Do you have to like each other to Collaborate?

By Trevor Gore, Associate Director, Institute for Collaborative Working (ICW)

May I be one of the last people to wish you a ‘Happy New Year’

The new year is traditionally a time to reflect on the year past and look forward to the new year and all the joys and challenges it will bring, possibly by making a resolution. However, the statistics do not bode well for your resolution lasting.

Whether it is to improve your health/lose weight (the no.1 resolution) or performing better at work (3%), the Forbes Health/One Poll survey found that the average resolution lasts just 3.74 months. Only 8% of respondents tend to stick with their goals for one month, while 22% last two months, 22% last three months and 13% last four months. So that’s nearly 2/3 gone by 4 months. I only mention this because at the tail end of 2024, I thought Pharmacy, or more specifically Pharmacy Representative bodies had taken an early resolution and decided to get along.

I am passionate about Collaboration and am a member of the Institute for Collaborative Working (ICW) and have spoken on the topic at conferences, the Pharmacy Show, etc, and also written in this very magazine on the subject (see Volume 20 March 2024). I have also been pretty dismayed at the lack of collaboration at a representation level leading to headlines such as “Don’t underestimate the power of unity” and “Sector disagreement over call for unity” coupled with some 99% of participating pharmacy owners saying they were willing to limit their services unless funding is improved.

But there seems to have been a thawing, at least from the outside, in the relationships. And not only in pharmacy. In November I awoke to the headline “From bitter rivals to a sensational partnership as Andy Murray set to coach Novak Djokovic starting at Australian Open”. If they can agree to work together then anything is possible! Then I read that there was a broad coalition of pharmacy bodies (including the two who have historically different approaches to representing pharmacy interests) that jointly wrote to the government on topics like funding. Hurrah!

One of the problems is how people think about collaboration. It is all smiles and hugs, soft and fluffy. Well, it often isn’t. In fact, the international standard (yes there is one) for the Principles of Collaboration ISO 44000 has amongst its principles: Trust and commitment to mutual benefit, Risk Management and even an Exit Strategy, and I think it’s this misunderstanding that has led to the recent public disagreements.

I believe there are two issues at play here.

1)           Competition for Membership and Funding

Many pharmacy organisations rely on membership fees for funding, creating competition to attract members. This has led to disagreements over policy positions, public messaging, and who should lead advocacy efforts.

2)           Lack of Unified Advocacy

Disunity weakens the profession’s ability to advocate with a single, powerful voice. For instance, in negotiations with the government on pharmacy funding or regulatory issues, fragmented representation often results in less favourable outcomes compared to more unified healthcare professions.

But let me return to the notion of “trust and commitment for mutual benefit”. It is recognised in collaboration that you may not be together for a long time. The level of trust required between short-term and long-term collaborations varies significantly, as the nature and expectations of these relationships differ.

Short-Term Collaborations seek to maximise immediate outcomes, and I hope we can all agree that there is a need for an immediate change to the CPCF. Second, there is low relational investment. There is less time to build interpersonal trust, so trust is transactional and tied to fulfilling specific responsibilities or meeting deadlines. You do NOT have to like or agree on everything. Just focus on the one big issue (funding perhaps)  that needs solving and present a united front until it's solved. Then you can exit the collaboration, again one of the principles of ISO44000, and then go back to internecine warfare.

I’d recommend we all read Collaborating with the Enemy: How to Work with People You Don’t Agree With or Like or Trust by Adam Kahane. Kahane argues that collaboration is inherently messy and challenging, especially with adversaries. Success lies in embracing these complexities and adopting unconventional approaches. The book is a valuable guide for leaders, mediators, and anyone facing difficult collaborative challenges in business, politics, or personal relationships.

One of the definitions of trust we use at the ICW is “Trust is the intention to

accept vulnerability based upon positive expectations of the intention or behaviours of another” so I see the joint letter as a 1st step in building trust and maybe showing some vulnerability, with positive expectations to deliver on an agreed objective.

Let us hope it lasts longer than 3.74 months!  Now how is Djokovic doing?