Partnering across sectors

The need for partners to maintain an awareness that sectors have different cultures and practices is constant in the implementation of collaboration and integrated approaches.  In the Pre establishment phase this is most relevant to the way you approach engaging broader stakeholders and the co design of the Schools as Community Platforms.  

Within the community sector there is a diverse array of organisation structures and underpinning beliefs that drive mindset and practices.  The Schools as Community Platforms model potentially works across early childhood development, health, education, family support, sport and recreation, adult learning and employment sectors.  Each subset within these sectors has its own perspectives on improving life outcomes for families, often complicated by periodic competitive processes and reluctance or inability to commit to long-term strategies.

Blending the flexibility that is inherent in smaller purpose driven organisations in the community sector and the strong processes and influence of large government departments takes effort and understanding from all parties.  With the best will in the world, the parties are still bound by the context of their organisation and changes to entrenched mindsets and practices will push boundaries that are untested.  Partners need to recognise the boundaries and explore where the compromises can and need to happen. 

Despite the differences, they mostly share the common goal of improving outcomes for families and/or children.  Engagement in this phase is still limited to core partners who are part of the ongoing system (decision makers in local government, community health, state government departments) with an invitation to imagine how their aspirations for the same community may be assisted by the establishment of Schools as Community Platforms and how they could see their sectors involvement.

The value of using boundary spanning roles to support understanding between different sectors is referred to in the Co design section and the boundary spanning skills, equally awareness of difference and a mindset of curiosity for solutions is important in early cross sector conversations.

Inviting input from others to the high-level plan helps to raise awareness of potential design flaws or future roadblocks even if not all issues are resolved in the planning phase.  Modifications to the original plan may be needed to get a core partner over the line.  This is a judgement call about ensuring the core purpose is still maintained, when specific outcomes or strategies change.  Some aspects of the design may be left for future negotiation once implementation progresses.

Our Experience/Learnings

The partnering for the planning process works well when senior decision makers embrace the concept of working differently, are championing the project to their teams, and brokering the removal of roadblocks from within their own system. 

Organisations entering partnering with government departments were small and used to being able to act quickly and having a small and agile structure for approval of decisions. The multiple levels and portfolio protocols in government departments are entrenched and can be frustrating so while the project is seeking to stretch boundaries there is also a need to acknowledge the additional complexities and pressures that department staff are working in. Patience has been rewarded over time. 

 What we have learned through this process is that trust and good relationships at the start of the process does not guarantee a smooth process all the way to completion. Those involved need to establish trusting relationships with each individual involved in the process. While delegation and authorisation certainly go a long way, effort still needs to be expended to build understanding and trust with each new player involved in developing plans and agreement. Partners should be prepared for staff turnover and potential changes in departments or divisions, necessitating additional effort to revisit the partnership's purpose and vision.

Progress from the vision to implementation needs a willingness to take calculated risks by all partners and use a partnership approach to work in uncomfortable spaces to get to better results. There were times when one party sought to introduce rules or conditions on the implementation that were grounded in risk management or previous practice but had not been agreed in early negotiations.