Introduction

Effective collaboration has become a fundamental requirement of success in disparate fields, from scientific research to medical surgery and moviemaking (Biscaro & Comacchio, 2018; Delmestri et al., 2005; Mannucci, 2017; Nicolini et al., 2012). At the heart of collaboration efforts are the social networks between the collaborating individuals (Reagans et al., 2007; Singh, 2005). However, although research has traditionally focused on the benefits and advantages that can be accrued from collaboration networks (see Burt et al., 2013; Perry-Smith & Mannucci, 2017; and Phelps et al. 2012, for recent reviews), only recently scholars have started to thoroughly investigate how people form different type of collaborative ties, driven by different reasons and objectives. This perspective can provide more clarity on those elements leading to more or less successful collaborations and can suggest how different relational activities lead to specific types of collaboration.

In line with these premises, this chapter aims at delving into the process of collaboration, exploring through which relational activities it unfolds. More specifically, the chapter presents the results of a qualitative research conducted in “Le Serre dei Giardini Margherita” (the greenhouses of Margherita Gardens), a collaborative space established in 2012 in a regenerated urban area of Bologna, Italy, and run by Kilowatt, a cooperative organization that carries out multiple activities in the realms of culture and social innovation, offering also a coworking space.

Our study highlights the potential role of collaborative spaces in catalyzing the emergence and realization of collaborative projects as well as the elements that might foster (or inhibit) these processes. Specifically, we shed light on the relational activities that a collaborative space’s users may deploy to initiate and sustain different kinds of collaboration. The chapter is structured as follows. The first section presents the theoretical background, the second illustrates the research methods, and the third one shows the main findings. The last section discusses the results, also proposing some managerial implications and ideas for future research.

Theoretical background

Collaboration is the development of shared projects based on trust and relationships and it is crucial in organizations (Irving et al., 2020). Collaboration could be conceived as a social process based on the joint effort of two or more individuals. Accordingly, the relationships among the involved individuals constitute the fabric on which collaboration is built (Hargadon & Sutton, 1997; Lingo & O’Mahony, 2010). Existing research has traditionally studied the individual attributes and traits facilitating collaboration or leading to successful collaborations (Perry-Smith & Mannucci, 2015; Phelps et al., 2012). More recently, scholars have started to investigate in depth what elements help people form, maintain, and utilize a tie, thus shedding light on the different phases through which collaboration unfolds. In line with such a dynamic and processual view of collaboration, scholars highlighted the activity of networking behind collaboration (Casciaro et al., 2014; Elfring & Hulsink, 2007).

Focusing on the practices of networking allows us to understand better how individuals have an active role in shaping the way collaboration evolves. When facing the decision of whether to collaborate or not with another individual, people first assess a tie’s potential value, both instrumental and emotional (Casciaro & Lobo, 2015). Then, based on this assessment, they decide whether to form the tie or not, basing their decision on factors such as similarity, competences, and interpersonal liking (Dahlander & McFarland, 2013). The way individuals form a tie impacts on how collaboration unfolds. For example, if the tie has been initiated for physical proximity, removing this factor could end the collaboration, regardless of its actual effectiveness. Similarly, if a shared third party has introduced two people, the effectiveness of the relationship could also be influenced by the third party (Dahlander & McFarland, 2013; Lingo & O’Mahony, 2010).

Collaboration is realized when the collaborative tie is activated and mobilized, but the ties need first to be maintained and nurtured if people want to activate them to collaborate. Tie maintenance itself is a time-consuming activity as individuals need to devote time and effort nurturing the tie (Dahlander & McFarland, 2013; Perry-Smith & Shalley, 2003). All in all, it is clear that networking behaviors constitute the pillars of collaboration. However, we still need to understand how collaborative ties are created, nurtured, and managed, in particular providing more clarity on the relational activities at the base of these behaviors.

In this sense, it is interesting to study the relational foundation of collaboration in the so-called collaborative spaces, which are deemed to sustain collaboration practices and facilitate shared projects. This topic is recently attracting the attention of several scholars. For example, Bouncken and Reuschl (2018) investigated how coworking spaces sustain entrepreneurship and networking. In particular, they highlighted how these spaces allow “flexibility and social interaction that can stimulate their members’ inspiration, the exchange and development of ideas among coworking-users, the development of teams and projects” (2018, p. 330). On the same line, Capdevila (2019) underlined the role of collaborative spaces in sustaining relations within a local ecosystem as they host startups and young professionals who are strongly motivated to develop new networks as means to support their entrepreneurial and professional projects.

Despite the burgeoning number of studies addressing the phenomenon of collaborative spaces, we still have a fragmented understanding of how they sustain actual collaboration. Thus, our chapter aims at providing a deeper understanding of the relational activities that may lead to collaboration, also revealing more insights on the internal dynamics of collaborative spaces.

Methodology

We conducted a qualitative study of “Le Serre dei Giardini Margherita,” a cultural and social innovation hub established in 2012 in Bologna, Italy. The hub is located in the main park of the city, the Giardini Margherita, where the managing organization (namely the cooperative Kilowatt) regenerated an abandoned public place–the former municipal greenhouse–granted by the municipality of Bologna, in order to give it back to the local community. Over the years, “Le Serre” has played a pivotal role in the cultural and social lives of people in Bologna by organizing free cultural events (e.g., movie screenings, concerts, and festivals) and launching social projects such as urban gardening that have involved the local community. Besides the organization of activities in the realms of culture and social innovation, Kilowatt, the managing organization, provides consulting, incubation, and education services. “Le Serre” hosts a kindergarten and a vegetarian restaurant, which is open to the public and supplied by local organic producers. Overall, the hub employs 25 people, including founders and partners and it also offers a coworking space that hosts 16 professionals with heterogeneous backgrounds, predominantly active in media, communication, and creative industries. The coworkers are mainly freelance workers, except four telecommuters of companies located in different towns or other countries.

Main findings

Since the first time we entered the field, we observed the “actual” collaborative nature of “Le Serre.” Indeed, interviewees recurrently narrated cases of collaborations that had emerged in the space with other users. Such collaborations went from one spot consultation on specific tasks (e.g., a professional interpreter who is often consulted by other coworkers for quick language references) to more continuous collaborations (e.g., two architects who started to collaborate on common projects after they met there). In some cases, interviewees also referred to entrepreneurial projects that some users of the space had developed together (e.g., a new venture dedicated to the production and distribution of traditional foreign vegetables in the urban garden).

Our analysis shows that in “Le Serre,” people engage in two main groups of relational activities aimed at sustaining different kinds of collaboration (see Table 1.1). Whereas the first includes relational activities that we label as “instrumental,” the second one pertains to relational activities that can be defined as “expressive.” We discuss them in detail in the next two paragraphs.

Table 1.1 Relational activities individuals deploy to collaborate

Discussion

This chapter proposes an account of the relational activities that individuals can deploy to initiate and sustain collaboration in collaborative spaces. Findings reveal two main groups of relational activities: instrumental and expressive. Whereas the first group includes those actions primarily driven by professional purposes, the second evokes the relational activities aimed at building and strengthening relationships based on similarity in terms of shared values and personal interests. The first group of activities (i.e., gaining access to the resources and cross-pollinating) reflects the instrumental “work” that individuals enact in order to leverage both on the material resources and the competences (e.g., knowledge and ideas) that are available in a collaborative space. In line with the idea that networks represent important conduits to get access to relevant resources, individuals engage proactively in activities specifically aimed at creating instrumental ties with other users of a collaborative space (see also Casciaro et al., 2014). However, a collaborative space can also be characterized by a strong culture, supporting a sense of community, which in turn sustains collaboration (Garrett et al., 2017). Accordingly, individuals may engage in activities aimed at creating and maintaining expressive ties (e.g., engaging in the social and cultural activities of the space and sharing common routines), which cannot be explicitly related to professional purposes but can contribute to increasing their motivation to collaborate and expectations of reciprocity in collaborative projects.

Our study suggests that these two types of relational activities are not mutually exclusive and are actually both necessary to ignite different types of collaborations. We find that collaborative spaces support collaborative efforts, eventually leading to new ideas and new projects, when users activate both instrumental and expressive relational actions. Whereas some collaborations can be ignited only through instrumental ties, such as in the case of a coworker reaching out other users of the space to accomplish a task or developing a product or a service, other collaborations are initiated and sustained through both emotional and instrumental ties, as in the case of a new entrepreneurial venture founded by two or more coworkers of the space.

Whereas collaborations can be initiated through instrumental ties, these collaborations tend to be short term and revolve around delimited tasks. When instead collaborations are initiated through expressive ties, they tend to last for a longer period of time, show more frequent interactions among the involved actors, and revolve around more creative tasks. Indeed, expressive ties allow for the creation of a common ground (e.g., common values and shared routines) among individuals, which facilitate the instrumental interaction and the exchange of knowledge and ideas during the development of new projects.

Results provide some managerial implications. For example, our study suggests that managers of collaborative spaces should spend efforts to communicate and promote distinctive values and identity, thus favoring the (self) selection of users, and organize different types of services, events, and rituals as moments for interaction, exchange and sharing among their users. In addition, a sense of community could be supported by both professional and social activities, which represent important occasions for creating ties among users as well as reinforcing a common ground in terms of values and identity.

Our findings also suggest potential avenues for future research. In particular, our study provides insights into the relational activities individuals deploy to ignite collaborations. Still, we did not offer either an account of how the process of collaboration unfolds dynamically or whether different relational activities are deployed by collaborative spaces’ users depending on the phase of the collaboration process. In this regard, we suggest that future research might explore how collaborations emerge and evolve dynamically over time, from the formation of collaborative ties to their maintenance/nurturing and effective activation, also examining how different relational actions come into play in these different phases of collaboration.