Earlier
this year I have blogged about how different values shape the three sectors:
the public, for profit and nonprofit sector. I argue that there are fundamental
differences in core values. While I still believe this to be true,
collaboration between the sectors can serve as a fruitful way of uniting forces
in order to achieve a common goal. It might even serve the purpose of
complementing the different values found in each sector, and as such partnering
up can be a way of compensating for weaknesses.
Collaboration
offers opportunities for reducing costs, building synergies and crafting more
holistic solutions by merging diverse approaches (Yankey & Willen, 2010;
United Way Worldwide, 2008). Despite the long list of benefits a collaborative
strategy can entail, there are numerous pitfalls to be navigated as well.
Broadly collaboration has been called “the new strategic planning”, and it is
without a doubt key to plan strategically if the benefits are to exceed the
costs (Yankey & Willen, 2010). The following three cases will help to
demonstrate some pros and cons of collaboration.
La Alianza Hispana & Massachusetts
Department of Social Services
The
proposal for collaboration between La Alianza and DSS is a great example of how
organizations in different sectors can potentially work together to complement
each other.
La Alianza
could provide DSS with specialized knowledge and a community outreach most
government agencies can’t obtain by themselves. On the other hand partnering up
with DSS would allow La Alianza to potentially have a more thorough impact in
their clientele’s lives by giving them legal capacity and thus achieving a
broader mission. The public sector is often characterized by an underlying
rigidness, which collaboration with a nonprofit could serve to loosen up. On
the other hand the nonprofit could gain access to a broader range of tools.
In this
case the risks include mission drift, since their missions may not be adequately
aligned, and uncertainty regarding funding. For La Alianza there is also the
risk of loosing the trust they have earned in the community.
Timberland and City Gear
Among the
recent trends affecting the private sector is a push for a more socially
responsible production. Since profit is the main purpose the most liable and
legitimate way of realizing this may be by increasing the collaboration with
nonprofits. On the other hand many nonprofits currently face issues of funding.
Neoliberal policies have resulted in program cuts and the recession in 2008 has
further increased the economic pressure on the sector (Hall, 2010; Yankey &
Willen, 2010).
The
partnership between Timberland and City Gear was for a period of time exemplary
of the intersection of profit and altruistic purposes served in the nonprofit
sector, benefitting both organizations. However it turned out to be very
fragile in times of distress, especially due to a lack of planning. Also this
case questions whether collaboration serves to create mutual understanding
in sectors that operate with divergent goals and values.
Seattle Art Museum and First Things First
The final
case is an example of two nonprofits forming a coalition in order to achieve
public support for a referendum that would ensure a tax levy – The Seattle Art
Museum and First Things First. Trust was the main issue here along with flaws
in the role distribution. For most nonprofits their mission is at the heart of
the organization, as opposed to much of the public sector, where bureaucracy and
regulations creates the framework for a lot of operations, and the private
sector, where profit is the main driver. This may complicate matters for nonprofits
working collaboratively, since it often entails giving up some degree of
autonomy or compromising, which could create opposition when working with
individuals who are highly committed to the cause (Yankey & Willen, 2010).
It is less clear-cut what each party brings to the table in this case compared
to collaborative efforts across sectors, which increases the need for a
thorough side-by-side analysis and strategic planning, when two nonprofits are
uniting forces.
References:
Elias, Jean (1996).
"Timberland and Community Involvement." Harvard
Business School
"Funding Seattle's New Art Museum and Low-Income Housing: The Politics of Interest Groups and Tax Levies (A)" (1996). Cascade Center for Public Service, Public Service Curriculum Exchange
"Funding Seattle's New Art Museum and Low-Income Housing: The Politics of Interest Groups and Tax Levies (A)" (1996). Cascade Center for Public Service, Public Service Curriculum Exchange
Hall, Peter
Dobkin (2010). Historical Perspectives on Nonprofit Organizations in the United
States. In: Renz, David O, ed. 2010. The
Jossey-Bass Handbook of Nonprofit Leadership and Management. Jossey-Bass.
San Francisco, CA.
United Way Worldwide (2008). "Best Practices Summary: Collaboration, Coalition-Building and Merger."
Varley, Pamela (1996). "Partners in Child Protective Services: The Department of Social Services and La Alianza Hispana." John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University
United Way Worldwide (2008). "Best Practices Summary: Collaboration, Coalition-Building and Merger."
Varley, Pamela (1996). "Partners in Child Protective Services: The Department of Social Services and La Alianza Hispana." John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University
Yankey, J.A. & Willen, C.K. 2010.
Collaboration and Strategic Alliances. In: The Jossey-Bass Handbook of Nonprofit Leadership and Management.
Renz, David O, ed. 375-400. Jossey-Bass. San Francisco, CA.