Collaboration seems fine in theory. It's comparatively easy to agree about "what we all want to do".
The practicalities of collaboration ("how we're going to do it") are more problematic, especially if the people involved have different ideas of "how things are usually done". Our own cultural norms seem perfectly normal to us, so normal that we don't even notice or question them. When we collaborate across cultures we find other people start doing things differently, and it can seem they are "being difficult".
One of the cultural clashes that intrigues me is where one cultural norm is to work in planned, hierarchical ways and another cultural norm is to work in an emergent way in a horizontal organisational structure.
Naturally the hierachical organisation is accustomed to target-setting and plans. So the heirarchy people are thinking "What exactly is everyone going to do? Let's settle down and get it all agreed properly so we can get started." But the emergent people are thinking "Why all the holdups? We need to get started. It's much too early to firm up things that we haven't explored yet."
Nobody says this in so many words. They may not even realaise what"s happening. There's just a feeling of frustration because it seems to nearly everyone that "some people" are being difficult and stopping "the rest of us" from getting started as well as we usually do. Of course exactly who the "difficult people" are depends on individual preferences for the best way to get started.