collaboration for BusinessWeek.com focuses on internal competition. The column is part of the site’s Management section, which offers actionable business information. So my column offers 5 ways that leaders can reduce internal competition.

Check out “The Hidden Cost of Internal Competition” on the BusinessWeek.com site.

Cisco's John Chambers: the Hardest Part is the Culture

I was watching Cisco CEO John Chambers do his trademark walk-and-talk style keynote yesterday at the Hilton San Francisco Union Square as Cisco was kicking off its Collaboration Summit when suddenly John interrupted his pitch for collaboration.

 

“Do you know what the hardest change is in this?” he queried the audience rhetorically. “As any CEO will tell you, it’s the culture.”

 

John’s observation resonated with me in that the fundamental premise of The Culture of Collaboration book is that “without a culture of collaboration, the best processes, systems, tools and leadership strategies fall flat.” In the book, I also note that “the overwhelming reason why collaboration eludes organizations involves culture.”

 

Understanding the role of culture in creating a collaborative enterprise is paramount, particularly as Cisco introduces 61 collaboration products. Collaboration tools are key enablers, but they are far more effective in enabling collaboration in enterprises with collaborative cultures and processes.  Cisco has been focusing on collaboration more than any other initiative as an organizational imperitive and in product efforts. Now the company is fixated on persuading customers that it has reached a milestone in innovating collaboration. With that in mind, Cisco vice president of enterprise solutions Alan Cohen, a history buff and blogger, noted that Cisco was announcing its slew of products on the 20^th anniversary of the Berlin Wall’s fall and observed that it was one of the “biggest transitions in our history.”

 

As Tony Bates, Senior Vice President and General Manager of the Enterprise Group, highlighted Cisco’s major product introductions, he emphasized the increasing role of video in collaboration—from Flip Video camcorders to WebEx web conferencing to telepresence—and the interactivity of these tools. You can read details of the product announcements here.

 

At a cocktail party following the keynotes, Tony and I had an engaging conversation about how the role of video has evolved. I mentioned that when I was researching my first book, Personal Videoconferencing, in the mid-1990’s, there was considerable push back against real-time video as a viable business tool. People were scared of the camera, and there was a pervasive view that one needed to have highly-honed presentation skills to use videoconferencing. Tony observed that people are increasingly accepting that the way they conduct themselves in meetings and in one-on-one workplace interactions is good enough for many video interactions.

 

Currently, most telepresence and web conferencing interactions are scheduled. As organizational cultures evolve to support more real-time collaboration, video interaction will become more spontaneous. Then real-time video will transcend communications and become part-and-parcel of collaboration. 

Replacing ROI with Return on Collaboration?

Yesterday I had a compelling discussion with Alla Reznik, director of global voice and collaboration for Verizon. Alla is from Russia, and she’s the only U.S.-based marketing professional I know who can provide input on the Russian language edition of The Culture of Collaboration book published by Ecom of Moscow. Alla and I chatted about regional cultural differences in how people collaborate—and differences in how they respond to surveys.

 

It was a timely discussion, because today Verizon and Cisco are releasing a new study tackling return on investment (ROI) for collaboration expenditures. ROI has long frustrated collaboration tools vendors, because of the difficulty in quantifying “soft” benefits such as corporate reputation. The research, conducted by Frost & Sullivan, identifies a model for measuring what it calls return on collaboration (ROC).

 

ROC measures the impact of collaboration on key functional areas. These include research and development, human resources, sales, marketing, investor relations, and public relations. Traditional ROI measures money gained or lost on an investment. In contrast, ROC tracks the amount of “improvement” derived from a financial investment in collaboration. The study identified research and development, sales and marketing as the functional areas with the highest ROC.

 

The study called “Meetings Around the World 2: Charting the Course of Advanced Collaboration” is based on questionnaires completed by 3662 information technology and line-of-business decision makers in 10 countries. Respondents represented enterprises plus small and medium sized businesses. Nearly half the organizations are using unified communications and collaboration tools ranging from enterprise instant messaging to Cisco TelePresence. Among the study’s key findings is that collaboration is more than twice as important as strategic orientation and six times more important than market factors in determining business performance.

 

 

“The world has changed quite a bit since 2006,” according to Alla, who was referring to the 2006 study dubbed “Meetings Around the World 1.” This earlier study determined that collaboration fuels business performance and that collaboration capability is based on technology, culture and structure. The new study indicates that culture and structure are even more important to collaboration than they were in the previous study conducted in 2006.  The point is that collaboration technology makes the most difference in organizations with collaborative cultures and structures. Similarly, the fundamental premise of The Culture of Collaboration book is that maximizing time, talent and tools to create value requires collaborative culture.

 

The main purpose of the study is to convince business decision makers to invest in collaboration tools and technologies.  One conclusion is that a $1 million investment in collaboration tools and technologies will deliver a $4 million dollar “improvement.” However, this result apparently fails to consider whether the organization has adopted a collaborative culture. I would argue that a $1 million investment by an organization with a collaborative culture will produce greater results than the same investment by an organization with a command-and-control, internally-competitive culture. So while the study does highlight the role of culture and structure, more work is necessary in integrating these elements into measuring ROC.

 

The big question for Verizon and Cisco is whether CFO’s, CIO’s and business decision makers will accept ROC. “We’re curious ourselves,” Alla told me. While there’s work to do in proving the value of collaboration, ROC is an important step towards evaluating the return on collaboration investment.

Empathy and Collaboration: What's the Link?

Are empathic people more likely to collaborate? Or are collaborators more likely to empathize?

 

Dev Patnaik, author of Wired to Care, and I tossed around these and other questions during an engaging discussion this afternoon. “Collaboration allows for empathy and creativity to occur” is Dev’s view. We can argue this chicken-or-egg question either way, but the point is that empathy and collaboration are fellow travelers. While I argue in The Culture of Collaboration book that collaborating creates value, Dev argues that empathy makes money for companies.

 

Almost everything in business has become data-driven. The thinking is...if you can’t measure it, it doesn’t matter. Even traditionally less data driven disciplines such as public relations have become more numbers-oriented. Data certainly provides valuable insight, but it doesn’t tell the whole story. After all, the road is littered with businesses that have used numbers—real or manufactured—to hide destructive practices. Bernie Madoff, who’s not exactly a poster boy for empathy, comes to mind.

 

I’ve been noticing recently some cracks developing in this data-obsessed foundation on which we build and grow businesses. Clearly, Dev’s antenna is up, and he’s noticing something similar. Dev likens the shift to the change in painting (canvases, not houses) that occurred after the adoption of the camera. Expressionism replaced realism.

 

According to Dev, we’re moving into the “abstract expressionist phase of management.” It’s no longer enough to be a great numbers person. We’re now expecting more of our leaders, and empathy and collaboration are among those qualities. Because a collaborative organization creates greater value, there’s an increasing role for collaborative leaders. And the same is true for empathy.

 

Understanding the feelings of others is good behavior, but empathy particularly pays off when companies—that is the people who work for companies-- understand what their customers are feeling. And in Wired to Care, Dev deftly weaves into his narrative numerous examples—ranging from Harley-Davidson to Nike—of companies that have achieved impressive results through empathy.

 

Dev asked me about the relationship between empathy and collaboration, and I’ve been thinking more about it since we talked. The strongest link is that both qualities involve focusing less on self and more on others. The opposite of collaborative behavior is internally-competitive, command-and-control behavior. This is a form of self absorption. Another form of self absorption is lack of understanding how others feel.

 

While reading Dev’s book, I wondered whether its author is empathetic. So I asked him. “I’m not a very empathic person,” Dev insisted.  That struggle with empathy, though drives Dev’s interest in the topic. He points to the reputation of Apple CEO Steve Jobs as technologically-challenged. Jobs and Apple are ideally suited to sort out usability, Dev argues, because of this struggle. It’s not exactly analogous, but I take Dev’s point. And at the risk of treading into blurb-like territory, Wired to Care will make you think and act differently.

Collaboration Curing Multiple Sclerosis

It was definitely unorthodox. Many said it was impossible. But it looks like The Myelin Repair Foundation has done it. MRF, which is working on curing multiple sclerosis, is about to meet its ambitious goal of licensing a discovery for commercial drug development within five years. Through a collaborative research model, the Silicon Valley-based foundation has reduced drug development time from 15 years to 5 years. MRF is negotiating with a biotech company and believes a license agreement is in the works.

 

Intuit Founder Scott Cook, a foundation supporter, suggested I research MRF when I was writing The Culture of Collaboration book.  In the book, I tell the story of how Scott Johnson, who has MS, learned that a cure was taking three or four times as long because of competition among researchers. This prompted Johnson to rethink the culture of medical research and begin changing that culture. Scientists often refuse to share data and information, because they compete for limited grant money and for publishing articles in top medical journals. The answer was to get experts in different disciplines to collaborate. So Johnson raised money, ultimately plowed $20 million into drug discovery work, and built a collaborative medical research foundation.

 

Johnson brought in fellow tech start-up veteran Russell Bromley as chief operating officer. And Johnson and Bromley recruited five principal investigators who head labs.  They proposed a level of collaboration for curing disease that none of the scientists had ever experienced. Their focus was to repair myelin, the sheath that surrounds the nerves, which MS damages. Johnson and Bromley with input from the researchers developed a Collaborative Research Process, which addresses everything from tools to incentives.

 

Since its founding in 2004, MRF has advanced work towards a cure for MS beyond anything anybody else had imagined within this timeframe. “Because of our work, we have a much clearer understanding of how to drive neural stem cells to the site of myelin damage in the central nervous system and instruct the myelin-producing cells to remyelinate,” Johnson writes in his recent president’s message.

 

The Myelin Repair Foundation’s game-changing collaborative approach sets a new standard for medical research. The broader medical research community should sit up and take notice that collaboration among researchers creates greater value than competition.

 

Kaiser’s Garfield Center Enhances Innovation, Collaboration

With the growing use of tools enabling collaboration at a distance, it’s easy to forget the value of same-room collaboration and the role of the physical workplace environment. Environment—both physical and virtual-- is one of the Ten Cultural Elements of Collaboration that I identify in The Culture of Collaboration book.

 

It’s essential to bring collaborative capabilities to people so that collaboration becomes integrated with work styles. Forcing people to walk down the hall or go someplace to collaborate falls short. Therefore, it may seem counter-intuitive that dedicated collaborative spaces not only enhance collaboration, but also are crucial components of collaborative organizations.

 

Our research at The Culture of Collaboration® Institute shows that the most collaborative organizations integrate dedicated collaborative spaces into work flow. The distinction is that these physical spaces are by no means the primary means of organizational collaboration. In some cases, dedicated collaborative spaces bridge physical and virtual environments by including geographically-dispersed team members through telepresence or videoconferencing.  

 

Yesterday, I had the opportunity to explore one such dedicated collaborative space. From the outside, Kaiser Permanente’s Sidney R. Garfield Health Care Innovation Center looks like a warehouse. In fact, it’s a former check processing center in an industrial park in San Leandro, California. On the inside, the Garfield Center is anything but ordinary. The future of healthcare delivery is unfolding in this 37-thousand square foot laboratory. The Garfield Center includes multiple environments ranging from patient room prototypes to homes outfitted with monitoring and telemedicine technologies.

 

There are lots of gee-whiz technologies and environments including a concept operating room in which researchers are testing tools including augmented virtual reality. But what’s most significant about the Garfield Center is that people from across Kaiser regardless of level, role or region come together to brainstorm, innovate and collaborate. Doctors and nurses partner with architects and technologists to create prototypes for patient care in this “touchdown location for innovation work” as Sherry Fry, operations specialist for the Center, describes it. Anybody at Kaiser can use the facility as long as the activity is interdisciplinary. “The Garfield Center has become synonymous with innovation at Kaiser,” notes Dr. Yan Chow, associate director of innovation and advanced technology for Kaiser Permanente.

 

In developing the 3-year-old Garfield Center, Kaiser researchers studied models outside healthcare, notably the McDonald’s Innovation Center near Chicago. Kaiser also studied Mayo Clinic's S.P.A.R.C. unit, which I describe in my book. S.P.A.R.C. stands for See Plan Act Refine Communicate. Through S.P.A.R.C., Mayo assembles cross-functional collaborators to conduct live prototyping of healthcare service delivery.

 

The value of dedicated collaborative spaces is that they help break down barriers among silos. As doctors engage architects and facilities people brainstorm with technologists, ideas become prototypes which ultimately deliver measurable value.

Cleantech Growth Impacting Venture Capital Ecosystem

Two years ago, Ira Ehrenpreis was quick to extend a hand at the IBF Venture Capital Investing Conference in San Francisco. When the general partner of Technology Partners told other VC’s that he invested exclusively in cleantech, they smiled and nodded politely.

 

“We could barely fill break rooms a few years ago. Now we’re filling ballrooms,” Ira told a ballroom audience during his keynote entitled “The Future of Clean-Tech” last Wednesday at this year’s IBF Venture Capital Investing Conference in San Francisco. Ira’s influence among venture capitalists has grown as cleantech has expanded from 1% of the venture capital sector a few years ago to 20% this year.

 

Cleantech was once considered just solar and biofuels. Today it touches on everything from transportation to energy-efficient windows. “There’s been a historic underinvestment in cleantech from venture capitalists, corporate and others,” according to Ira. Driving the growth of cleantech as a sub sector of venture capital is a shift in our collective consciousness. Enterprises are increasingly embracing sustainability and “going green.” In years past, a few companies including Google, GE and Wal-Mart made real commitments and others “greenwashed” their products through disingenuous marketing. Incidentally, this mirrors the current shift from enterprises using collaboration as a buzz word or marketing hype to actually collaborating.

 

The cleantech venture capital ecosystem is far more global than the incubation system for most information technology start-ups. While Silicon Valley is the traditional epicenter of start-ups and VC, different global regions lead in developing particular cleantech technologies. Europe, Ira notes, has been leading in developing solar and wind technologies.

 

As cleantech grows along with global investments in information technology and biotechnology, the collaborative ecosystem that defines venture capital will become more global and less Silicon Valley- focused.

Reflection Enhances Collaboration

Recently, I’ve grown concerned about the lack of reflection that can compromise collaboration. I define reflection as “pausing to think.” Reflection is increasingly lost in our interrupt and interact-driven culture. It may seem counter-intuitive in that reflection suggests working alone or in a vacuum. But there’s a difference.

 

Some people think they do their best work by going off in a corner and making their mistakes in private. They prefer to interact with others only after they feel they got their part right on their own. Once their part is complete, they prefer to toss their work over the fence to the next person to do their part. This assembly-line approach to decision making, problem solving and product and service development compromises value.  This behavior clearly undermines collaboration.

 

The other extreme is that in this Twitter-twitching, Facebook feeding, blog-obsessed culture, we feel compelled to constantly interact. Some health experts insist the fallout from these potentially obsessive behaviors includes everything from repetitive strain injuries to heart attacks, not to mention neglect of loved ones or divorce. Like endless face-to-face meetings, much of this online interaction is falsely labeled collaboration.

 

In The Culture of Collaboration book, I define collaboration as “working together to create value while sharing virtual or physical space.” Also, value is one of the Ten Cultural Elements of Collaboration that I identify in the book. Creating value is critical to collaboration. In fact, it’s a useful acid test.

 

Social networking includes a portfolio of tools and behaviors that can lead to collaboration, but it takes  more than a tweet, post, text or instant message to collaborate. Social networking and social media output can be much like cable television chatter. The difference is that social networking lets us participate, and we tend to dip in and out all day long. It’s easy to devote big chunks of time to chatter. And there’s nothing wrong with chatter, but it’s not necessarily collaboration.

 

Constant interaction without reflection can compromise collaboration and value creation. Brainstorming, sharing ideas, and co-creation produces incredible value. When we pause to think, however, we can contribute more effectively when we’re collaborating. Reflection enhances value creation for collaborators.

 

Using collaborative tools for chatter and fun helps instill behavior that sparks collaboration, but it’s easy to just keep chattering and never get around to creating value. Use value creation as an acid test for collaboration, and we derive greater satisfaction and real results from social networking and other collaborative tools. And reflection is part of that equation.

Collaborate to Fix Venture Capital and Innovation Ecosystem

With a severe liquidity squeeze and a withered initial public offering (IPO) market, the venture capital industry and entrepreneurs face incredible challenges. The infrastructure to take companies public has nearly collapsed.

 

“The ecosystem is broken,” Judy Estrin told an audience at the Tech Policy Summit this week in San Mateo, California. Judy, serial entrepreneur and former chief technology officer of Cisco, was referring to the ecosystem comprising venture capitalists, investment bankers, universities, entrepreneurs, scientists, customers and others that has launched scores of innovative and profitable companies including Intel, Apple, Cisco and Google over the last forty years.

 

Judy has become a crusader for innovation, one of the Ten Cultural Elements of Collaboration that I identify in The Culture of Collaboration book. While there have been “exit” opportunities for venture-backed companies in recent years, those exits have been almost entirely mergers and acquisitions (M&A). “M&A is not enough to spur innovation,” Judy insists. Therefore, we must fix the innovation ecosystem and repair the IPO market to regain innovation leadership.

 

In her book, Closing the Innovation Gap (McGraw-Hill, 2009), Judy chronicles the breakdown of the innovation ecosystem.  She argues that sustainable innovation never happens in a vacuum. “It is not just a flash of brilliance from a lone scientist, nor is it simply the result of a group going offsite to brainstorm and play team-building games.” Judy also quotes Danny Hillis, former vice president of research and development at Walt Disney Imagineering, as saying essentially that the key is not only to create the “soup” where people brainstorm, but also to develop a system that translates their ideas into something effective. Clearly, Judy believes that collaboration is key to innovation.

 

Collaboration is also key to fixing the innovation ecosystem. Let’s face it. Greed-fueled star culture helped break the ecosystem. To fix it, we must recruit and promote collaborators throughout the ecosystem. This means funding entrepreneurial teams focused on the fundamentals of building great companies. It also means rebuilding the public trust that companies are rooted in innovation rather than hype. It also means changing expectations to embrace long-term growth over short-term returns.  

Telehealth Revisited

Telehealth is back on radar screens of policy makers, health care professionals, engineers and marketers. As we rethink healthcare economics and delivery systems, technology advances are enabling new approaches and better execution of old approaches. Telehealth can enable healthcare access for underserved populations including rural areas, inner city areas, isolated regions, developing countries, and prisons.

 

 Telepresence creates new opportunities for virtual consultations to approximate face-to-face encounters between providers and patients and among providers. Tandberg and Polycom, established vendors in  telehealth, now offer telepresence for healthcare. Polycom announced last month at the American Telemedicine Association 14th Annual Meeting and Exposition that the Michigan Department of Corrections is using Polycom telepresence for everything from tele-psychiatry to tele-nephrology.  Cisco’s Internet Business Solutions Group has developed HealthPresence, which combines Cisco TelePresence with patient health data captured by connected medical devices such as stethoscopes and vital signs monitors.

 

In the late 1990’s, I conducted research in telehealth and wrote the “Personal Telemedicine” column for Telemedicine Today magazine. The magazine allowed me to write about every aspect of telehealth with an emphasis on how the tools and delivery mechanisms impact people. The name of the column played off my first book, Personal Videoconferencing (Manning/Prentice Hall, 1996). Since many of the telehealth topics I researched then are now re-emerging, I’ll share one column that’s still available online. It’s called "Twenty Minutes in the Life of a Tele-Home Health Nurse," which appeared in the December, 1997 issue of Telemedicine Today. You can read the column here.