Using Adversarial Collaboration Research Theory to Advance Teamwork and Innovation

A concept popularized by Nobel Prize-winning behavioral psychologist Daniel Kahneman in the late 1990s, adversarial collaboration is an approach to research that involves teams with opposing theories, hypotheses, or interpretations of evidence working together to solve a problem (Nature, 2025; Pappas, 2025). The idea is that, through collaboration, these two (or more) groups will arrive at a mutually agreeable result, and in the process provide a balanced perspective of the issue (Nature, 2025; Pappas, 2025). Aside from successfully reconciling their differences and fostering group trust, the innovation that results from collaborations borne out of opposing views also has the capacity to challenge the status quo, particularly in the workplace.

Contradicting other ideas is the established norm within the realm of research, and in some cases, business. It is not uncommon to see different research teams proposing contrasting ideas on a particular subject. Yet this tactic does little to promote discourse, a necessary precursor to innovation (Jain, 2023). Engaging in adversarial collaboration challenges both parties to look at the problem or issue from a different perspective and work towards creating a shared truth (Ellemers, et al., 2020). To do so requires collaborating on all aspects of the project, thus increasing its rigor, promoting diversity, and challenging fixed mindsets, all necessary aspects of good team functioning. Further, accepting the possibility of being wrong is a necessary aspect of adversarial collaboration (Nature, 2025). Working with individuals who are open to engaging with competing ideas and admitting when they are wrong helps foster teamwork and promotes a growth mindset for all team members.

Originating in the psychological sciences, the concept of adversarial collaboration is being seen in different sectors such as business, technology, and in neurological sciences (Accelerating Research, n.d., Nature, 2025). While detractors may critique this approach as being too time-consuming or antagonistic, likening it to nothing more than a debate, this binarism presupposes that one group “wins” (Ellemers, et al., 2020, Nature, 2025). While a healthy dose of competition serves as a good motivator, engaging in the deliberate act of reconciling contradictory results, whereby all parties involved participate in the process of critically examining the data and incompatibilities in sum and negotiating consensus is an opportunity for innovation and team growth.

Instead of separating rivals or teams with opposing viewpoints (or pitting them against one another), why not try traveling against the grain and have them work together next time? Despite the inherent contradiction in its name, adversarial collaboration could be the ally you’ve been looking for.

References

Accelerating Research. (n.d.). Open Accelerated Team Science. https://www.acceleratingresearch.org/

Ellemers, N., Fiske, S., Abele, A., Koch, A., Yzerbyt, V. (2020). Adversarial alignment enables competing models to engage in cooperative theory building toward cumulative science. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7148555/

Jain, N. (2023). What is Innovation? Definition, Types, Examples and Process. https://ideascale.com/blog/what-is-innovation/

Nature. (6 May 2025). Make science more collegial: why the time for ‘adversarial collaboration’ has come. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-01379-3

Pappas, S. (1 April 2025). Rival scientists are teaming up to break scientific stalemates. https://www.apa.org/monitor/2025/04-05/adversarial-research-collaboration