How to overcome clashing values within a collaboration | Article

In any collaboration, whether between different sectors, organisations, or individuals, differences in values are to be expected, and sometimes those differences can create challenges.  The first step in managing clashing values is to anticipate them and understand their origins.

Anthropologist Mary Douglas has provided a helpful framework for understanding these different value systems. She categorised cultures based on their emphasis on following rules and social cohesion:

• Cultures that value neither are individualist, where everyone looks out for themselves.
• Cultures valuing both are hierarchical, relying on rules and social bonds.
• Those that prioritise social cohesion but not rules are egalitarian.
• Those that value rules but not social cohesion are fatalistic.

Authors have attempted to apply this framework to different sectors. The private sector can be seen as individualist, focusing on competition over cohesion and seeking to avoid being rule-bound. The public sector is viewed as more hierarchical, relying on social cohesion for its legitimacy, and rules for governance. The social sector can be seen as egalitarian, valuing social bonds over formal rules.

While being aware of these differences is helpful, it's important to avoid stereotypes and generalisation which can lead to misrepresentation.  There is also comparative research that suggests that public and private sectors have broadly similar values, diverging on only a few issues. 

When value clashes occur, there are several strategies that leaders can use to navigate conflicts in cross-sector collaborations:

1. Avoidance: Not addressing a value conflict.
2. Cycling: Alternately emphasising different values at different points in time.
3. Hybridisation: Maintaining distinct policies or practices that align with competing values by creating structural separation or administrative “firewalls” between them.
4. Incrementalism: Softening or easing value conflicts through a series of small, gradual adjustments to policy or practice, often involving compromise.
5. Integration: Reframing an issue so that conflicting values are seen to support or complement one another.
6. Trade-offs: Prioritising one value (or a set of values) at the expense of another.

Of these, incrementalism and integration are the generally preferred methods as they can incorporate multiple values simultaneously. Hybridisation is useful for isolating areas of possible agreement by separating the more stubborn issues.

Value conflicts can originate from outside the collaboration, shaping and framing its objectives.  They can also originate internally, where they are more likely to be about the collaboration process, affecting aspects like who is included in the collaboration, who is a beneficiary, how decisions are made, and accountability to external stakeholders. As external value conflicts are likely to emerge earlier and are harder to influence, they require the initial focus before addressing internal, process-related, value conflicts.

Understanding and effectively managing these value differences is essential for successful cross-sector collaboration.

Originally published: