• Critically discuss the factors that promote or hinder partnership working 20%.
• Discuss and evaluate the central concepts of partnership & apply to practice context 25%.
• Evaluate how different professional codes and organisational frameworks impact on partnership when working with users and carers .
The purpose of this report is to define partnership working but at the same, it critically evaluate those points that hinders and evaluate partnership working. Partnership can be defined as a relationship that is there between the individuals and the groups and the partnership always develop on the mutual relationship that exists between the individuals and the groups. The term “partnership” was always there but in the business organization, it found its place in the business law where, partnership is being referred to the contractual relationship that is there between two organizations and where both the organizations enjoy the profit and at the same time they also share the loss that a business face at times. Therefore, it can be said that the concept of partnership, is nothing or simply a fair division of profit and loss that is being shared by the organization (Brechin, 2000). The term “partnership” has a relationship with the health improvements but in general the definition of partnership is a very vague definition and the model of partnership too, is a vague one. The lack of definition and a model of partnership allow more than one interpretation of the term and therefore in practice different people are interpreting it in various different ways. Therefore, either judging or monitoring the partnership policy becomes impossibility in practice. The report here shows the disparity that is there between the theory and practice, and the policies that are related to it; with respect to the problem faced by an organization.
Partnership, theory is being adopted by many organizations because it is beneficial in many different ways. If one goes by the definition of partnership, then by definition, partnership is something where the organization work for a common goal and they share their benefits (Cameron, et al. 2012). Along with sharing the benefits, the organizations also share the risk that is faced. The companies also share the resources and the power, when they become partners. The, companies could come into a partnership relationship either through verbal agreements or through written agreements. The word “collaborate” or the word “collaboration” is the very common word in the partnership literature as well as in the partnership research (Ross, King, & Firth, 2005).
The word partnership is an umbrella word, which covers various and multipurpose concepts that is widely different from each other. The word actually defines different kinds of relationship that is exists in the myriad circumstances. Partnership working during the 1980s and 90s is defined as a canonical word, which means working in a cooperation that is utterly formalized. Along with the utterly formalize co-operations, there are at times, legal bindings and arrangements (Thompson, 2009). If the presences of legal bindings or arrangements are not there then there is an informal understanding, which helps in laying the relationship between two organizations or between two companies. The agreement that is there between the two companies includes certain policies, which state that the companies, agrees not only on the program objectives but at the same time they also agrees for sharing the risks, and resources as well as the power. The agreement policy also states that the company should share all these things as well as their benefits for a specific period (Tait & Shah, 2007).
The partnership definition can be divided and interpreted in many points and sub points and among all those many points and sub points one of the most important is the “public-private partnership”. The “private-public partnership”, allows the action of the actors to contribute to the development of the economy of the urban population and it helps in improving the quality of life of the people in that urban economy (Gannon-Leary, Fontainha & Bent, 2011). Other critics believe that partnership working is actually nothing but a mobilization of a strategy, for which the collaborators have agreed upon the strategy, because of which there is a regeneration o ideas for a definite area. The partnership working, according to these particular critics is there because there is a mobilization of interest.
Organization could distinguish between partnership working at different levels and among those different levels, there is the strategic level, and this level is known as the project level. There is also the geographical level, which includes the regional level as well as the local levels. The theoretical and the ideal form of partnership could be divided into three parts and among those three parts; one of the most important is the “facilitating partnership”, where the strategic policy issues that are long standing are managed. The second most important part is the “coordinating partnership”; in here, importance is given to the management and the policies that are being implemented (Quinney, & Hafford-Letchfield, 2012). The policies here are based on those priorities that are broadly agreed. The third most important type or kind of partnership that is being ideally defined is known as the “implementing partnership”. The particular kind of partnership is a kind of pragmatic partnership and it is mainly concerned with mainly those projects that are mutually beneficial and at the same time that, which is also specific (Harrison, et al. 2013)
Although many scholars and many critics have come up with different kinds of theory and definition of partnership or rather partnership working in the organization but all those definitions have turned out to be vague one. In countries like United Kingdom, the definition of partnership or government partnership has been made even more complicated with the interference of the government interpretation. According to the government of these countries, partnership is such a relationship or a program where the collaborators are in relationship to have an allocation of resources that will contribute to the services for the welfare and the development of the society (Laming, 2003). Although, if one goes by the theory then one will not have a definite definition or the theory of partnership approaches or the partnership working, yet the companies are adopting this approach or this partnership working strategy because it is beneficial to the organizations in various other ways. Therefore, in practice the partnership working benefits the organization, and therefore, even if there is a lack of a definite model or a lack of theory it is being widely accepted by the organizations (Hudson, et al. 2015).
The Reason Behind Working in Partnership
The organizations adopt the partnership working in practice because there are many benefits that are associated with partnership workings. In practice, most of the time the organizations adopts the strategy of partnership working or rather most of the time the organization go for the collaboration because of their own self interest and to meet their own self interest. The self-interest of the organizations going for collaboration or for a partnership working may differ from the point view of the stakeholders of the organization. One of the main reasons why organizations go for partnership working is motivation and it is because of this motivation the organization share their profit and risk and their resources as well as power. Although, motivation act as one of the main agents of partnership working, one should or rather the organizations should also remember that, if there is a lack of motivation from the part of the organizations, who is forming a partnership or collaboration, then the partnership working between the organizations may fail as well. The organizations who come into collaboration or who form a partnership are at the advantageous stage because they benefit a lot from the partnership working. The partnership working allows them to have an increased allocation of resources, additional resources also benefits those organizations who work in partnership with other organizations.
Organizational partnership definitely means that it will give the organizations a competitive advantage but then before taking the decisions of the organizational partnership the organizations have to keep certain things in their mind. Among those certain things that the organizations have to keep in their mind, one of the most important thing is the framework of the organizations and other than the framework of the organizations, the identity of the organization is also a matter of concern for the organizations. Along with it the other things that are matter of concern for the organization includes, the mutuality that is there as well (Littlechild & Smith, 2013).
The government intervention as well as the interpretation of the definition of partnership working is there so that the organization could contribute to the urban economic development and so that the organization could contribute to the society as well. Although, in practice, most of the organization, work for those benefits that they will gather from the market forces; and it rarely concerns the societal problem that are there (Hann & Peckham, 2010). The companies relying more on the market forces and less on the government interpretation, is not only the fault of the companies or the organizations but here the government and their policies are questionable and at times, they are more responsible for the failure than the policies of the companies that are there. The political failure or the failure of the government is there because the governments opt for the subsidiary and for privatization as well, to meet the “unit of social life” of the individual (Miller & Cameron, 2011). Thus, in the higher level of intervention, where the capacity is lacking the government policies and the government decisions, are being proved as a failure for the partnership working of the organisation. Therefore, in practice the “private-public” sector faces a set back because they could not adhere to the needs of the clients, because both these sector could not be compatible to each other. Therefore, because they could not become compatible to each other they could not provide comprehensive solution to the clients as well.
Many sectors have gone through changes, and like, many other sectors, the marketplace of the healthcare sectors, too have changed a lot and it has therefore, given rise to the need of the demand of the partnership working. The healthcare sector has gone through changes in the past decade because of the health care reforms that were there in the past decades and the healthcare reform proved as failure for the society and for the economy of the society. The result of these failed healthcare reforms, was that there were increased in the cost of healthcare resources and along with the increase in the cost of healthcare resources there is also a crisis in the health care sector. The crisis in the healthcare sector is there because of the public and the business perception, which are either uninsured or underinsured and at the same time enforced. Therefore, the crisis in the healthcare sector therefore demanded for a solution and as because the rhetoric of partnership working is a good one therefore, partnership working has been adopted as the solution of this problem.
Theoretically, the organizational model allows the companies or the organizations to come in a collaborative relationship with the help of the motivation. Although, in practice, the motivation, even though allow for a collaboration, but then when the organization go through problems after collaboration motivation is of not much use. There are the presences of some fundamental policies related to partnership working that will help in the improvement of the local agencies and contribute to the development of the community. The policies include:
According to 2009, Health Act budget would be shared between the local and the health authorities (Glendinning, Powell, & Rummery, 2002).
According to Glasby and Peck (2003) the implementation of the care trust, represents a model where there is a full merging of the health and the social care in United Kingdom.
The partnership working has moved beyond health and social care branches, and this could be understood easily with the creation of the children care branches. The particular policy reflects the fact that there has been an encouragement over common assessment of framework and sharing information, for children (Laming, 2003). The particular fact is a truth even for the professional coordinator, and at the same time, it is helpful for different professional, working in different co-location, who is working with children (Glasby & Peck, 2003).
The particular policies have been turned to be useful for both the support service users and the carers at the same time.
The successful partnership working depends on the partnership model and policies that are being adopted by the companies and the management. The organizational policy should bring in a change in the organizational structure and accordingly the companies should adopt a collaborative strategy, which will help the organization to work in partnership (Glendinning, Powell & Rummery 2002). The structural change in the organization, which depends on the policy of the organization, includes such a structure where the partners enjoy both the social as well as the political acceptance. Polices of the organizations should be such that the partners agrees to accept their responsibilities and accordingly they should accept both the political responsibilities and the practicalities as well (Glendinning Powell & Rummery 2002).
The organizations, who are entering into collaboration, should consider the open partnership-working model as an important part of their policy and this will bring in improvement in the partnership working of the organization. According to the model there is a sub system or rather there is an interacting element, which is there in a set, and the sub system or the interacting elements form a whole, which is an integrated part. The “integrated whole”, is also a part of the larger system that is there. Open system partnership theory or policy is generally applicable to all the organizations that are there in the market force and therefore for the market of the healthcare sector the model or the philosophy is the most applicable one. The particular policy or theory of open system partnership allow the partnership theory or rather the framework of partnership study to be a part of the social system that has an interaction, not only with the other sub system but at the same time it also has an interaction with the environment as well. Therefore, while describing open system theory it can be said that it is, a coalition or rather collaboration between the shifting interest groups. The coalition between the interest group is there because it is largely influenced by the environmental factors and because of those goals that were developed depending on the structure, outcomes as well as on the activities of the organization.
Therefore, it can be concluded that the partnership working is a very complex theory and the implementation of the partnership working is a very complicated thing. Although there are lots of theory, which could help the organization in adopting the theory of partnership working, but then there is a gap between the theory and the practice. The gap is created not only because of the private organizations that are there in the market force, but also because of the policies and the actions of the government, or because of the actions of the politics. It should also be remembered that in practice there is the emergence of the partnership working because of the health care market force, the health care reforms probed to be a failure and thus there is a demand for the public and the private sector organization. The demand leads to the formation of the partnership working and today though it is facing many problems, it could be easily solved with the adoption of the perfect policy of partnership working. There are many policies but depending on the structure of the organizations, the perfect policy had to be adopted.
Brechin, A. (2000). Introducing critical practice. Critical practice in health and social care, 25-47.
Cameron, A., Lart, R., Bostock, L., & Coomber, C. (2012). Factors that promote and hinder joint and integrated working between health and social care services. SCIE Res Briefing, 41, 24-24.
Gannon-Leary, P., Fontainha, E., & Bent, M. (2011). The loneliness of the long distance researcher. Library Hi Tech, 29(3), 455-469.
Glasby, J. & Peck, E. (2003). Care Trusts. Google Books. Retrieved 24 May 2016, from
Glendinning, C., Powell, M. A., & Rummery, K. (2002). Partnerships, New Labour and the governance of welfare. Associated University Presse.
Hann, A., & Peckham, S. (2010). Most vaccination programmes are concerned with reducing the prevalence and incidence of a particular infectious disease, such asTB or smallpox. The human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine, however, is a vaccine that is designed to prevent the development of cervical cancer by protecting the individual against infection by HPV. This chapter examines the evidence base for the policy of a HPV vaccination programme, and suggests that the way in which this information is communicated to the public is loaded and .... Public Health Ethics and Practice, 155.
Harrison, S. L., Apps, L., Singh, S., Steiner, M. C., Morgan, M. D., & Robertson, N. (2013). “Consumed by breathing”-A critical interpretive meta-synthesis of the qualitative literature. Chronic illness, 1742395313493122.
Hudson, T., Knowles, J., Price, K., Tomlinson, J., & Ainsworth, K. (2015). Junior KICk-OFF-teaching and health care profession working in partnership to develop diabetes education.
Laming, H. (2003). The Victoria Climbié Inquiry.
Littlechild, B., & Smith, R. (2013). A handbook for interprofessional practice in the human services: learning to work together. Routledge.
Miller, E., & Cameron, K. (2011). Challenges and benefits in implementing shared inter-agency assessment across the UK: A literature review. Journal of interprofessional care, 25(1), 39-45.
Quinney, A., & Hafford-Letchfield, T. (2012). Interprofessional Social Work:: Effective Collaborative Approaches. Learning Matters.
Ross, A., King, N., & Firth, J. (2005). Interprofessional relationships and collaborative working: encouraging reflective practice. Online Journal of issues in Nursing, 10(1).
Tait, L., & Shah, S. (2007). Partnership working: a policy with promise for mental healthcare. Advances in Psychiatric Treatment, 13(4), 261-271.
Thompson, N. (2009). Practising social work: meeting the professional challenge. London: Palgrave Macmillan.