Very few governmental programs are implemented in isolation.
Most agencies and units of government are involved in a complicated set of intergovernmental partnerships.
In this time of shrinking budgets and heightened expectations, knowing how to collaborate effectively is more critical than ever before.
This article reviews seven tips to being an effective intergovernmental collaborator.
1.
Understand the time horizon of all the actors.
Each person in an intergovernmental collaboration will have different time horizons that impact their decisions, their willingness to collaborate, and their sense of urgency.
Understanding how the other participants' time frames impact their behavior and willingness to cooperate is critical.
Let's take the first example of a time frame: term of office.
If you are working with elected or appointed officials they are likely to be very sensitive to where they are in their term of office.
At the beginning of a term of office, an official might be very anxious to show quick progress to impress the voters who elected them that they are working on the issues they promised.
At the end of a term of office, on the other hand, an official might become quite cautious in your collaboration because they are fearful of the impact of the collaboration on their reelection efforts.
A similar dynamic applies to those who are appointed to their positions.
They may be removed or reaffirmed by the elected official who put them in office based on the success or failure of your collaboration.
Other potential collaborators may also be moved by timeframe.
For example, the director of a nonprofit may be appointed and reappointed on a yearly basis by a Board of Directors.
Naturally, such a director may be sensitive to how news of your collaboration and its success or failure may impact their appointment or reappointment.
Long-term civil service employees, on the other hand, may have the luxury of planning many years in the future.
Combining sensitivity to the ways in which all of these different terms of office impact perspective and willingness to collaborate is a critical part of being an effective intergovernmental collaborator.
2.
Understand the fiscal constraints of all the actors.
Every organization has its own peculiarities to its budget and the restraints on the way in which they can use its budgets.
Public sector agencies operate within a highly transparent environment.
Public budgets are developed with public input and participation and all aspects of their budgets are open to public scrutiny including individual salaries.
Nonprofit and corporate entities do not have this level of transparency with their budgets.
Learning to work with in the highly transparent public sector environment can be a struggle for these nonprofit and corporate partners in an intergovernmental collaboration.
This difference may translate to a lack of the quality in the way in which information is shared and distributed amongst the partners.
Setting up the ground rules about how the extra burdens of public sector transparency will impact the project's budget transparency at the beginning of the project will benefit everyone.
Another aspect to fiscal constraints in the public sector are the various rules that apply to how different "funds" can be used.
For example, public sector agencies frequently utilize "dedicated funds" that have restrictions on how that money may be used.
Dedicated funds cannot be shifted from one use to another.
In budgeting terminology this is called fungibility.
Public sector funds often lack fungibility.
This lack of flexibility in the movement of money can be confusing to nonprofit and corporate sector partners.
Another example of fiscal constraints are the requirements that attach to the receipt of certain kinds of federal grant monies.
A nonprofit that depends upon grant money may be highly sensitive to the federal "strings" attached to their funding.
These restraints may limit the types of activities, partnerships, and expenses that each type of partner in the collaboration can participate in funding.
Understanding these restraints that shape the collaboration will make each partner more effective in finding the best way to make common cause.
3.
Understand the mission and values of the other actors in the collaboration.
Some common value or vision has brought all of you to the table to discuss or implement the collaboration in which you are involved.
It is unlikely, however, that your mission completely overlaps with the mission of the other actors in the partnership.
In fact, you would be missing many opportunities for collaboration if you limited yourself to only those agencies and partners with whom you are certain you share a common mission and value.
It is not necessary for everyone to agree on a common mission.
It is necessary, however, that you understand enough about the mission and values of the other actors in the partnership that you understand how their mission shapes their behaviors in the collaboration.
For example, let's assume we are working in a collaboration involving a city that has received federal funding to provide shelter for the homeless and a nonprofit.
The nonprofit who runs the shelter is a religious organization whose mission is to provide spiritual counseling and salvation for its client.
As the city works to comply with federal reporting requirements, it may request that the religious organization collect certain information about the clients in the shelter as well as information about what happens to them after they leave the shelter.
The religious organization may resist this type of reporting as their priority is the spiritual health of the clients not accountability as understood by a federal grant requirement.
As such, they may not even collect the names of clients or routinely participate in follow-up data collection.
Failing to understand how the mission of the nonprofit and the mission of the city in this example lead to emphasis or deemphasis on different activities can lead to unnecessary friction in the partnership.
In some rare cases, partners in a collaboration may have missions and values which seem to conflict.
Collaboration may take place however if the various partners see something they can get out of the collaboration.
It may be that they only need to agree on the set of activities covered under the collaboration and not on the wider vision of their separate organizations.
As they say, "politics makes for strange bedfellows.
" 4.
Understand the constituencies of the other members.
Each actor in an intergovernmental collaboration is responsible to a different set of constituencies.
The nonprofit organization staff member may feel that their chief constituency is the Board of Directors of their agency and their clients.
A state agency employee may feel that the governor, the legislature and the public are their chief constituencies.
And of course none of those constituencies may be singular.
"The public" may translate to the members of the public who are active in interest groups who follow the issue on which you are collaborating.
Similarly, there are many members of the Legislature and it is not surprising that they do not speak with one voice.
It is not only important that you understand your own constituency, it is also important that you understand what groups and forces are impacting the other actors in your intergovernmental collaboration.
What may seem like needlessly resistant behavior on the part of one of your partners may be their attempt to represent the voices of some cross section of their constituents.
The challenge is in allowing members of the collaboration to represent those differing views while still finding successful ways to work together.
5.
Understand the particular statutes and rules that impact the other participants.
Some intergovernmental partners will be directly impacted by statutory language that require certain activities or prevents others that impact your collaboration.
It is not uncommon for state agency employees to know the particular Idaho code that sets up the parameters for their program.
The same is true of federal employees.
The same dynamics apply to administrative rules and regulations.
Collaborations that seem to threaten compliance with these statutes and regulations will engender resistance from these state, local, and federal employees.
To be an effective collaborator with agencies and governments that are directly impacted by statutes like this requires that the participants be given the chance to air their concerns and discuss the limitations and then evaluate what if any collaborative effort can happen within these constraints.
6.
Understand the professional preparation and point of view of the other participants.
All of us are shaped by the education and professional preparation that we have experienced that bring us to this point and this collaboration.
These different forms of preparation can shape our point of view on issues and processes.
For example, a scientist who has been trained in the field of biology will bring a set of assumptions about the value of science and the scientific method to questions of whether or not to introduce wolves into a particular ecosystem.
A rancher, on the other hand, may be thinking mostly about the economics of his ranching operation when evaluating information about wolves.
These two different points of view can lead to disagreement over what kinds of information to use in a collaborative process and how to value those various kinds of information.
An effective collaborator will understand how our different professional backgrounds and approaches shape what kind of information we value and how we use information.
One can easily see the challenges of combining accountants, members of the clergy, scientists, soldiers, and every other walk of life that leads us to where we are now.
7.
Understand that it will take more time and resources to collaborate but that we can and must do so! Sometimes the difficulties of intergovernmental collaboration make people wish they could just go back to their own cubicle and not worry about dealing with other agencies and units of government.
Effective governance, however, requires that we figure out how to work together.
In this time of diminished budgets and heightened expectations, we all owe our constituents and the public our best efforts at finding new ways to best meet our pressing needs.
So we need collaboration even though it is harder than working alone.
Providing your self, your staff and your boss with a realistic understanding of the additional time, resources and effort that collaboration requires is critical.
There is an investment that has to be made in building and sustaining the collaboration.
It may be tempting to try to avoid this investment in the hopes that the collaboration will save money later.
A realistic understanding of the extra time and effort and resources that an effective collaboration requires will help each partner burning the necessary ingredients to the table to create and sustain the partnership.
Most agencies and units of government are involved in a complicated set of intergovernmental partnerships.
In this time of shrinking budgets and heightened expectations, knowing how to collaborate effectively is more critical than ever before.
This article reviews seven tips to being an effective intergovernmental collaborator.
1.
Understand the time horizon of all the actors.
Each person in an intergovernmental collaboration will have different time horizons that impact their decisions, their willingness to collaborate, and their sense of urgency.
Understanding how the other participants' time frames impact their behavior and willingness to cooperate is critical.
Let's take the first example of a time frame: term of office.
If you are working with elected or appointed officials they are likely to be very sensitive to where they are in their term of office.
At the beginning of a term of office, an official might be very anxious to show quick progress to impress the voters who elected them that they are working on the issues they promised.
At the end of a term of office, on the other hand, an official might become quite cautious in your collaboration because they are fearful of the impact of the collaboration on their reelection efforts.
A similar dynamic applies to those who are appointed to their positions.
They may be removed or reaffirmed by the elected official who put them in office based on the success or failure of your collaboration.
Other potential collaborators may also be moved by timeframe.
For example, the director of a nonprofit may be appointed and reappointed on a yearly basis by a Board of Directors.
Naturally, such a director may be sensitive to how news of your collaboration and its success or failure may impact their appointment or reappointment.
Long-term civil service employees, on the other hand, may have the luxury of planning many years in the future.
Combining sensitivity to the ways in which all of these different terms of office impact perspective and willingness to collaborate is a critical part of being an effective intergovernmental collaborator.
2.
Understand the fiscal constraints of all the actors.
Every organization has its own peculiarities to its budget and the restraints on the way in which they can use its budgets.
Public sector agencies operate within a highly transparent environment.
Public budgets are developed with public input and participation and all aspects of their budgets are open to public scrutiny including individual salaries.
Nonprofit and corporate entities do not have this level of transparency with their budgets.
Learning to work with in the highly transparent public sector environment can be a struggle for these nonprofit and corporate partners in an intergovernmental collaboration.
This difference may translate to a lack of the quality in the way in which information is shared and distributed amongst the partners.
Setting up the ground rules about how the extra burdens of public sector transparency will impact the project's budget transparency at the beginning of the project will benefit everyone.
Another aspect to fiscal constraints in the public sector are the various rules that apply to how different "funds" can be used.
For example, public sector agencies frequently utilize "dedicated funds" that have restrictions on how that money may be used.
Dedicated funds cannot be shifted from one use to another.
In budgeting terminology this is called fungibility.
Public sector funds often lack fungibility.
This lack of flexibility in the movement of money can be confusing to nonprofit and corporate sector partners.
Another example of fiscal constraints are the requirements that attach to the receipt of certain kinds of federal grant monies.
A nonprofit that depends upon grant money may be highly sensitive to the federal "strings" attached to their funding.
These restraints may limit the types of activities, partnerships, and expenses that each type of partner in the collaboration can participate in funding.
Understanding these restraints that shape the collaboration will make each partner more effective in finding the best way to make common cause.
3.
Understand the mission and values of the other actors in the collaboration.
Some common value or vision has brought all of you to the table to discuss or implement the collaboration in which you are involved.
It is unlikely, however, that your mission completely overlaps with the mission of the other actors in the partnership.
In fact, you would be missing many opportunities for collaboration if you limited yourself to only those agencies and partners with whom you are certain you share a common mission and value.
It is not necessary for everyone to agree on a common mission.
It is necessary, however, that you understand enough about the mission and values of the other actors in the partnership that you understand how their mission shapes their behaviors in the collaboration.
For example, let's assume we are working in a collaboration involving a city that has received federal funding to provide shelter for the homeless and a nonprofit.
The nonprofit who runs the shelter is a religious organization whose mission is to provide spiritual counseling and salvation for its client.
As the city works to comply with federal reporting requirements, it may request that the religious organization collect certain information about the clients in the shelter as well as information about what happens to them after they leave the shelter.
The religious organization may resist this type of reporting as their priority is the spiritual health of the clients not accountability as understood by a federal grant requirement.
As such, they may not even collect the names of clients or routinely participate in follow-up data collection.
Failing to understand how the mission of the nonprofit and the mission of the city in this example lead to emphasis or deemphasis on different activities can lead to unnecessary friction in the partnership.
In some rare cases, partners in a collaboration may have missions and values which seem to conflict.
Collaboration may take place however if the various partners see something they can get out of the collaboration.
It may be that they only need to agree on the set of activities covered under the collaboration and not on the wider vision of their separate organizations.
As they say, "politics makes for strange bedfellows.
" 4.
Understand the constituencies of the other members.
Each actor in an intergovernmental collaboration is responsible to a different set of constituencies.
The nonprofit organization staff member may feel that their chief constituency is the Board of Directors of their agency and their clients.
A state agency employee may feel that the governor, the legislature and the public are their chief constituencies.
And of course none of those constituencies may be singular.
"The public" may translate to the members of the public who are active in interest groups who follow the issue on which you are collaborating.
Similarly, there are many members of the Legislature and it is not surprising that they do not speak with one voice.
It is not only important that you understand your own constituency, it is also important that you understand what groups and forces are impacting the other actors in your intergovernmental collaboration.
What may seem like needlessly resistant behavior on the part of one of your partners may be their attempt to represent the voices of some cross section of their constituents.
The challenge is in allowing members of the collaboration to represent those differing views while still finding successful ways to work together.
5.
Understand the particular statutes and rules that impact the other participants.
Some intergovernmental partners will be directly impacted by statutory language that require certain activities or prevents others that impact your collaboration.
It is not uncommon for state agency employees to know the particular Idaho code that sets up the parameters for their program.
The same is true of federal employees.
The same dynamics apply to administrative rules and regulations.
Collaborations that seem to threaten compliance with these statutes and regulations will engender resistance from these state, local, and federal employees.
To be an effective collaborator with agencies and governments that are directly impacted by statutes like this requires that the participants be given the chance to air their concerns and discuss the limitations and then evaluate what if any collaborative effort can happen within these constraints.
6.
Understand the professional preparation and point of view of the other participants.
All of us are shaped by the education and professional preparation that we have experienced that bring us to this point and this collaboration.
These different forms of preparation can shape our point of view on issues and processes.
For example, a scientist who has been trained in the field of biology will bring a set of assumptions about the value of science and the scientific method to questions of whether or not to introduce wolves into a particular ecosystem.
A rancher, on the other hand, may be thinking mostly about the economics of his ranching operation when evaluating information about wolves.
These two different points of view can lead to disagreement over what kinds of information to use in a collaborative process and how to value those various kinds of information.
An effective collaborator will understand how our different professional backgrounds and approaches shape what kind of information we value and how we use information.
One can easily see the challenges of combining accountants, members of the clergy, scientists, soldiers, and every other walk of life that leads us to where we are now.
7.
Understand that it will take more time and resources to collaborate but that we can and must do so! Sometimes the difficulties of intergovernmental collaboration make people wish they could just go back to their own cubicle and not worry about dealing with other agencies and units of government.
Effective governance, however, requires that we figure out how to work together.
In this time of diminished budgets and heightened expectations, we all owe our constituents and the public our best efforts at finding new ways to best meet our pressing needs.
So we need collaboration even though it is harder than working alone.
Providing your self, your staff and your boss with a realistic understanding of the additional time, resources and effort that collaboration requires is critical.
There is an investment that has to be made in building and sustaining the collaboration.
It may be tempting to try to avoid this investment in the hopes that the collaboration will save money later.
A realistic understanding of the extra time and effort and resources that an effective collaboration requires will help each partner burning the necessary ingredients to the table to create and sustain the partnership.
Source...