Will Social Distancing Disrupt the Hard-Won Collaboration Culture of the Social Sector?

A recent Slate article proposed that the changes we are making to fight COVID-19 will likely mean that we will NOT go back to the “way life was before.” (We’re Not Going Back to the Way Life Was Before, March 12, 2020, Henry Grabar))

In one week in the United States we have accomplished the nearly universal acceptance of social distancing as an effective way to “flatten the curve” and slow down the spread of the virus.  This has resulted in an avalanche of rapid changes in how we work and live, mostly in the embrace of virtual alternatives to “real” life. Online education has been in development for 20 years and within a matter of days last week, online classes have been mandated at many universities and in school districts.  Most of us have some virtual meetings in our life but now we are looking at replacing face to face with ZOOM until further notice. In the blink of an eye we have shut down sports, entertainment, education, community recreation, services. 

When the danger passes (and hopefully social distancing has helped to limit the virus) what will “come back” and what may be gone for a long time to come? Which changes will be for the good and which changes might threaten our connectivity, empathy, shared responsibility and creativity?

One particular issue that concerns me is the collaborative culture that many have worked hard to create in the social sector (and to some extent also in business and government).  As a sector we have discovered the benefits of working together and increasing side by side and interconnected efforts to solve problems. We have convinced funders to invest in better facilitation of collaborative efforts, more travel and administrative support to bring people together to discover, decide and act.  Nonprofits and philanthropists have formed new alliances and created new concepts and vocabulary to capture the value of many working together on a common agenda (think collective impact; collaborative planning; shared infrastructure; shared space and more). Nationally and internationally we have formed alliances and coalitions to hold us together and to benefit from the “agglomeration effect” even when we are not geographically located together.

Once we are forced apart by social distancing and create substitute processes deeper into the virtual world we may decide not to rebuild the social infrastructure as we have known it.  This would not be ALL bad, of course (think of cost and time savings). But business studies and day to day experience have reinforced that there is something useful about being together.

As the current crisis unfolds we all should try to get better at understanding the different intensities of “collaboration” and become more skilled at picking the right level of intensity for the situation we are in.  Once we have picked the right level of intensity of collaboration then we can be clear-eyed about deciding how to structure and facilitate virtual togetherness to get the job done.

Here is a simple map and definitions of the continuum of collaboration.  It is a quick guide for being intentional about working at the “right” level of collaboration for the job.

See What I Mean consultants have helped many clients to work collaboratively.  Clients often are surprised by the differentiation among the levels of collaboration and the “fit” between a level of collaboration and the work they are trying to do.  In the current world of social distancing leaders now have three dimensions to consider:

--What is the issue/problem/situation that is the focus of our collaborative efforts?

--Which level of collaboration do we need?  Does it meet the need and is it affordable (time and money)?

--How can this process be designed, facilitated and maintained virtually (and when will it need to integrate some face to face effort)?

To learn more or to talk to a See What I Mean Consultant click here:

Author: Stephanie Clohsey