When a collaboration is not a collaboration

Prisoner’s dilemma in digital product design.

Collaborating on digital product design with engineers or managers follows the same principles as the prisoner’s dilemma — both of you can either cooperate or defect. In more modern language, suited to the design industry, you can either collaborate by building on each other’s ideas or make the most common beginner’s mistake:

falling in love with your own design.

In real life, the difference isn’t always as clear as in theory when it comes to whether the other party is truly collaborating or subtly competing by pushing their own ideas. From the outside, it might look like people are working together — sharing opinions, discussing pros and cons, using various mind-mapping techniques — but beneath all that, the good old competition gene might still be lurking, even if unconsciously.

So how can this “defecting collaboration” be noticed and mitigated before it derails the work, especially when the defecting party isn’t even aware they’re doing it?

Why can it happen?

Uncovering the blindspots

In any scenario, designing a digital product demands cross-functional collaboration, as all stakeholders have certain knowledge gaps that need to be bridged to achieve a successful outcome. For example, the more technical the product, the larger the designer’s technology gap that must be filled by an engineer. Conversely, if the user experience heavily relies on a graphic user interface, the larger the gap for the product designer to address.

Knowledge gaps create a mutual dependency that can only be resolved through trust.

Moreover, I would argue that designers are often in a less favourable position, as they typically lack both the final decision-making power (like managers) and the responsibility for implementing the agreed-upon solution (like engineers). This dynamic creates the first blind spot.

Design equifinality

In addition to knowledge gaps, there are less obvious blind spots. One example is design equifinality —…