The bwcon research team investigates failure factors in collaborative working
In the world of collaborative working, people love celebrating success, whether by toasting it at project wrap-up events, writing about it in best practice guides or talking about it at conferences. This is a familiar picture – but what about when, in spite of all the good intentions and careful planning, a project falters or even fails completely? A recent study by bwcon research gGmbH turns the spotlight on these “awkward guests” at the collaborative working party by investigating failure factors, sometimes also referred to as “non-success factors”.
Be it in education and research, supporting start-ups, or digital transformation processes, collaborative projects are seen as a tool for solving complex challenges. But even when all the right conditions are in place, many collaborations fail to deliver the desired results. And while success factors are widely discussed in the literature, there is still relatively little knowledge about non-success factors. What are the most common reasons for the failure of collaborations? And what are the implications for practitioners? These questions were addressed by Dr. Lukas Bruns, research director at bwcon research and author of the recent study.
What is collaborative working?
“In our study, we define collaborative working as cooperation or collaboration between different organizations, enterprises or institutions that share at least one common goal”, explains Dr. Bruns. It can take many different shapes, such as legally prescribed, situational or project-based collaboration.[1] It involves sharing knowledge, skills and resources,[2] and can be actively planned and managed.[3]
There are lots of different success factors: continuity of key individuals, committed leadership and good network management can all make a valuable contribution.[4] Maschwitz et al. (2019) also stress the importance of clear goals and role allocation and functioning working relationships.[5] But there’s no universal recipe for success. Every collaboration is unique and is influenced by numerous external and internal factors.[6]
It’s also important to understand that failure factors aren’t simply the opposite of success factors. Rather, they are distinct barriers that can delay projects or bring them to a complete standstill, even if other conditions are seemingly favorable. Examples include inadequate coordination, personnel turnover, conflicting goals or a lack of agility. The systematic analysis of non-success factors helps to identify risks at an early stage and make collaborations more resilient in crisis situations.[7]
Study design: consulting the practitioners
The bwcon research study carried out qualitative interviews with ten individuals wholly or partly responsible for the management of collaborative projects in the fields of continuing professional development and culture, with the aim of using their firsthand experience to identify typical failure factors. The interviews were conducted anonymously and professionally transcribed. They were analyzed using the qualitative content analysis method described in Kuckartz (2018). After initial exploratory coding, the responses were organized thematically and grouped together into nine main categories. Despite carefully following this design, the study does have its limitations – the transferability of its findings is limited by the small sample size and restricted contexts covered.
Typical failure factors
Nine overarching non-success factor categories were identified from the collected data, some of which are highly relevant across different collaboration formats:
- Lack of agility: Many projects fail because they don’t respond flexibly enough to change. Changes are ignored and plans aren’t updated. This is often due either to uncertainty or to an insistence on sticking to the original principles.
- Staff shortages: Delays in recruitment, high recruitment costs or the departure of key individuals result in friction losses. Personnel turnover has a negative impact on continuity and trust
- Unclear or divergent goals: Failure to add value, conflicting interests or vaguely defined goals may result in partners leaving or their commitment waning
- Structural problems: Different systems, inadequate coordination and unclear processes all hamper collaboration. The absence of a common error management or learning culture can be particularly problematic.
- Problematic hierarchies: Top-down, non-inclusive decision-making causes frustration. It means that people’s hands are often tied at the operational levels, and decision-making processes lack transparency.
- Lack of resources: A project’s success can be compromised by unrealistic schedules, uneven distribution of resources and inadequate budgets – especially if expectations are not aligned with the available resources.
- Lack of engagement: Despite being formally involved, some participants may not actively engage in the project. This can be due to a lack of motivation or resources, or because they have not been assigned responsibilities.
- Communication issues: Tensions can arise as a result of misunderstandings, differing expectations or a reluctance to be open about criticism. There are no feedback loops and communication methods remain unused.
- Lack of binding: commitments Unclear responsibilities, a lack of decision-making authority or participants only paying lip-service to their involvement can cause projects to falter or be ineffective.
Recommendations for practitioners
The study shows that when collaborative projects fail, it is often due to a combination of complex factors. That’s why there is so much to be gained from analyzing these factors. Lukas Bruns is in no doubt: “While you can’t always prevent failure factors, you can identify, reflect on and address them”. Failure factor analysis helps to identify risks at an early stage and take targeted measures to address them. The study identified three key recommendations for practitioners:
- Accept mistakes, avoid finger-pointing: An open attitude towards mistakes increases learning opportunities over the course of the project and strengthens a collaborative culture.
- Ensure clear roles and responsibilities: Clear structures are key to ensuring a project has a sound basis – especially when it comes to allocating actions and decision-making authority.
- Actively reflect on the goals: A project’s goals should be determined through a dynamic process rather than on a one-off basis. It is vital for everyone to maintain a shared sense of purpose if they are to remain able to actively engage in the collaboration over the longer term.
Why it pays to analyze failure
Collaborations aren’t guaranteed to succeed – their success relies on participation, clarity and shared responsibility. And there can be all kinds of reasons why they fail. Some factors are systemic, while others are individual or situational. Regardless of this, the key is not to ignore them, but to reflect on them systematically. This systematic analysis of failure factors is a valuable way of improving the quality and sustainability of collaborative projects. Although there is no universal recipe for success, if you know the obstacles, you can plot a course around them – or at least negotiate them with less chance of tripping up.