Question

Question 1 (50 Marks

) All successful collaborations aim to achieve collaborative advantage. This, however, is not easily realised. Based on the course material, and using examples from your professional or personal life:

• Discuss the bases for achieving collaborative advantage;

• Discuss the types of goals that need to be set to achieve collaboration aims;

• Outline when these goals might lead to collaborative inertia and identify which might lead to harmful outcomes. 600 words

Answer 1

The collaborative advantage is described as the opportunity, for mutual benefit, to form fulfilling and productive collaborations with various organisations. A well-developed capacity to build and maintain successful partnerships provides a major competitive edge in today's industries. Productive relationships have three basic characteristics-they are living organisms, which gradually grow in their possibilities. In addition to the direct advantages of the relationship, they give the parties an opportunity for the future, opening new doors and unexpected opportunities; they include partnering together to generate additional interest, rather than merely being an agreement or sale. We can not be managed by structured structures but need a complex network of informal relations. Collaborations are constructed as paradoxical in nature with inherent contradictions and mutually exclusive elements created by unavoidable collaboration differences; differences which contain the very potential for collaborative advantage. The six bases for gaining collaboration advantage are as follows:- Access to Capital: Organisations frequently cooperate where their own capital are insufficient to accomplish their objectives. Often that involves pooling financial or human capital but most commonly it requires various tools to be pooled together, whether technologies or skills. Inter-Company, for example, collaborates on delivering a commodity to market. This could take the form of one organization supplying the goods and the other supplying consumer access. Shared risk: Companies partner as the effects of a project loss are too high for them to risk doing it on their own and therefore share. Efficiency: Policymakers have always perceived private entities as more effective than public ones, and so have encouraged (collaboration) public-private collaborations. Performance derives from the concept of economies of scale, specialization and productive processes. Coordination: It is a presentation of organizing, manipulating different people or things to collaborate in an group with an purpose or effect to achieve desirable goals. Learning: While concerted measures are being placed in motion to take any collective intervention, these are being achieved from the aim of mutual learning. Moral Imperative: Collaboration is necessary to mitigate any problems concerning the relationship, the company, The various forms of targets that need to be set for achieving objectives of cooperation are listed below. Targets affecting the collective behavior and directions vary in form across six dimensions: degree, context, validity, significance, quality, and overtness. Level: The first element has to do with the point at which goals are remembered. It differs between those concerned with teamwork, those concerned with corporate goals and those individuals trying to succeed. Goals shared at the stage of partnership refer to the opinions of the members of what the collaborative parties plan to do together. Origin: The objectives conceived by the participants are often heavily informed by the objectives of other cooperation groups or individuals. If collaborations are required or limited by legislation, regional laws, as well as local preferences and desires continue to influence the collaboration's objectives. Authenticity: Leaders' and potential partners' goals that be honest declarations of what they aim to achieve. There are also many reasons why participants do not agree with priorities that are still expressed openly. For eg, they may not adhere to expectations of cooperation that external constraints or improvements have placed upon them. Relevance: Defining clear targets for both of the interested parties as well as the shared intent is recognised as necessary if the partnership is to be successful. However, it is not always easy to understand which corporate objectives should fairly be achieved through the partnership. Content: Many of the priorities shared by individuals are mainly concerned with the purpose of cooperation, such as obtaining access to resources and skills, sharing risk, increasing performance, enhancing service delivery management, and learning. They involve concrete outcomes and are obviously critical in all partnerships. Overtness: Ultimately, aims should be freely shared and clearly mentioned, but there are still several explanations why they should not consciously be disclosed to other parties, even though there is sincere solidarity among partners. Cooperation with hidden agendas is endemic. However, intentional concealment of objectives is not the only explanation why they could not be mentioned explicitly. This is the interplay of these aims that creates a troublesome aspect of the puzzle by generating huge barriers to reaching a partnership objectives that are entirely held.

The explanations may be as follows: All of the targets are very unlikely to be in equilibrium. It is extremely unlikely that any single person learns or acknowledges more than a portion of the targets at stake. This is a function of the sheer size and complexity of the entanglement, distractions caused by pseudo- and independent goals, and the masking effect of hidden or unstated goals. Diverse interpretations of goals can contribute to a low degree of mutual understanding, even when individual information or understanding is present. Since the entanglement is in perpetual flux as the goals shift over time, any shared awareness of the goals of each other – and thus any consensus on the objective of cooperation – appears to be short-lived.