Creativity is a driving force behind collaboration. Collaboration is not necessarily an effort to create a new product, improve on an existing one, or develop a process or an event, but it is the creation of a shared understanding among collaborators. With tools like e-mail, fax, telephone, collaboration has moved away from F2F interaction to a more sophisticated one. These tools used alone or with another do not make such collaboration, 2.0.
Collaboration 2.0 tools allow interaction among members with the ability to create content, update/Edit content, comment on content, have discussions, keep a history of activities, and operate directly in a cloud system. At the setup stage of a collaboration 2.0 activity, emailing or other communication means including F2F interaction may be used, basically to notify members of the activity. Once every member in the group is on board, a good Collaboration 2.0 tool can be used throughout the activity without using emails or F2F interactions. David Coleman wrote how a CEO of a software company mistakenly sent a confidential information to him by email instead of another “David”. The CEO later called to correct the situation, but time (which is money) had already been lost by the time the information was sent to the intended David. This is a classical example of the advantages of using collaboration 2.0 tools.
One factor I think makes collaborators to switch between email/phone, and collaboration 2.0 tools is lack of commitment in the part of the collaborators. With my experience in collaborative class projects, I found out that collaborators are more committed in the collaboration 1.0 case than in the 2.0. This is not a problem with the collaboration 2.0 tools but with the collaborators.
Collaboration 2.0 tools allow both synchronous and asynchronous collaborations. I think this is of great benefit over the F2F collaboration.