A Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) is a document that outlines the preliminary terms and understandings between two or more parties who plan to collaborate on a project. While MoUs are viewed often as strategic partnerships, their true effectiveness may be under question.
Some may opine that MoUs serve as acts of self-glorification for the companies and their key people involved. When companies announce an MoU, it is typically accompanied by media coverage in print or social media. These public displays are aimed at showcasing the forward-thinking nature behind the MoUs, however, the reality may be different.
The companies who have built a strategic partnership must ensure tangible outcomes or meaningful collaborations. The focal persons need to actively follow-up with the activities either parties need to complete. Without a robust framework to ensure that the terms of the MoU are completed, the essence of the MoU is lost. Companies frequently fail to reassess their progress, resulting in a stagnant agreement that creates delays.
Another prevalent issue with MoUs is their reduction to mere photo opportunities for social media. The signing ceremonies are meticulously planned, with high-ranking executives from both sides giving camera time. However, the reality behind these photos may have a different story. It can be an attempt for corporate vanity instead of a genuine step towards collaboration.
Perhaps the most fundamental critique of MoUs is the argument that they are unnecessary. If two parties are genuinely interested in collaborating, resolving a need, addressing a problem, or completing mutually beneficial tasks, they would simply begin by sharing plans, highlighting ideas, putting down action points and deciding upon a timeline.
If the parties are honest to themselves, this planning process will not take more than two weeks before they begin their work. The extensive process of planning, drafting, reviewing, and approving a MoU can be seen as a bureaucratic exercise that wastes time, energy, and resources.
In many cases, the time spent on formalizing a MoU could be better utilized by pursuing the project. The process of negotiation and approval often delays the implementation process and creates bottlenecks. Instead of focusing on creating a lengthy document, the parties could engage in immediate, practical steps that lead to real progress.
Despite these criticisms, it is important to recognize that MoUs do have their place in certain contexts. They can provide a framework for collaboration, outline responsibilities, and set expectations. However, their utility is dependent on the commitment of the parties involved to actively pursue the goals outlined in the document.
While MoUs are intended to be strategic tools that facilitate collaboration, their actual impact is often overshadowed by their use as instruments of self-glorification that turns then into a corporate memorabilia.
