How to Improve Team Collaboration: Remote Work, Hybrid Teams, and the Best Collaboration Software

By Dr. Janice Perkins, PhD, PCC | Executive Coach and Leadership Communication Researcher

We've invested enormous amounts of money in technology designed to help people work together. Yet organizations still struggle with communication, collaboration, accountability, and trust.

Why?

Because collaboration is not simply a technology problem. It's a chemistry problem.

As an executive coach and leadership researcher, I study what makes professional relationships click and what causes them to break down. My doctoral research on interpersonal chemistry explores the relational conditions that allow people to connect, contribute, and accomplish meaningful work together.

And here's what I want leaders to understand: You can have the best project management software, communication platforms, and collaboration tools available and still have a dysfunctional team.

Technology can organize the work. It cannot create the relational conditions necessary for people to do that work well together.

Let's look at four common questions about improving collaboration in today's workplace.

Best software options for team collaboration in remote work

The best remote collaboration software depends on what your team needs to accomplish and where communication is breaking down.

Some teams need better visibility into projects. Others struggle with communication, accountability, decision-making, or simply knowing who owns what.

Before investing in another platform, I encourage leaders to ask a different question: What problem are we actually trying to solve?

A communication platform won't fix unclear decision rights. A project management system won't solve a lack of trust. And another virtual meeting won't necessarily improve collaboration if people don't feel comfortable speaking honestly.

Here are several established options to consider:

Microsoft Teams supports shared-document collaboration, Slack organizes conversations into channels, and Asana makes tasks, owners, and deadlines visible.  

My recommendation is to choose technology that supports how your team needs to work rather than expecting your team to adapt endlessly to new technology.

But there's a leadership question underneath all of this: Do people know what they're responsible for, who makes decisions, and how to communicate when something isn't working?

If the answer is no, software isn't your first problem.

Compare leading project management software for agile teams.

Agile teams need to respond to change, collaborate across functions, prioritize effectively, and maintain accountability without becoming buried in processes.

Several leading platforms support these needs:

• Jira: Particularly suited to software development teams using Scrum, Kanban, sprint planning, and backlog management.

• Asana: Useful for cross-functional teams that need clear task ownership, visual workflows, and project tracking.

• monday.com: Offers customizable boards, timelines, dependencies, and project dashboards.

• Trello: A simpler visual option for teams using Kanban-style workflows.

These distinctions reflect documented product capabilities rather than independent performance testing.  

But here's where I challenge leaders to think differently.

Agile isn't just about moving tasks across a board. It's about developing the ability to respond to changing circumstances without losing alignment, accountability, or trust.

I often work with leaders who struggle to move from controlling the work to developing people who can own the work.

That requires more than delegation. It requires clarity around agency and decision rights.

Does your team know which decisions they can make independently? When should they involve other stakeholders? What happens when priorities change? Can someone challenge a decision without being viewed as difficult?

In my research on interpersonal chemistry, agency and legitimacy emerged as important relational conditions. People need to experience appropriate ownership and have their contributions recognized.

A project management platform can show who owns a task. Leadership determines whether that person actually has the authority to own it.

The best Agile software should make collaboration easier, but the leader still has to create the conditions for collaboration to happen.

How to improve collaboration in a hybrid office environment

Hybrid work introduces an interesting leadership challenge. Some people interact face-to-face regularly, while others participate primarily through screens.

Over time, organizations can unintentionally develop two different employee experiences.

Those physically present may have more informal conversations, greater visibility into decisions, and easier access to leadership. Remote employees may receive information later or feel disconnected from the conversations that shape their work.

This isn't necessarily intentional. But the impact can still be significant.

To improve collaboration in a hybrid workplace, I encourage leaders to focus on four things.

1. Make decision-making visible. Important decisions shouldn't depend on who happened to be in the office that day. Clarify who makes decisions, who needs to contribute, and how outcomes are communicated.

2. Establish communication agreements. Teams need shared expectations about response times, meeting participation, feedback, and when a conversation should move from email to a phone or video call.

3. Create intentional opportunities for connection. Don't assume that putting people in the same meeting creates meaningful interaction. Give employees opportunities to exchange perspectives, challenge ideas, and contribute.

4. Address relational drag. I use this term to describe the energy lost when people spend more time navigating misunderstandings, defensiveness, unclear expectations, or interpersonal tension than accomplishing meaningful work.

One of the biggest mistakes I see is assuming that because employees are friendly, they are collaborating effectively.

Friendliness is not the same as chemistry.

In my research, chemistry is more than connection. It is a generative interactional system in which something meaningful becomes possible between people.

A team can enjoy one another and still struggle to make decisions, hold each other accountable, or work through conflict.

The real measure of collaboration isn't how well people get along. It's what they can accomplish together.

Tips for improving communication within a distributed team.

Distributed teams require more intentional communication because employees don't share the same physical environment.

Without hallway conversations, body language, and informal opportunities to clarify misunderstandings, people can begin filling in the blanks with assumptions.

Someone doesn't respond to a message.

A colleague challenges a recommendation.

A leader makes a decision without explaining the reasoning.

Suddenly, employees are creating stories about what those behaviors mean.

One of the most important communication skills I teach is learning to separate observations from interpretations.

For example:

"You didn't respond to my message yesterday."

That's an observation.

"You don't respect my work."

That's an interpretation.

When we confuse the two, we often create unnecessary conflict.

Here are five practices I recommend for distributed teams:

1. Lead with curiosity. Before assigning intentions to someone's behavior, ask questions.

2. Choose the right communication channel. Not every disagreement belongs in an email or messaging thread. Sometimes a live conversation is necessary.

3. Clarify expectations. Define responsibilities, deadlines, communication preferences, and decision-making authority.

4. Recognize different communication needs. Some people process information verbally, while others need time to reflect. Effective communication makes room for those differences.

5. Create room for productive disagreement. Employees should be able to challenge ideas, raise concerns, and offer different perspectives without fearing punishment or humiliation.

My research on chemistry highlights the importance of dignity, attunement, containment, and agency in relational interactions.

Those conditions become especially important when people are communicating across distance.

The goal isn't to eliminate every misunderstanding. It's to develop enough relational capacity that people can recognize tension, address it, and move forward together.

You Don't Have a Collaboration Problem. You Have a Chemistry Problem.

Organizations often respond to communication challenges by introducing another tool, restructuring a team, or scheduling more meetings.

Sometimes those solutions are necessary.

But before investing in another platform, I encourage leaders to examine what is happening between their people.

Are employees withholding information because they don't trust one another?

Are managers making decisions that should belong to their teams?

Are people avoiding difficult conversations?

Do employees understand how their work contributes to the larger organization?

And perhaps most importantly, are the interactions between people generating momentum or creating relational drag?

Technology can help us communicate faster, organize projects, and work across distances.

But technology cannot replace the human conditions that make collaboration productive.

You don't build a collaborative team simply by giving people better tools. You build one by creating the conditions where people can think, contribute, challenge, and accomplish something meaningful together.

That's the power of leadership chemistry.

Dr. Janice Perkins, PhD, PCC, is an executive coach, leadership communication researcher, and founder of Capacity. Her work focuses on leadership chemistry, executive team development, organizational culture, and helping leaders create the conditions for stronger collaboration and meaningful change.