Lean Collaboration Models

How can engineering teams maintain autonomy when they are collaborating with many other teams on a complex system? There has been a rising answer to this problem in the non-software world: Model-Based Systems Engineering. The old way is the document-based approach: many documents are generated by different teams to capture the system's design from various stakeholder views, such as software, hardware, safety, manufacturing, etc. Every time one stakeholder changes a requirement in one document, it requires every other team to synchronise and manually update their documents. This makes every change slow and makes the whole job frustrating, as teams spend most of their time dealing with other teams' changes rather than thinking about the best technical solutions. The digital-modeling approach of Model-Based Systems Engineering creates a single source of truth for the system on which every team can autonomously contribute, while technology enables seamless synchronisation. The best implementation I have seen of this is at Jimmy, where Antoine Guyot, Mathilde Grivet and Charles Azam are building micro nuclear reactors to decarbonise industrial heat. Their whole system is modeled using Python and all the changes are synchronised using Github. This allows them to make multiple changes a day and even automate the verification of engineering and regulatory requirements. The result: a big update in their design takes them days instead of the many months expected in their industry. The result is much safer, thanks to the automated checks and the lack of copy-pasting errors. And the teams can focus on the value, creating ingenious technology to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. This is the idea we tried to capture with the Tech-Enabled Network of Teams principle in The Lean Tech Manifesto: leveraging tech innovation to reduce the need for coordination between teams and increase autonomy at scale. #LeanTech #TechEnabledNetworkOfTeams

Why should design and construction projects use collaborative contracts? When the project is complex, the worse delivery method is DBB. The method that takes the longest is also DBB. For this reason, many complex projects can benefit from the use of collaborative contracts such as Progressive Design Build or Integrated Project Delivery. In fact, collaborative contracting will be the future for pretty much every project over 100M USD. Some other key reasons include: 1️⃣ Enhanced collaboration and teamwork: Collaborative contracts foster a culture of trust, cooperation, and shared responsibility among project stakeholders, including owners, designers, and contractors. 2️⃣ Improved risk management: By sharing risks and rewards, parties can avoid adversarial relationships, litigation, and claims, leading to better risk allocation and mitigation. 3️⃣ Early contractor involvement: Collaborative models allow contractors to participate in the planning and design phases, providing valuable input on cost, schedule, constructability, and innovation. 4️⃣ Better cost control: The collaborative approach enables more efficient pricing, reduces guesswork, and improves confidence and predictability for all parties. 5️⃣ Increased innovation: The collaborative environment encourages creativity and allows teams to explore new solutions and technologies. 6️⃣ Enhanced project outcomes: Collaborative contracts can lead to reduced costs, improved quality, and better overall project performance. 7️⃣ Flexibility and adaptability: These models allow for easier adjustments to changing needs and opportunities throughout the project lifecycle. 8️⃣ Sustainability benefits: Collaborative approaches can facilitate the implementation of sustainable practices and solutions. 9️⃣ Improved dispute resolution: Collaborative contracts often include mechanisms for proactive and constructive dispute resolution, reducing the likelihood of costly legal battles. 🔟 Optimized design development: The iterative nature of collaborative contracting allows for systematic improvement of project delivery at each design milestone. By using collaborative contracts, construction projects can benefit from improved coordination, reduced inefficiencies, and a more positive working environment, ultimately leading to more successful project outcomes. #leanconstruction

𝗖𝗼𝗹𝗹𝗮𝗯𝗼𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻: 𝗬𝗼𝘂’𝗿𝗲 𝗱𝗼𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗶𝘁 𝘄𝗿𝗼𝗻𝗴. Like everything else these days, we often represent collaboration as an always-on activity – with us all working together in each others’ faces every minute.    It’s the wrong model. The right way to collaborate? “𝗙𝗶𝗴𝘂𝗿𝗲 𝟴” 𝗰𝗼𝗹𝗹𝗮𝗯𝗼𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 – 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗼𝗴𝗲𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿, 𝘀𝗵𝗮𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗮𝘀, 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝗯𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗮𝗽𝗮𝗿𝘁 𝘁𝗼 𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗸 𝗶𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗽𝗲𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗹𝘆 𝗮𝗴𝗮𝗶𝗻, 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗯𝗮𝗰𝗸 𝘁𝗼𝗴𝗲𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗿𝗲𝗽𝗲𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘄𝗵𝗼𝗹𝗲 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀 – 𝗶𝘀 𝗵𝗼𝘄 𝘀𝗼 𝗺𝘂𝗰𝗵 𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗸 𝗴𝗲𝘁𝘀 𝗱𝗼𝗻𝗲 𝗯𝗲𝘀𝘁. Figure 8 collaboration works well because very few of our brains are set up to process everything in collective dialogue in real time. Think of all of those good ideas you get in the shower or while out for a run. You need time with yourself to think through what others have shared. And brilliance or creativity are iterative endeavors – it takes more than one cycle to strike gold. So the repeated motion of coming together and breaking apart again facilitates both the “lightning in a bottle” of interaction and the “deep work” of meditative thinking. It seems like a no-brainer. Here are a few steps to design for it:  • Engineer project-level collaboration to explicitly allow for both collaborative moments and independent work.  • Don’t reflexively push back on people asking to take a side moment from collaboration. They’re asking for the wider part of the Figure 8 – let them cook.  • Plan for the independent work part too – have an agenda for the work that doesn’t happen in meetings.   • Regularly examine the shape of your 8s: are teams getting both enough independent time and enough together time? Follow me and Anthrome Insight for more practical insights into effectiveness in a challenging and tech-laden world of work. And if anyone has a wonderful citation for the academic or practitioner roots of this concept – please send it my way! This is one of those “I swear I saw it somewhere”s…but my AI assistants and I can’t find the source material.

The Complete Collaboration Framework (Collaboration Series - Part 4) — A recap and integration of the three-part series — Over the past few weeks, I shared a series of frameworks on collaboration, one of the most misunderstood capabilities in organizations today. What I’ve learned from years of working with leaders is this: 👉 Collaboration is not one thing. It’s a system. A system with locations, qualities, and paradoxes. A system that either breaks down into silos or connects an organization into something cohesive, aligned, and high-performing. To make this system visible and practical, I introduced three models: 🔹 1. The Collaboration Zones Model Where collaboration happens. This model maps collaboration across four zones: Local (within a team, same level) Vertical (across levels in a department) Horizontal (across departments, same level) Diagonal (across departments and levels) Each zone represents a unique type of relationship, challenge, and opportunity. Understanding where collaboration is breaking helps leaders diagnose silos with far greater precision. 🔹 2. The Collaboration Maturity Levels How well collaboration happens. Collaboration isn’t binary. It evolves through four maturity levels: Coordinated Cooperative Collaborative Co-creative Most organizations think they are at Level 3 or 4… but operate at Level 1 or 2. Adding this dimension helps leaders assess the quality of collaboration in each zone — not just its presence. 🔹 3. The Collaboration Tensions What pulls collaboration apart. Every collaboration zone includes a built-in paradox: Alignment ↔ Autonomy (Local) Direction ↔ Empowerment (Vertical) Local ↔ Enterprise Priorities (Diagonal) Authority ↔ Influence (Horizontal) These tensions explain why collaboration often feels difficult — even when people have good intentions. Great leaders don’t eliminate these tensions. They navigate them with wisdom and awareness. ⭐ The full picture When you integrate all three models, you get a clearer, more actionable view of collaboration: Zones → Where collaboration happens Maturity → How well it happens Tensions → What shapes and strains it Together, they offer a practical, nuanced way to understand and strengthen collaboration, not as a buzzword, but as a strategic capability essential for breaking silos and building connected, high-performing organizations. A question to close the series: 👉 Which of these three dimensions do you think your organization most needs to focus on next — Zones, Maturity, or Tensions? Would love to hear your reflections. Links to previous posts in the comments. --------------------------- BECOME A CERTIFIED STRATEGY & IMPLEMENTATION CONSULTANT (CSIC) - If you would like to enhance your current portfolio of consulting, or move into consulting, check out Strategy.Inc's CSIC program. Next cohort starts in February, last call to register now!