The time you spend on internal meetings has been rising steadily. So, you won't be surprised that executives generally report spending an average of 70% of their time on internal collaboration. However, what will surprise you is data showing how much of this is actually wasted.

1.
The time you spend on internal meetings has been rising
steadily. So, you won't be surprised that executives
generally report spending an average of 70% of their time
on internal collaboration. However, what will surprise you
is data showing how much of this time is actually wasted.
In this short article we will explore the real‐world Return on
Collaboration based on data from 900 executives. We will calculate
the cost of poor collaboration in terms of time and wages, but also
in terms of energy and engagement. Finally, we will build the
business case for tackling the issue of poor collaboration within your
organization or team.
WARNING:
Poor Collaboration Could be Costing
You 1.9 Days Each Week!
What % of
internal
collaboration
actually adds
value?

2.
Choosing How You Spend Your Time
Imagine it is mid‐morning on Thursday. You have 3 choices:
You need to do (b), you would like to do (c), but chances are you are
already on your way to yet another internal meeting (a). But think
again! How much is another internal meeting going to actually
contribute to the success of your week. Well, chances are very little.
To use more technical language ‐ the payback (what we call Return
on Collaboration™) is likely to be poor.
How Much Time Is Spent on Collaboration?
The data tells us that executives are spending an average of 70% of
their time on internal collaboration(1). That includes time spent on
emails, calls and meetings with colleagues on their team, as well as
on other teams, departments and functions. Apply this data to a 5‐
day working week and it means that from Tuesday lunchtime
onward is spent on internal collaboration (shown as black in the
diagram overleaf).

3.
Most of the typical working week is now spent on internal
collaboration (i.e. 3.6 days). It accounts for all of Tuesday
afternoon, together with the full day on Wednesday, Thursday and
Friday too! That is a lot of collaboration, but how much of this is
effective or worthwhile?
How Much Collaboration Is Effective?
The data tells us that just under half of all collaboration (i.e. 47%)
adds real value, the rest does not. Apply this data to the typical work
week and the following picture (2) emerges:
‘…half of all
collaboration
adds real
value, the rest
does not’.

4.
Of the time spent collaborating 47% adds value. In other words, it
helps people to get their work done, solve important problems, or
otherwise make progress. This 'good' collaboration accounts for
1.7 days each week, or Tuesday afternoon and all of Wednesday.
But it ends at 10 am on Thursday ‐ from there on the typical week is
spent on collaboration that adds little or no value.
This brings us right back to where we started ‐ the decision at the
beginning of this article ‐ to go golfing or to another meeting.
How Much Time is Wasted on Poor Collaboration?
In most of our organizations what happens after 10 am on
Thursday is effectively wasted. That is a stark realization. The clock
image shown above (and taken from our performance analytics
solution) is a powerful way of communicating the following
statistical reality: Although 'poor' collaboration adds little or no
value it accounts for as much as 1.9 days each week. In other words,
37% of your team's time generates little or no value.

5.
Here is the paradox: Organizations spend big money hiring the best
talent only to put them working in environments where 37% of their
time will be wasted!! And of course, it is not just a matter of wasted
time.
Perhaps even more finite than time is the energy that people can
bring to their work. To spend almost 40% of your week on an
activity that does not deliver a return is frustrating, especially when
today's workload means there are simply not enough hours in the
day. Poor collaboration doesn't just steal time, it also drains energy,
as well as engagement, creativity and focus.
What is the Cost of Poor Collaboration?
For those readers who say 'show me the money' let's bring the 37%
figure to life, by calculating the cost of poor collaboration. The
diagram overleaf calculates the total time spent by a team of 10
people on non‐value adding internal collaboration. It is a stark
message, revealing that poor collaboration is the equivalent of
almost 4 team members working full‐time.
‘…Poor
collaboration
doesn't just
steal time, it
also drains
energy...’

6.
You could take out your calculator and put a number on the salary
and related costs involved. That would make the picture even more
compelling, perhaps even scary.
Less easy to calculate, but likely to be significantly greater than the
cost of salaries, is the opportunity cost involved. But imagine the
projects, strategies and innovations that could have been pursued if
people had up to 37% more time and energy.
‘…imagine the
projects,
strategies &
innovations
that could
have been
pursued’

7.
Every Thursday at 10 am you could be packing your golf bag, or
alternatively launching into that strategic project that you want to
drive forward. Although golfing probably won’t change the future
of your organization or its industry, tackling that strategic project
you can’t see to find time for, could. The opportunity cost is that
instead you go to another internal meeting or conference call that
delivers little, or no value.
What is the Potential Return on Collaboration?
Let's end this article on a positive note ‐ the business case for more
effective collaboration. To do this we will switch from calculating
costs to estimating benefits, expressing the lost time as a potential
gain to the team and its members.
Looked at in terms of potential benefits, improved collaboration
would be the equivalent of:
 Gifting each team member 14 hours each week ‐ time that they
could spend on their most important projects and priorities, or
simply getting on top of their to‐do lists.

8.
 Adding 4 new people to the team with little if any additional cost
‐ no additional salaries, hiring costs, etc.
Then there are the equally important, but more difficult to quantify
benefits. For example, reduced stress and frustration on the one
hand and increased energy and engagement on the other. These
are shown here:
Although hidden, these factors are essential in the battle to acquire
and retain talent.
A Call to Action
If you are frustrated by the amount of time you spend on internal
meetings, are compelled by the numbers (i.e. the cost or payback)
or simply want to go golfing, focus attention on your team's Return
on Collaboration™.
The future will likely require more collaboration, rather than less.
However, with something that is so important and takes up so much
our time, it is vital that we can maximize its effectiveness. That is
why Return on Collaboration™ matters.
‘…imagine
the projects,
strategies &
innovations
that could
have been
pursued’

9.
To measure the Return on Collaboration™ for your organization or
team talk to us, we provide analytics and workshops that help
leaders and their teams to take back up to 10 hours a week lost in
poor internal collaboration.
About Growth Pitstop™
Growth Pitstop® is recognised as one of the most exciting
performance analytics companies in the world. We leverage the
latest science and psychology of performance, together with F1™‐
style BIG data, to measure, model and unlock the performance
potential of ambitious business units, leaders and their teams.
Footnotes:
(1) Data based on a subset of 900 executives via Pitstop Analytics™ performance
analytics solution by Growth Pitstop™. Diverse sample from medium to large sized
organizations composed of different functional backgrounds from general managers
to scientists and engineers.
(2) Images used are based on screenshots from Pitstop Analytics™ performance
analytics solution.
Copyright © Growth Pitstop™ 2018. All Rights Reserved.
Return on Collaboration™ and Pitstop Analytics™ are trademarks of Growth Pitstop™.
‘…take back
up to 10 hours
a week lost in
poor internal
collaboration’.