Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to study why collaboration among police, fire, and ambulance services is minimised at accident scenes. Design/methodology/approach - Observations and semi-structured interviews were carried out during 2007-2008. The data material comprises a total of 248 hours of observations on 20 occasions and 57 interviews with 80 people.Findings - The study identifies the difference between rhetoric and practice in connection with accident work. Collaboration is seen as a rhetorical ideal rather than something that is carried out in normal practice. Asymmetry, uncertainty and lack of incentives are important explanations as to why only limited forms of collaboration are actually implemented.Research limitations/implications - The paper shows a distinction between collaboration as rhetoric and practical collaboration at accident scenes. Practical implications The article proposes a multi-faceted collaboration concept. In this way, collaboration can be developed and refined.Originality/value - The results of the study show that police, fire, and ambulance services want to develop excellent forms of collaboration at the accident scene, but avoid this as it leads to uncertainty and asymmetries and because of a lack of incentives. However, simpler forms of collaboration may be realistic in the organisation of everyday work at accident scenes.