Researchers as well as practitioners often elevate collaborative governance as a necessary condition for effective responses to extreme events. This research has a dominating focus on large-scale catastrophes and disasters, whereas little attention is devoted to less serious emergencies. Another void concerns performance measurement. Addressing these gaps, this study investigates plausible explanations for collaborative activity and outcomes in response to extreme winter conditions in Sweden. Analysis of a survey of Swedish public managers suggests that, in this case, collaborative action is associated with preparatory actions and disruptions affecting other organizations. The analysis generates conflicting findings regarding underlying explanations for collaborative outcomes.