Book Review: ‘Collaboration’ by Morten T. Hansen

Book Review: ‘Collaboration’ by Morten T. Hansen

This work is quite the all-inclusive book when it comes to collaboration. The author, Morten T. Hansen, has plenty of credibility in the subject - it was the thesis of his PhD program at Stanford University during which he studied HP [Hewlett-Packard] across 140 projects and 40 business units, he worked for a few years with the Boston Consulting Group studying multinational corporations and the senior executives in charge of those corporations, and has continued to compile research in this area. All of this to say that if anyone knows a thing or two about collaboration, Hansen is that guy, and he touches, very methodically, all the areas contained in such a topic.

In terms of main points, he communicates succinctly, and then continues on to prove his theories with real-life stories ranging from the governments involvement in determining and tracking down the groups behind the 9/11 attacks, President Kennedy's plan to land a man on the moon, and the launch of the iPod to smash Sony's counter item. His main points go on to include the following: knowing when to collaborate is just as important as good collaboration, bad collaboration is worse than no collaboration, there are four main boundaries to collaboration, and there are three ways in which managers can circumvent these boundaries in order to improve results.

The four main barriers to collaboration were as follows: the ‘not-invented-here’ barrier, the hoarding barrier, the search barrier, and the transfer barrier. It would be wise to briefly describe these. The ‘not-invented-here’ barrier refers to the tendency of some people to not seek help/input from those outside of their department (or, in other words, pride). The hoarding barrier is just the opposite – people are sometimes unwilling to supply information to others when asked. Sometimes this is due to the feeling that with information comes power, and they feel that if they shared that information, they might become dispensable to the corporation (when just the opposite should be true). When one person in an organization simply cannot determine/find who they need to contact for certain information, they run up against what Hansen calls the search barrier. The finally, when information is so complex it becomes difficult to communicate, people hit the transfer barrier. The first two of these are motivational problems – people are unwilling to collaborate. The last two are inability problems – people simply cannot communicate to collaborate.

In an attempt to solve the first two problems, the motivational problems, Hansen proposes that managers unify people through common vision, common enemies, and common goals to foster an environment of trust and job security. At the same time, people who are unwilling to collaborate are faced with potential job loss, and promotions are given to those who not only ‘play well with others’ but also get their individual work done [no “chatty-Kathy’s” allowed]. In light of the last two problems, the author suggests that networking be improved – sometimes simple upgrades in software systems can help. Other times, people need to be appointed to positions where their job becomes ‘networker’ or ‘connector.’ These types of people often have an unspoken talent to know where and how to get information, and how to transfer and convey that to others without allowing people to slip through the cracks. These people should be promoted in terms of pay, but not position – they will do well in this position, but not necessarily in manager positions.

With all this in mind, Hansen presents a relatively simple case for collaboration, presenting its successes, its pitfalls, and its methodology. Audiences interested in learning about better teamwork, and ultimately, better results in an organization would learn from this book. However, for those with little time in their schedules for reading 200+ page books, this review would suffice, along with some question and answer time with someone who adequately understood the book. At times it felt slightly repetitive (probably due to the fact that he used the word ‘collaboration’ about 500 times, avoiding all synonyms or other ways of expressing the idea), but all in all, it seemed to mostly present new information with each section, causing the reader to feel their time was well spent. It’s a good read if you’ve got the time, but contains a great conceptual synopsis if you can find someone who’s already read it and can communicate well (or if this review was enough to get the main ideas).

[Amazon review link located here --> http://www.amazon.com/review/RNL5WQZC7D2W9]