Comments on: Three tiers of collaboration

By: Jill Drury

Jill Drury — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 22:37:55 +0000

James, now that you’ve had some time to work with this model, do you have a case study that you can share with us? In other words, it would be great if you have something that says, here’s how we applied the model and here’s what it was helpful for and what it wasn’t so helpful for. Also, have you documented these ideas in an archival form such as a conference paper or journal article, or is this web page still the definitive reference for pointing others to these ideas? Thanks in advance for your response.

By: Tim Jeffries

Tim Jeffries — Sat, 28 Mar 2009 23:19:59 +0000

Thanks for this model James. I work for a small not for profit and am trying to think through the implications of online collaboration for us as an organisation. Previously our collaboration has been done in a very informal way, such is the nature of our organisation. I would hope we could continue with this culture but change our processes to include a digital/online component.

Thanks again.

By: Harold Jarche » Starting an Online Community

Harold Jarche » Starting an Online Community — Tue, 24 Mar 2009 15:19:00 +0000

[...] a collaborative working/learning space. I’ve previously referred to Column Two’s three tiers of collaboration – Capacity, Capability & Strategy and it’s a good model to start with. Part of capacity [...]

By: Harold Jarche » Communities of Practice

Harold Jarche » Communities of Practice — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 13:32:53 +0000

[...] Australian resource I found via Jack Vinson is three tiers of collaboration from Column Two, a good model to examine organizational readiness regarding – Strategy, Capability [...]

By: James Robertson

James Robertson — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 21:17:01 +0000

Yes, I think this is the big challenge. We now have the tools, but how do we foster successful people-to-people collaboration within organisations?

By: gstene

gstene — Sun, 04 Jan 2009 11:26:01 +0000

Hi, thanx for a great model.Being a consultant within the internet business, naturally my focus is on digital supported tools to achieve collaboration. However no technology will solve the problem itself. It is the organizationa ability to implement the collaborative effort that will make digital cllaboration work with a realistic set up of critherias.

By: James Robertson

James Robertson — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 07:55:32 +0000

Hi Jill, the naming of all the elements needs reviewing! Thanks for the input.

But in terms of what I mean by a “model for collaboration”, have a look through this slidecast:

http://www.slideshare.net/jamesr/ten-tips-for-collaboration-audio/

By: Jill Drury

Jill Drury — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 03:23:16 +0000

James, I like the stratification of the concepts into three different levels. I confess to being uneasy with the “collaboration model” element, though. Does this make it a model within a model? “Model” in this context is rather vague; I can’t help thinking that there is a more precise way of expressing what you mean. Do you mean “collaboration processes” (or, for those of us used to working with the military, collaboration concepts of operation, or CONOPs)? My experience is that most groups need the aid of an explicit, agreed-upon set of rules or procedures for what collaboration mechanisms they will use for different types of situations. Analogous to the “support for individuals” element, the “collaboration processes” element would provide (non-technology) support for groups.

By: Thei Geurts

Thei Geurts — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 07:52:46 +0000

I tend to agree with Patti and James. The model is simple but effective.

If you translate it to abilities, it would/could be:

Strategy: ability to visualize (meaning: a vision that you can bring to life)
Capacity: ability to perform (we can do it)
Capability: ability to execute (we do it)

By: Dorje McKinnon

Dorje McKinnon — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 23:51:43 +0000

James,

Nothing like tackling the big questions, great stuff.

To me the way you have made obvious that collaboration requires a healthy soil (capactiy) is great. Often I’ve seen, to carry on with the garden metaphore, growth (capability) being attempted on concrete. Similarly expectations of wonderous fruit (strategy) without putting the effort into either the soil or nurturing the plants is not uncommon.

I’m looking forward to how others see this model and how it develops.

DorjeM

By: James Robertson

James Robertson — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 21:47:57 +0000

Hi Patti, that’s a nice description for each of the levels, thanks!

By: Patti Anklam

Patti Anklam — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 20:52:26 +0000

I like these three distinctions a lot. I am familiar with Hubert Saint-Onge’s distinction between the organization’s “absortion capacity” and strategic capability, but have often had trouble explaining the distinction to others. If I were to simplify the model, I’d put it as

Capacity: readiness (what the organization could hold)
Capability: what the organization is able to do given the skills, knowledge, and environment it provides
Strategy: the structures that focus collaboration toward specific purposeful goals

thanks for the model!

/patti