JA Westenberg's article "Collaboration is bullshit" [1] claims that the tech industry's relentless focus on collaboration does not produce meaningful output. It only gives an illusion of progress.
> Collaborating means the failure belongs to the process.
> Communication matters, and shared context matters. But there’s a huge difference between communication and collaboration as infrastructure to support individual, high-agency ownership, and communication and collaboration as the primary activity of an organisation. Which, if we’re honest, is what most collaboration-first cultures have actually built. They’ve constructed extraordinarily sophisticated machinery for the social management of work, without actually doing the work they’re socialising about.
> If and when it exists, ownership looks like an individual who deeply gives a shit, making a call without waiting for group-consensus. That individual will be right sometimes, and they’ll be wrong other times, and they’ll own it. They won’t sit around waiting to find out who has the authority to move a card from one column to another and post about it in the #celebrations channel.
In many organizations, coordination methods such as meetings, status updates, shared documents, and emoji reactions become ends in themselves. These activities feel productive. They look collaborative. They also protect people from the discomfort of failure. Yet they produce little work that can be shipped. They raise communication overhead.
The problem is not collaboration by itself. The problem occurs when collaboration becomes the default system. Collaboration should be a support layer for individuals who own their outcomes. Teams need some coordination. That coordination must have limits. It must have a purpose. It must follow execution and accountability. The opposite arrangement is a mistake.
1. https://www.joanwestenberg.com/collaboration-is-bullshit/







