Keeping goals relevant in multi-actor collaborations

This paper explores how organizations from different backgrounds are able to pursue sustained collaboration on a broad goal. Broad goals are effective for mobilizing heterogeneous actors to collaborate on an overarching issue. However, realizing broad goals can be challenging due to the possible emergence of conflicting sub-goals salient to different participants. Prior research has found conflicting sub-goals to have both positive and negative effects on sustained collaboration. Conflicting sub-goals can create synergy and innovative initiatives, but can also lead to inertia and displacement of the broad goal. How do organizations with heterogeneous interests engaged in a collaborative initiative manage the tension between the pursuit of a broad goal and ensure that conflicting sub- goals do not displace the broad goal? To explore this we draw upon a qualitative longitudinal study of Helix Nebula, the leading science and business cloud computing initiative in Europe. We explore how large science organizations (CERN, EMBL, ESA) collaborate with business (Atos, CloudSigma, T-Systems) and public infrastructure organizations (EGI, GÉANT) on the broad goal of developing a pan-European scientific cloud computing infrastructure. Our inductive analysis derived ‘contextualizing’ and ‘conceptualizing’ as two mechanisms that enable organizations to adopt a frame where conflicting sub-goals are perceived as serving rather than undermining sustained collaboration on a broad goal. Our empirical study of Helix Nebula contributes to multi-actor collaboration and framing literatures and has broader implications for science, business, and society by explaining the mechanisms that allow the pursuit of broad goals despite the emergence of conflicting sub-goals that can damage sustained collaboration.