Communication for Collaboration

2. OUTCOMES • Describe methods of effective individual and organization communication • Identify areas of individual and organizational collaboration • Develop a plan to effectively communicate and collaborate

3. YOUR OUTCOMES What do YOU want to get out of this presentation for YOURSELF &/OR YOUR ORGANIZATION?

4. http://blog.insideview.com/2012/07/02/how-to-communicate-professionally-on-sales-calls/

5. BACKWARDS DESIGN 1. Goal/ Outcome 2. Collaboration 3. Communication 4. Action 5. Assess

6. WHAT IS COLLABORATION?

7. WHAT IS COLLABORATION?

8. BENEFITS OF COLLABORATION

9. BARRIERS TO COLLABORATION

10. MODELS OF COLLABORATION •Relationships • Courtship • Engagement • Setting up housekeeping • Bridging differences • Old-partners (Kanter, 1994) (Ring & Van De Ven, 1994)

11. PROCESS OF COLLABORATION Step 1. Clearly define the problem. Step 2. Identify core partners to develop the program. Step 3. Develop a common vision of the project to increase feelings of shared ownership. Step 4. Ensure that everyone has a voice and is treated respectfully. Step 5. Clearly define program and collaboration goals. Step 6. Define process and plan of work. Step 7. Establish and nurture trusting working relationships between collaborators. Step 8. Provide benefits to members and align reward structure with collaborative goals. Step 9. Evaluate program and collaboration to provide evidence of outcomes and impact. Step 10. Use evaluation results to modify, expand, and/or drop the collaboration in order to maximize success and/or sustainability as required by program mission.

12. TRAITS OF SUCCESSFUL COLLABORATION

13. COMMUNICATION FOR COLLABORATION 1. Goal/ Outcome 2. Collaboration 3. Communication 4. Action 5. Assess

14. WHAT IS COMMUNICATION?

15. WHAT IS COMMUNICATION?

16. PURPOSES OF EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION

17. CONSTRUCTIVE COMMUNICATION

18. ACTIVE LISTENING 1. Seek to understand 2. Restate 3. Reflect feelings 4. Validate concerns 5. Encourage sharing completely 6. Use conversational comments 7. Use probing questions 8. Use open ended questions 9. Clarify & summarize 10.Allow time for follow up 11.Pay attention to non- verbals

19. COMMUNICATION FOR COLLABORATION 1. Goal/ Outcome 2. Collaboration 3. Communication 4. Action 5. Assess

20. YOUR PLAN 1. Your Goal/Outcomes: Find yours on the wall. 2. Collaboration: Take 3-4 minutes to identify others with goals similar to yours. 3. Communication: Determine if you should collaborate with this person. Practice your communication skills w/this person/group. 4. What worked? What was difficult? What would you do differently outside of this room in the real situation?

21. 10 THINGS As a group, let’s come up with a list of 10 things that: You learned You want to do next as a result of what you learned

22. QUESTIONS Michelle Rodems michelle.rodems@louisville.edu // michelle.rodems@gmail.com @michellerodems

Hinweis der Redaktion

Introduction Twitter hashtag Title: Effective Communication for Collaboration Time: 7-7:50pm Location: Primo Classroom Description: Communication skills are necessary for nearly any task—academic, professional or personal. For many, resources (human, physical, financial, time and others) are limited yet in high demand. This session will address methods of effective communication as well as explore potential areas of collaboration for maximum results. Whether you are on an RSO executive board, passionate about community service, prefer to lead independently, not yet involved, preparing to graduate or just finishing your first year, all attendees will walk away with a plan to effectively communicate and collaborate to see results.
Outcomes of the session
Write your goal on a post-it (one post-it per goal). Put on wall. 5 Minutes: Write goals, stick on wall
So, why communicate for collaboration? Want to convince others to work with you – communication is how you do that. What does this message convey?
Backwards Design: Start with the goal in mind Can collaboration help achieve that goal (assumption that it can in this room) If it can, you’ll want to identify collaboration goals & partners If it can, identify communication methods to achieve collaboration goals Make an action plan Assess General overview of the session * Mention that assessment won’t covered, but still important
Sit in a circle What were we trying to do? What was required to do it? What worked well? What was difficult?
“Three terms are used extensively in this study. Relationship, partnership, and collaboration are often used synonymously in research and anecdotally, but it is important to understand the distinction among them as they will be used in the study. Relationship happens when “two individuals create a set of shared experiences and understandings that are unique to them” (Schrage, 1995). Partnership and collaboration can be understood as types of relationships. Partnership is a formalized relationship (McKimm, Millard, & Held, 2008; Schrage, 1995). McKimm, Millard, and Held (2008) stated that partnership was a formalized “agreement between individuals or organizations to work together within the bounds of the agreement” (pp. 34-35). Collaboration is instead a purposive relationship (McKimm, et al., 2008; Schrage, 1995). Kemp (2001) described collaboration as individuals coming together to achieve goals that they might not be able to achieve separately. Partnership describes an official working association wherein individuals benefit separately; collaboration describes a process of developing a common understanding to produce an outcome beneficial to the individuals separately and together. One term is about the structure, the other is about the process. Understanding collaborative relationships could provide information that may allow those in partnerships to improve their work together.” (Rodems, 2011)
Additionally, collaborative relationships may increase innovation, learning, and cognitive complexity; create better service; promote more and varied solutions; have better cost effectiveness and efficiency; enhance communication and campus relationships; support a campus of trust; combine various areas of expertise; and lead employees to be more motivated (Dotolo & Noftsinger, 2002, Kezar, 2001, 2003a, 2006; Kezar & Lester, 2009; Schroeder, 1999a, 1999b). Bensimon and Neumann (1993) listed benefits of collaboration as more creative solutions from a group of individuals; more direct, efficient, and informal communication; appropriate attention to important tasks by through delegation; and professional development through shared expertise. Collaborative partnerships also allow more voices to be a part of the conversation of higher education. Collaboration may provide varied perspectives in making decisions, establishing values and priorities, and creating culture (Fried, 1995).
purpose While these differences occur across institutions at the broad level, disagreement of purpose may be seen at cultural and individual levels as well. . Common barriers to collaboration between academic affairs and student affairs include organizational fragmentation and division of labor (Bohen & Stiles, 1998; Ferren & Stanton, 2004; Kezar, 2003a, 2005, 2006, 2009; Schroeder, 1999a, 1999b; Streit, 1993); specialization among faculty and staff (Kezar, 2006; Schroeder, 1999a, 1999b); lack of common purpose or language between faculty and staff or administration or between areas of administration and faculty (Kezar, 2003a, 2006; Streit, 1993); history of separation of units (Kezar, 2003a, 2006; Schroeder, 1999); varying cultures (Ferren & Stanton, 2004; Kezar, 2003a, 2006, 2009; Streit, 1993); different priorities and expectations among various employee groups (Bloland, Stamatakos, & Rogers, 1996; Ferren & Stanton, 2004; Kezar, 2003a, 2006; Streit, 1993); competing assumptions about what constitutes effective learning (Kezar, 2003a, 2006, 2009; Kuh, 1991; Schroeder, 1999a, 1999b); mistrust (Ferren & Stanton, 2004; Schroeder, 1999a, 1999b; Streit, 1993), competition for resources (Ferren & Stanton, 2004), lack of time (Kezar, 2001), faculty resistance (Kezar, 2001) and lack of training and support (Bohen & Stiles, 1998; Kezar, 2009). Images: http://www.flickr.com/photos/mikecpeck/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/cocca/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/susivinh/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/miran/
In their model, relationships developed in a cyclical process of negotiation, commitment, and execution and back again. Concepts prevalent in their model included risk and trust, formality and informality, and role and personal interaction, with personal relationships supplanting role (professional) relationships (Ring & Van De Ven, 1994). More related to a traditional understanding of relationships, Kanter (1994) used the analogy of romantic relationships to explain how collaboration works: courtship—where the collaborators meet, are attracted, and discover their compatibility; engagement—where collaborators draw up plans and close the deal; setting up housekeeping—where newly partnered companies discover they have different ideas about how to operate; bridging differences—where partners develop techniques for getting along; and old-marrieds—where collaborators discover that they have changed internally as a result of the accommodations and ongoing collaboration.
ORGANIZATIONAL STEPS IN COLLABORATION(JOHNSON, GROSSMAN, AND CASSIDAY) AGREE ON THE MISSION, VALUES, AND PRINCIPLES OF THE EFFORT AGREE ON A PROCESS WITH GROUND RULES FOR WORKING TOGETHER DESIGN ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE DETERMINE MEETING GUIDELINES DEFINE RULES AND RESPONSIBILITIES CREATE AND EFFECTIVE PROCESS FOR COMMUNICATION COORDINATE BUDGET AND FUND DEVELOPMENT LINK WITH OTHER EFFORTS CELEBRATE PROMOTE THE EFFORT BUILD THE LEADERSHIP CAPACITY OF ALL STAKEHOLDERS ENLIST TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND SUPPORT Slide info from: Strieter & Blalock, (February 2006). Journey to Successful Collaborations. Journal of Extension 44 (1), Article Number 1TOT4
Arcelus suggested that partnership, in spite of these cultural differences, happens through relationship. Through intergroup dialogue, individuals in academic affairs and student affairs may get to know one other and come to learn more about the assumptions of the culture (Arcelus, 2008). Other possible ways to overcome these obstacles include strategic planning (Ferren & Stanton, 2004; Streit, 1993); conferences and consultants (Ferren & Stanton, 2004); support (Ferren & Stanton, 2004; Streit, 1993); hunger for ongoing learning and exploration of new ideas and personal gains (Bohen & Stiles, 1998); vision and leadership (Bohen & Stiles, 1998; Kezar, 2001; Streit, 1993); institutional commitment (Bohen & Stiles, 1998; Streit, 1993); incentives/rewards (Bohen & Stiles, 1998; Kezar, 2001; Streit, 1993); financial support (Bohen & Stiles, 1998; Kezar, 2001; Streit, 1993); inclusiveness in decision making (Streit, 1993); considering all needs of students (Streit, 1993); individual relationships (Arcelus, 2008; Kezar, 2001); cross-institutional dialogue, common language development and mission, generating enthusiasm, and staff development (Kezar, 2001). In terms of those environmental factors that promote success, Kezar (2005) explained there are eight factors elemental to context for collaboration, “(1) mission; (2) integrating structures; (3) campus networks; (4) rewards; (5) a sense of priority from people in senior positions; (6) external pressure; (7) values; and (8) learning” (p. 844). In their book considering organizational context for collaboration, Kezar and Lester (2009) confirmed these features with some variation, including vision and educational philosophy with mission, changing campus networks to social networks, and removing item number five. They noted that mission and vision, campus networks, and integrating structures were absolutely vital and that, “Without them collaborative activities will fail” (Kezar & Lester, 2009, p. 60). Other environmental characteristics found to be conducive to collaboration included leadership, cross-institutional dialogue, setting expectations, generating enthusiasm, creating a common vision, staff development, planning (Kezar, 2003a), past history, legitimacy (Dunlop & Holosko, 2004), prior affiliation, shared decision making, similarities between partners, and trust (Saxton, 1997). Support and foster relationships. Support and foster collaboration. Foster discussion in collaboration. Make common goals clear. Consider importance and complexity of roles. Consider matching commonalities and content. Foster student learning. http://www.flickr.com/photos/unlistedsightings/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/lrargerich/ http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/leader/leadcon.html
Activity: One & Two way communication
http://www.flickr.com/photos/stephendann/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/fhmira/

Communication for Collaboration

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (20)

Andere mochten auch

Andere mochten auch (15)

Ähnlich wie Communication for Collaboration

Ähnlich wie Communication for Collaboration (20)

Mehr von Michelle Rodems

Mehr von Michelle Rodems (9)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

Communication for Collaboration

Hinweis der Redaktion