Menu:

• Info Career Trends Home

• Subscription Info

• Current Issue

• Archives

• Upcoming Themes

• Contributor Guidelines

• Submit a Book for Review

• Rate Card

We often have opportunities as library professionals to write collaboratively with others. This might be a committee report, an article in a professional journal, a dual presentation at a professional conference, or a coauthored book for one of the library publishers. We may work with one of our in-house colleagues, or with a colleague at another institution. I have been fortunate to have a number of these experiences, and have learned a great deal - including what not to do!

There are a few main areas to consider when you decide to work collaboratively on a writing project. These include workflow and work distribution, communication, editing controls, and sharing the credit. You can use the following suggestions as a general checklist for collaborating, or simply as food for thought.

Workflow and Work Distribution

Nothing can sideline a collaborative project faster than a feeling on either side that the workload is uneven or unfair. Reasonable distribution of work - not equal distribution, necessarily, but reasonable distribution - is key. You want to be sure that any tasks (research, compiling, writing, editing) are assigned to the right person to complete them thoroughly and well. This may mean a slightly unequal distribution on the face of things, but, if you work toward each person's strengths, the product as a whole will be more successful. So, what do I mean by this?

First, work to your strengths. Each participant should start by making an honest list of their own strengths and weaknesses as related to the project. And, I do mean honest! Are you a bad speller? Are you a control freak, needing constant updates on every aspect of the project? Is your grammar shaky, but your ability to synthesize complex concepts into simple language second to none? Are you perennially tardy at completing projects? (Come on, be honest...) Do you frequently confuse "its" and "it's"? Are you shy on the phone, so perhaps shouldn't do any phone research for the project? Are you great on the phone, and love getting information out of people? Are you (like me) good at project management and arranging details, but do you panic slightly when faced with a blank page (like this article)?

Once you've each created your lists, share them with each other. This requires a measure of trust, but hopefully you already have that if you've chosen to work with this person. Look at your lists - where are there complementary strengths? Are you detail-oriented, but your partner is more big-picture-oriented? Great! Assume that you'll coordinate task lists and deadline issues, and that your coauthor will be a great help in the initial brainstorming and outlining. Are you better at print research, and your coauthor better at online searching? Don't be afraid to say: "This isn't my strongest point, would you like to take it on?" If you're both weak at the same thing, be sure you discuss it and decide how you're going to keep each other on task in that area. For instance, if you both hate phone research, but it's required for your project, create a list of the people or institutions to be called, divvy up the list equally, and pledge to give weekly updates to each other as to what calls have been made and their results.

Create the outline and task lists together. Before you put a word on paper, or a slide in PowerPoint, be sure you agree on a solid outline of all parts of the project. As with any writing project, especially if it entails research, this can evolve over time, so set up a mechanism for reviewing this outline periodically. Obviously, for a smaller project, a simple but thorough outline can be the template you both work from, only coming together for the editing stage (see Editing, below). The task list should be hashed out and agreed upon before any work begins. Again, this helps to nip in the bud any feelings of unfair distribution of work. If your partner agreed to do certain work, preferably in a written task list, then you can hold him/her (and yourself!) to that list. If possible, put rough timelines next to particular tasks ("by next Thursday," "by mid-April," etc.).

Communication

Yes, I did just say that uneven workflow was the biggest stumbling block to useful collaboration. On second thought, though, that's not true - communication is your biggest issue, and the one that should be sorted out right at the outset.

Create consistent lines of communication. How are you going to communicate about the progress of the writing project? If you work in the same institution, this can be easier, but it's no less important to sort out at the beginning. Will you have regular meetings? These are particularly useful when there are more than two contributors. Will you "meet" via e-mail? E-mail is wonderfully useful, when used correctly, but it can also cause communication gaps. If you have more than one person involved, see if your system administrator can create a group distribution list, so that you lessen the risk of "forgetting" to add someone to a group e-mail. Egos can get fragile and bruised on a project like this; consistent, equal communication routes can alleviate a great deal of this frustration.

If you're at different institutions and in a group of more than two people, consider setting up a Google Group or similar list so that you need only send and respond to one group address. This can save numerous headaches and keeps you from having to remember to "Reply All" (which everyone slips up on at least once). Whatever means of communication you implement, be sure that all members are consistent about their use. Someone working feverishly on a part of the project, but not telling anyone else in the group, is a recipe for disaster.

Who talks to the publisher/dean/department head? This part of the project may not be immediately apparent to project members, but it can be important. You often need to get clarification or guidance from those who assigned you the work in the first place. But if both or all of you go to your publisher/dean/department head with the same question, the group can look foolish and poorly organized. Decide up front who will be "the communicator" when clarification is needed. A detail-oriented person with good communication skills is best - you'll have to sort out who that is among you. Any questions will be funneled through that person, and they will have the responsibility to bring the answers back to the working group.

Editing

It's possible that the greater part of your project work will be done alone. You may be in charge of a particular section or set of research, and need little input from your partner(s), who are also working independently until the point where you need to put it all together. Hopefully your frequent communication throughout the process will alleviate some tensions, but you can't count on this. I have a couple of tips for making this editing and finalizing project proceed more smoothly.

1. Track Changes. Microsoft Word has a wonderful option in its Tools menu called Track Changes. Track Changes allows multiple users to make edits, with each user's changes showing up in a different color or other noticeable way, without having to save multiple versions of the same merged document. You can also insert comments, which is a great tool for groups working at a distance from each other. You can use comments to communicate within the context of the document (e.g., "did we want this paragraph here, or later in the conclusion?" or "we need additional citations in the footnotes for this research") instead of sending an e-mail saying "I have questions about the 3rd paragraph on page 25" and making your writing partner(s) hunt these items down.

   Finally, this allows you to accept or reject all or some of the changes that have been made to the document as you go, which is how we come to our next item:

2. Agree on who has final editing power. Ultimately someone has to make the decision that "this is done." It's possible that, with good communication throughout, you will come to an easy consensus. It may, however, be necessary to designate a team leader with the power and the responsibility to say: "We've done all the edits we can; we're done; this is going to the publisher/dean/department head." I cannot stress this enough: this must be decided at the outset of the project. Again, look at each person's strengths. Who is the best project leader, with the ability to be fair but firm and to organize and track details? This is your team leader, not necessarily the person with the strongest personality.

Sharing the Credit

Speaking of strong personalities, these can get in the way when you're promoting your work. This promotion may be in the form of announcing it on an e-mail discussion list, presenting to the dean, or contracting with the publisher. Unfortunately, one person is always listed first in a book or article title. If you're part of a team, someone's name has to be on top. Simple alphabetizing can work, but you have to agree on that scheme.

Share both kudos and the critiques. If you're given a compliment on the project, paper, article, or book, share the credit! Say: "We are very proud of our work," not "I'm glad you liked my article." On the flip side, if your work is critiqued, don't say: "Oh, that was so-and-so's part of the project, and I had nothing to do with it." The work is everyone's, good or bad. The final product, except in extraordinary circumstances, was agreed upon by all of you. Take your strokes and take your licks together; it's the professional way to respond.

Agree up front who makes what money - if any. For books, and some articles, there may be royalties or a fee involved. Understand from the outset how those are going to be split, and be sure that is communicated to the paying organization. I had one paid project where I did the bulk of the work, based on someone else's aborted project. We agreed that I would get all the royalties, but, as we were using some of my coauthor's original work, that person's name would remain on the final product. This would help my coauthor with tenure review. In order to make this happen, we had to sign an updated contract with the publisher.

Working With Friends and Colleagues

There is one last item you may want to consider carefully, especially if the project you are offered is independent of your job - deciding with whom to work. In many cases, this will be decided for you by the nature of the project. However, if you are given a chance to choose, choose wisely. Although it can be great fun to work with a friend, if it's a large, extended project, this can put a considerable strain on your relationship. You will want to take extra care to make all expectations - work distribution, communication, editing, and credit - exceedingly clear at the outset. On the other hand, for short projects like writing an article, working with a friend can speed up the process with easy communication and agreement.

Even the worst collaboration process can teach you something. In a very real way, it can help you define your leadership style, your preferences for process and control, and your work methods. Collaboration is worth doing, and it's worth doing right!

Louise Alcorn received her MILS from The University of Michigan in 1996. She is the Reference Technology Librarian at the West Des Moines (Iowa) Public Library, a vibrant, growing suburban library in the Midwest. She's an active member of a number of library-related lists and can be reached at louise.alcorn@wdm-ia.com.