When you look at the technical definition of COLLABORATION, it is hard to argue with the philosophy and why you wouldn’t agree with its inherent value. However, when it comes to most people, we are all hoarders. We assume scarcity when there is plenty. We act cautiously of those we describe as competent peers to others. We think that the only way to do it right is to do it ourselves.

If this attitude was prevalent in our ancestors, we would all be staring at a roaring fire for entertainment instead of our phones (or perhaps some one trying to start a fire).

We have the luxury of not collaborating in a society of plenty. The taller the ivory tower, the bigger the safety net we have beneath us represented by policies and cultures that will indulge our insecurity expressed as the avoidance of working with others.

However, those that do not collaborate are not looking closely enough at that hidden support net of behind the scenes collaborators responsible for much of their success. Others pay the invoices, do the marketing, clean the conference rooms, file the taxes, create the documents and so on. Ivory tower residents collaborate all the time with subordinates. Without them, they would be lost.

We do not go to the mail room to make sure things are being done correctly. We do not audit the annual reports for the finance department. We do not insist on overseeing the installation of the IT systems. We trust that those that support us are competent and do their jobs to the best of their ability.

So, imagine what you could do if you collaborated that way with your peers or clients?

Collaboration is not a choice. It is how societies and organizations are built, and you already are a participant. If you are avoiding competition with peers and clients, that is a team dynamics issue.

Let’s chat about it.


Collaboration occurs when two or more people or organizations work together to realize or achieve a goal. Collaboration is very similar to cooperation. Most collaboration requires leadership, although the form of leadership can be social within a decentralized and egalitarian group. Teams that work collaboratively can obtain greater resources, recognition, and reward when facing competition for finite resources.