As urban congestion levels rise, a well-functioning traffic management is paramount. Drivers and travelers rely on a multitude of services and information channels for planning and routing journeys. These include private as well as public actors. Capabilities and responsibilities are both distributed among municipalities, the Swedish Transport Administration (STA) and several service providers. The local and national authorities each manage interconnected yet distinct parts of the road infrastructure with sometimes conflicting goals. Similarly, service providers compete by giving their customers better route guidance than the competitors, which could risk sub-optimizing the traffic system as a whole. Collaborative Traffic Management (CTM) is a concept that strives to alleviate challenges of these conflicting goals by enabling a ‘win-win-win’ for citizens, private service providers and authorities alike. The concept proposed by the TM 2.0 forum is currently being tested in the Socrates2.0 project in several pilots across Europe. The Swedish project Samverkande Trafikledning follows these developments and relates them to the current Swedish traffic management practice to explore how CTM could be implemented in Sweden focusing on the 2025 time frame. As a means of gauging the potential of CTM, the merits of improved information to road users is further explored in a simulation study of Stockholm performed by TU Delft, indicating substantial benefits of better traffic information and route guidance. While complete CTM is most likely not within the near project time scope, to improve traffic management and prepare a gradual development towards CTM, a road map containing a set of direct actions is proposed for the very near future. These include 1) the STA moving towards national domain responsibility for traffic data, 2) continuous end-to-end assessment of data exchange and use, 3) establishing common processes for dynamic regulations via geofencing, 4) a clear data channel and format strategy, 5) detailed and clarified rerouting priorities, 6) improved public interagency coordination, 7) the setup of a permanent Swedish CTM forum with public and private members, 8) establishing KPI:s and SLA:s for data exchange, 9) improving location referencing practice and finally 10) initiating work towards a bilaterally shared situational awareness.