Collaboration Spectrum

A spectrum of collaboration from competition to integration was introduced by Liz Weaver and the Tamarack Institute in the early 2000s and updated in 2017.  They provide guidance and tools for its application.

Building from that work, the Collaboration Spectrum helps clarify the fundamental trade-off between individual and organizational interests, or turf, with the need to build trust to enable collective action.  It illustrates that collaboration is not a single action but a range of activities and modalities that supports building clarity of purpose and helps partners get on the same page about their current context and future aspirations.

• Compete & Coexist: Sometimes organizations compete or are loosely coupled, focusing primarily on their own agendas, resources, or even competing for clients and public attention. There’s little to no systematic connection, and “turf” is strongly protected.
• Communicate & Cooperate: Organizations share information or engage in as-needed, often informal interactions on discrete activities or projects. The emphasis may be on mutual benefits, but commitment levels remain relatively low.
• Coordinate: Here, organizations make a conscious effort to systematically adjust and align their work with each other to achieve greater outcomes. This level of collaboration involves more intentional planning and a focus on shared goals and building the trust necessary for deeper engagement.
• Collaborate & Integrate: Involves longer-term interaction based on a shared mission, common goals, shared decision-making, and joint resources. Integration is the end of the spectrum, characterized by fully integrated programs, planning, and funding. Achieving these stages requires significant trust, a willingness to relinquish some degree of autonomy or “turf,” and a commitment to shared ownership.

Imagine several non-profit organizations, each offering services to homeless youth. They often compete for grants, volunteers, and public attention, each promoting their unique approach to attract funding and clients. The value in competition lies in allowing each organization to innovate independently, specialize in its niche, and develop unique strengths without external constraints.

Following a severe winter storm, the same non-profit organizations serving homeless youth recognize an immediate, urgent need for warm clothing and temporary shelter. They decide to cooperate by sharing information about available shelter beds for that night and organizing a joint, clothing drive. Each organization leverages its own network to collect items and distributes them to its clients or at a shared drop-off point. This is an as-needed, often informal interaction related to a discrete project.  The value of cooperation is the ability to achieve specific, immediate, and shared outcomes more effectively than any single organization could do alone, but with relatively low ongoing commitment. On occasion, various non-profit organizations, social services, housing authorities and healthcare organizations come together to intentionally collaborate over time. They agree to integrate their efforts by forming a unified access point for a wide range of services. This involves developing a common strategic plan, pooling resources (staff, budget, facilities), and jointly designing and delivering a comprehensive program.