Collaboration Learning Resources 1

Collaboration

What is collaboration?

Collaboration generally refers to individuals or organisations 'working together' to address problems and deliver outcomes that are not easily or effectively achieved by working alone. Collaborative practice is now central to the way we work, deliver services and produce innovations. Collaborative relationships are attractive to organisations because the combination of effort and expertise produces benefits greater than those achieved working alone.

What is collaborative practice?

Collaborative practice involves community service organisations working together to achieve shared goals.

In the community services delivery system, collaboration is achieved when organisations develop mechanisms - structures, processes and skills - for bridging organisational and interpersonal differences, and together arrive at outcomes that they value.

Community service organisations generally collaborate to:

• improve the quality or scope of service to their clients, and/or
• provide administrative or service delivery efficiencies.

A continuum of collaborative practice

Collaborative practice can be seen as a continuum of relationships. The relationships formed between organisations can vary in terms of the formality of arrangements and how activities or functions are shared or integrated. Arrangements can range from informal agreements for information sharing, such as inter-agency or other network meetings, through to amalgamations and mergers, where a formal process fully integrates two organisations into a single operation.

Relationships may also differ in terms of:

• length of relationship (one-off activity, time limited or ongoing)
• degree of risk and commitment
• type of outcomes sought, and
• level of organisational autonomy retained.

1.    Benefits of Collaboration

Although many community sector organisations compete with other organisations for access to government and private funds, collaboration between organisations can provide important benefits to organisations and their clients or constituents.

Working with other organisations, either though informal networks or more formal partnerships can provide:

• greater efficiency and less duplicated effort. For example, a consortia approach to a competitive funding round can deliver integrated service models, achieve broader geographic coverage or reduced costs
• access to additional resources or lower costs through sharing resources such as office space, administration or other aspects of an organisation's operation
• improved service coordination across agencies, with better pathways or referral systems for service users
• a holistic approach to meeting client needs, with better and more efficient access to the range of services required, improved quality and consistency of service and greater responsiveness to needs
• organisational knowledge and improved service system capability
• greater innovation and flexibility to respond to changing, emerging or more complex client needs and changing operations and operational environments
• access to up-to-date information, new ideas and strategic thinking
• improved capacity to demonstrate best practice
• political and lobbying strength
• increased capacity to successfully submit tenders or expressions of interest and to deliver projects, and
• additional expertise, support or legal protection for small, new, or struggling organisations.

Over time, the combined benefits of collaboration create new opportunities for partnering with others to build strong, safe, healthy and vital communities and a sustainable future together.

2.    Principles of Collaboration

Evidence-based assessment of successful collaboration highlights six partnership principles:

1. Recognise and accept the need for partnership
2. Develop clarity and realism of purpose
3. Ensure commitment and ownership
4. Develop and maintain trust
5. Create clear and robust partnership arrangements, and
6. Monitor, measure and learn.

The development of a shared vision and values between collaborating organisations, has been highlighted as crucial to successful collaboration.

A successful collaboration or partnership also needs to be approached systematically. Without clear goals and careful planning, collaborating organisations risk misunderstandings, disagreements or other problems arising.

Systematic planning for collaborative ventures involves:

• Assessment of the likely benefits to the organisation and the venture's impact on its services or activities, the attributes and suitability of potential partner/s, and the venture's potential risks.
• Alignment of goals and values. There needs to be a basic agreement about the purpose of the collaboration, what the organisations will try to achieve together, mutual expectations and the principles or values by which the partners will operate. The principles need to include agreements to operate with transparency and openness in dealings with one another.
• Negotiation of details. The agreement between organisations needs to detail partners' specific roles and responsibilities, practical issues such as time frames and financial arrangements, and any other terms and conditions of the agreement, such as confidentiality and intellectual property.
• Documentation. The agreement between the partners needs to be documented, either in a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) or, where there are resource or legal implications, in a formal agreement or contract.

3.    Collaborative Practice Models

“Real collaboration is authentic working together across organisational boundaries toward common goals.”  

Harrington R. (Wasserman. L. N/D. Results of United Way’s  Collaboration Learning Project. United Way of Greater Milwaukee).

There are various models of collaboration agencies may pursue. In this section we explore the degree of integration each model requires, the advantages and disadvantages and illustrate with accompanying case studies.

3.1 Interagency meetings

Introduction

Interagency networks and groups have in the past been mostly informal collaborations usually between organisations and agencies working in a similar area of service delivery such as disability, mental health, youth or aged cared. This approach is very effective where there is management support, time allocation and strong leadership/role modeling.

Due to the increasing time and human resource issues for service providers today there has been a move to a more structured approach for Interagencies with groups developing agreed Terms of Reference that clearly define the role of the group and the outcomes expected from the time allocated. 

Advantages

• A critical mass can be developed to support advocacy and to hold sector events and activities.
• Information can easily be shared across a number of services.
• The groups can act as informal learning circles and Communities of Practice.
• Regular interaction builds trust and reciprocity.
• Formal collaborations may arise from connections made during networking.

Disadvantages

• Services suffering from work overload may struggle to find the time for informal collaborative approaches (Munn. P. 2003). Empirically, evidence indicates that this is particularly true where there are no clearly stated outcomes for the organisation or client.
• Competitive tendering may inhibit may inhibit collaboration between local services  

3.2 Community of Practice

Introduction

Some Inter-agencies have valued added to the general benefits of networking by becoming Communities of Practice. Communities of Practice are groups of people who share a concern or passion for something they do and learn how to do it better as they interact regularly.  

They become in effect Learning Networks focussed on improving outcomes for service users by:

• sharing what they are learning in their day to day experiences
• developing new approaches to more holistic support for service users
• sharing resources and information
• providing support and encouragement for network members.

The basic principles that underpin Communities of Practice are:

• learning is social and comes from the things we do everyday
• knowledge and activity are strongly connected
• growth is nurtured and promoted.

Advantages

• Connect people through their passion.
• Connect people outside their ‘silos’.
• Enable issues to be dealt with holistically.
• Ensure input of everyone involved is valued.
• Provide opportunity for flexibility and creativity (that is service pathways).
• Support adaptability to change.  
• Build trust and reciprocity.
• Enables the ongoing reflection, negotiation and learning to balance the tensions essential in seeking solutions to complex social problems.

Disadvantages

• Require commitment and a real interest in learning from each other for them to work effectively.
• Require people willing to acknowledge that service delivery can be improved using existing resources.

3.3 Co-location

Introduction

Organisations sharing expensive infrastructure. Co-location models of collaboration may be called “Service Hubs”, “Multi-Tenanted Service Centres”, “Service Clusters” and “one-stop-shops” and take a variety of forms.  A variety of collaboration models are well suited to also incorporate co-location into their approach. These include: co-governance, amalgamation, co-operatives and the lead agency model.

• Co-governance – a sub-committee based on an agreed number of representatives from each partnering agency provides the management and governance structure under the strategic oversight of one of the organisations acting as the auspicing body.
• Amalgamation -  partnering organisations merge to form a new entity which is made of an agreed number of representatives from the agencies involved.
• The co-operative model – a legally register non-trading co-operative, managed by a board consisting of members from each individual incorporated association involved in the collaboration.
• The lead agency model – the building lease is taken by a large organisation that then manages the premises with assistance from the management committees of the small organisations involved.  

Advantages

• Provide a one-stop-shop for service users and the community.
• Enable organisations to minimise the budget allocation to premises.
• Enable facilities such as training rooms to be shared.
• Make it practical to share expensive resources such as data projectors. 
• Reduce worker isolation and may increase security.
• Enable services to afford better accommodation.
• Enhance capacity to improve referral and provide a more holistic service delivery.

Disadvantages

• Lead agency carries high risk – lease/premises.
• Very, specific and clear documented rules/protocols needed to address risk and define boundaries.
• Risk of power imbalances.
• If a service participating in the co-location closes, it can be difficult to find a replacement, particularly in rural communities.
• Cost of building outfitting may be higher than expected.
• Co-location in itself may not improve service delivery.  
• Locating suitable buildings can be difficult in many rural and regional communities.
• Legal advice is recommend if you are thinking about being involved in a co-location.

3.4 Other Resource-sharing arrangements

Introduction

Resource sharing between not-for-profit organisations is often seen as a response to insufficient resources and increasing client and operational demands. In particular, small community service organisations may consider resource sharing to address threats to their viability.

However, resource sharing between agencies can generate a range of positive benefits, including increased organisational efficiency and effectiveness. Complex community challenges and issues can often be resolved by sharing costs and risks, and focussing on a shared resolution.

Applying the principles and tools of effective collaboration to the practical, operational aspects of service delivery may do more than ensure the future viability of organisations; it may be the point of difference of successful organisations in the future.

Resource sharing can take many forms and generally occurs between organisations that maintain their separate legal and distinctive identities.

The community services sector has a long history of collaboration through sharing resources, particularly its intellectual, knowledge, strategic and policy resources. There are successful examples of resource sharing across the full range of operational and governance resources required by community service organisations.

3.4.1 Models of resource sharing

3.4.1.1 Operational infrastructure

Resource sharing of infrastructure involves sharing a common provider or system and can include:

• motor vehicles
• corporate services that are difficult for small organisations to afford, such as finance and accounting and payroll
• marketing, communication and fundraising
• procurement or contract management services
• administration and service reception functions
• sharing office equipment, training and meeting facilities is also possible for organisations that are co-located in the one facility or complex.

3.4.1.2 Information and knowledge management

Shared information technology and business systems have been set up in regional communities and among clusters of small agencies in other localities. Examples include shared development and management of client or member databases, websites, e-commerce facilities, specialised resource libraries and IT support functions. Sharing databases that hold information about clients and/or members requires precautions to be in place to protect the privacy of individuals and ensure those affected consent to their details being shared.

3.4.1.3 Human resources

Sharing staff across separate programs and organisations is one strategy to strengthen recruitment and retention capacity. This is because it often enables organisations to offer full-time hours across a number of small programs. This may be particularly useful in rural and regional locations and in attracting candidates with specialised skills such as psychologists, counsellors and other health professionals. It may also assist organisations and individuals to manage risk across a number of short-term projects. When considering this option, it is important to clearly define the line management responsibilities and staff accountability requirements.

3.4.1.4 Service delivery infrastructure

Initiatives between agencies for more streamlined or integrated client service delivery processes can open up a range of opportunities for sharing systems and processes such as client assessment and case management systems. This has the potential to improve client experiences of service access, provide seamless pathways and minimise overlaps between services. A more efficient and cost-effective service delivery process and operational cost structure can free up new resources, including management and administration time, to improve client service quality and quantity.

3.4.1.5 Governance and professional development support

The challenge of providing ongoing development support for management committees and staff is faced by all community service organisations. It is particularly acute for rural and regional services where local support, expertise and training infrastructure may be limited or where demand is spread over wide geographic areas. Successful resource-sharing models that demonstrate the benefits of resource sharing to support staff and management committees have been piloted through the Queensland Department of Communities and Disability Services Queensland's Building Links funding initiative. The department's introduction of Standards for Community Services and Disability Service Standards raises opportunities for smaller community organisations within a locality to consider collaborating to procure quality system support such a policy development, training and shared quality management personnel.

3.4.1.6 Multi-service outlets

Various models of co-location and shared resources have evolved to respond to local community needs and circumstances. Partnerships between local government and NGO community services have evolved hybrid forms of co-location and resource sharing from multi-service outlets.

Advantages

There is a range of potential benefits of co-location and its related resource sharing. Larger benefits are more likely to be realised and costs minimised with appropriate planning, assessment, explicit agreement making and ongoing review processes. However, practical constraints need to be considered and managed in relation to co-location.

The potential benefits of co-location and sharing resources include the following:

• a multi-tenant facility can provide an opportunity for a highly visible profile and a unified presence within a community
• a better quality facility and accessible location can be established than could be afforded by individual co-tenants
• a well-resourced facility with shared office infrastructure can be accessed that otherwise would be unaffordable for individual tenants, for example access to meeting and training facilities, car parking
• cost savings can be gained in areas such as utilities and other building and service supports, for example cleaning, gardening, building and computer maintenance
• improved customer service can be gained from external service providers responding to larger purchasing power
• increased informal peer support opportunities can occur through sharing work environments
• greater flexibility for purchasing capital or investment in upgrading can occur because of shared contributions, shared use and shared risk
• opportunities occur for sharing new resources and technologies as they arise. A well-functioning co-location arrangement can foster new ideas and resource-sharing opportunities. For example, access to technology and equipment that has high benefits but low usage, such as expensive data projection equipment can be cost-effective if shared across a number of user groups.

Disadvantages

There are a number of key challenges of co-location and resource sharing.   Critical success factors in the not-for-profit sector are likely to mirror those documented in the private and government sectors:

• deciding which services to share
• leadership and good governance arrangements
• supporting and managing people
• finding a balance between change processes and time frames and the effects of change
• maintaining service quality through the transition
• adapting to changed client profiles or demand
• building a new culture
• managing and monitoring costs
• maintaining accountability and performance management, and
• maintaining the agreements.

An emphasis on relationship (trust, communication) and cultural fit factors (shared vision, values and service culture) are also likely to be highlighted in the not-for-profit sector. Organisations need to be confident of their ability to work constructively with others in an open and flexible manner. Careful negotiation and establishing clear agreements prior to commencement is critical.

The costs of change, such as new logos, floor plan re-organisation and social and psychological impacts on staff, can also be a challenge to organisations considering co-location and resource sharing.

Resource sharing, particularly co-location arrangements, can be time intensive to establish, and require reserves of cash and capital as well as extensive staff management time. There may also be a time lag in realising the benefits. When benefits are realised, they may not be obvious to stakeholders, unless clear cost analysis and careful monitoring are maintained.

The greatest barrier to the take-up of co-location and resource sharing initiatives for many organisations may be the lack of a strong driver for organisations to take the initiative and prioritise this activity over other demands. Unless an organisation is facing serious viability issues, other client and service management issues may take priority.

Working with others to achieve agreed sharing of resources can deliver a range of the benefits of collaboration for organisations, their staff and clients, and it is important resource sharing is seen as a means to provide clients high-quality and sustainable services.

Detailed assessment and careful planning are needed prior to starting co-location or major resource sharing agreements and to ensure actual financial and operational benefits are identified. Small, planned steps that can demonstrate success will build confidence that resource sharing can be a means to building a network of more effective non-government community service organisations. Building an effective evaluation and learning system about what works and what doesn't work will help to build a collaborative culture within an organisation and within the wider community service sector.

3.5 Co-operatives

Introduction

Although they are legally recognised entities, co-operatives have a different type of structure to companies, trusts, incorporated associations and other similar organisations. This is defined by a set of principles which shapes their character. The International Cooperative Alliance definition of co-operatives is:

“… an autonomous association of persons united voluntarily to meet their common economic, social and cultural needs and aspirations through jointly owned democratically controlled enterprise.”

The principles that define co-operatives include: self help, self responsibility, democracy, equality, equity and solidarity. Co-operative members agree to operate ethically bound by the values of openness, social responsibility and caring for others. There are more than 2,000 co-operatives in Australia and around 180 in Queensland, however only a relatively small number are based in the Community Sector.

Many organisations who choose to use the co-operative model to support their collaboration, do so because it offers a “flat” structure of governance with all members seen as equals and because of the approach's intrinsic values and principles.

Advantages

• Model incorporates intrinsic values and principles.
• “Flat” governance structure.
• Organisations can maintain autonomy. 
• Relationships can be strengthened.
• Joint funding can be trialled.

Disadvantages

• Time required to establish well.
• May be human resource intensive in early stages.
• Cost benefit may take time to show.
• Relationships need effort to maintain.
• One agency has to take the lead and responsibility for ensuring sound governance and risk management.
• Some funding bodies do not initially acknowledge Cooperatives as a legal governance structure.

3.6 Consortia/Partnerships

Introduction

Two or more organisations agree to formally documenting an agreement about the role of each agency without merging and creating a new legal entity. Joint funding can be applied for without the individual agencies losing their autonomy.

Advantages

• Organisations can maintain autonomy. This can be of particular advantage where small outreach services of large or statewide organisations wish to partner with other local services to share resources and improve outcomes for clients through a more holistic approach to service delivery.
• Relationships can be strengthened.
• Joint funding can be trialed.

Disadvantages

• Relationships need effort to maintain.
• One agency has to take the lead and responsibility for ensuring sound governance and risk management.

3.7 Mergers and Amalgamations

Introduction

Organisations working in similar area of the sector join together to become a single larger organisation, merging their governance and administration tasks.

Advantages

• Human resource efficiencies.
• Spreading cost of premises. 
• May enable services to be spread over a wider geographic area.
• Resource efficiencies.

Disadvantages

• Legal advice is recommended if you are establishing a new group.
• Loss of identity and autonomy.
• Time and resource intensive.
• Potential for clash of organisational values and cultures.
• Clients may not be as well supported by the new entity – less personal.
• Time required to develop and consolidate the new entity.
• Efficiencies do not happen overnight and initially the process may place high time and resource demand on the collaborating services.

Copyright

·      All material published on the Community Door website is licensed as Creative Commons Attribution Only as per the Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 Australia license. 

·      Unless otherwise stated, the material may be used without obtaining prior permission provided the author and organisation is acknowledged and the source is www.communitydoor.org.au.

·      If you submit content for publication, in any format, you acknowledge that you have all necessary rights, including copyright, in the material that you are contributing to the Community Door website and that you accept the material will be accessible to the public as per this licensed.

·       In certain exceptional cases, particular pages on the Community Door website may contain alternative copyright provisions. In these cases the specific copyright provisions will be clearly stated on the individual pages.