Too Many Partners A Challenge To Partnership Working The WritePass Journal

Too Many Partners A Challenge To Partnership Working Introduction Too Many Partners A Challenge To Partnership Working ). Strong leadership and management In order for a joint working to be successful, there must be strong leadership and management structure in place. The importance of having a strong leadership and integrated management structure has been identified by Rutter et al. (2004) Aims and objectives Practitioners from the various agencies involved in the joint working should understand the ultimate goals, aims and objectives as well as the eligibility criteria for the new initiative to become a success (Cameron et al. 2012). Roles and responsibilities The agencies involved should understand their roles and responsibilities to prevent conflicts. Responsibilities may include administrative tasks, budget management and coordination of material resources(Cameron et al. 2012).   Team building Another factor that is likely to promote joint working is team-building and arranging for weekly meetings. Regular team-building events and subsequent weekly meetings allows for the various agencies to share information and to discuss issues arising (Clarkson et al. 2011). Additionally, such team meetings enhance the understanding of the different professional roles and prevent conflict between the different professions by building trust and rapport between the various agencies or groups involved. Information sharing Other factors that may promote joint working include mechanisms for sharing information such as using shared information technology systems and shared documentation. Such effective sharing mechanisms lead to timely assessments of needs (Cameron et al. 2012) Factors hindering joint working  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Aims and objectives Whilst we have shown that an understanding of the aims and objectives is key to success of a partnership, it should be noted that such shared purpose can be problematic as well. For example, studies by Clarkson et al (2011), Asthana Halliday (2003) and Glasby et al (2008) which examined some of the integrated care services found a general lack of understanding of the central aim of partnership working among the health care practitioners. Without a shared understanding of the aims and objectives among the various agencies involved, then it becomes difficult to develop a sense of purpose.   Further, this difficulty is made worse if there are conflicting roles and responsibilities. Roles and responsibilities Roles and responsibilities should be clearly defined to avoid conflicts between the professionals involved. In their study, McCormack et al. (2008)found that a shortage of clarity of the roles and responsibilities of the professionals involved in the joint working resulted in delays in treatment and inappropriate referrals. Organizational difference Partnership working can also be undermined by competing organizational visions. If organizations are in competition about the joined-up agenda, the initiative may not be successful. This is evident in a study by Young (2003) on partnership working between the local authorities and NHS. Young’s study foundthe partnership as undermined by the differences in resource and spending criteria between the parties involved. Poor Communication and coordination As noted above, communication is critical to the success of a partnership working. Poor communication hampers collaborative efforts which may result in delays in service delivery. Using specialist languages that some partners are not familiar with and communicating selectively may fuel suspicion and personal agendas leading to conflicting messages which undermine collaborative efforts (Cameron et al. 2012).Almost all tragedies which have resulted have been a direct result of poor communication and failure of professionals to coordinate with each other. This is especially the case where there are too many partners involved and where there is a lack of clarity of the responsibilities of each partner. Power and hierarchical relationships Partnership can also be hindered by power and hierarchical relationships. Some practitioners may perceive others to be below them in terms of their status. When perceived status differences occur, the dominant high status professions such as the medics may silence the contribution made by the others (Clarkson et al. 2011). Such kind of perceived status difference hinders integrative efforts and can stultify effective partnership. There is a host of other factors that may hinder partnership working including difficulty in information sharing due to incompatibility of the IT systems, lack of trust and respect, relationship between agencies, and financial uncertainty among many others. These barriers can perhaps be addressed by arranging for a local forum where practitioners can meet regularly and share issues arising. Whereas there many benefits to partnership working, such joint collaboration can prove to be extremely difficult especially where there are too many partners involved. Partnerships that involve too many partners often suffer from poor communication and coordination, competing organizational visions, lack of clarity with regard to the roles and responsibilities of the professionals involved, duplication of roles, unclear accountability, too many referrals between agenciesand lack of trust and respect among several other factors (Douglas 2008). These barriers tend to hinder the effectiveness of partnership working and can ultimately lead to failure in delivery of services as seen with the case of Victoria Climbie. However, there are many success stories where many partners were involved. The future holds promising for more partnership involvement and collaboration as more community development workers are increasingly funded by primary care trusts. Further, many government funded initiatives are currently being implemented to promote the integration of services and multi-agency partnership including the Sure Start, Best and Connexions, Youth Offending Teams, and Childrens Fund (Cheminals 2009). Conclusion It is very hard to predict the dynamics and outcomes of partnership working especially where there are many partners involved due to continually evolving nature of such partnership. Partnerships that involve too many partners suffer from a range of factors that may stultify joint working including poor communication and coordination, competing organizational visions, duplication of roles, unclear accountability, and too many referrals between agencies among several other factors. Whereas the practicalities of adopting a multi-agency approach can prove to be difficult, promoting integration of services and joint approach to service delivery is key to addressing key societal problems which cannot be constrained neatly within traditional boundaries such as poverty, crime, social exclusion, community safety and inequality. These problems are highly complex in nature and since no single actor or entity has sufficient knowledge and information required to solve them, it becomes extremely important to have multi-agency partnership working. Reference Asthana, S and Halliday, J., 2003.‘Intermediate care: its place in a whole-systems approach, Journal of Integrated Care, vol.1, no.6, pp.15-24 Audit Commission, 1998.A Fruitful Partnership: Effective Partnership Working. Audit Commission. Audit Commission, 2006. Governing Partnerships: Bridging the Accountability Gap. Audit Commission. Barrett, G., Selman, D. Thomas, G., 2005.Interprofessional Working in Health and Social Bella, 2001. Turning point: collaboration for a new century in public health. Washington DC: the National Association of County and City Health Officials. Cameron, A., Lart, R., Bostock, L. and Coomber, C., 2012. Factors that promote and hinder joint and integrated working between health and social care services. Research briefing 41. Social Care Institute for Excellence. Care: Professional Perspectives. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Carnwell, R. and Buchanan, J., 2008. Effective practice in health, social care and criminal justice: a partnership approach. McGraw-Hill International Carnwell, R. and Carson, A., 2005. ‘Understanding partnerships and collaboration’,in R. Carnwell and J. Buchanan (eds) effective practice inhealth and social care: a partnership approach. Maidenhead: Open University Press. Cheminals, R., 2009. Effective multi-agency partnerships: putting every child matters into practice. Sage Publications Clarkson, Brand, C., Hughes, J and Challis, D., 2011. Integratingassessments of older people: examiningevidence and impact from a randomized controlled trial, Age and Ageing, vol 40, no 3, pp 388−391. Douglas, A., 2008. Partnership working. Routledge. Dowling, B. Glendinning, C. and Powell, M., 2004. Conceptualising successful partnerships Health and Social Care in the Community 12(4) 309-317 Fletcher, J. K., 2006. Partnerships in Social Care: A Handbook for Developing Effective Services London: Jessica Kingsley Fraser,S. and Matthews, S., 2007. The Critical Practitioner in Health and Social Care London:Sage publications Gallant, M.H., Beaulieu, M.C. and Carnevale, F.A., 2002.‘Partnership: an analysis of theconcept within the nurse–client relationship’, Journal of Advanced Nursing 40(2): 149–57. Glasby, J., Martin, G. and Regen, E., 2008. Older people and the relationship between hospital services and intermediate care: results from a national evaluation, Journal of Interprofessional Care, vol 22, no 6, pp 639−649. Harris, S., 2003.‘Inter-agency practice and professional collaboration: the case of drug education and prevention’, Journal of Education Policy 18(3), pp.303-314. Huxham, C. and Vangen, S., 2005. Managing to Collaborate: The Theory and Practice of Collaborative Advantage. London: Routledge Ling, T., 2002. ‘Delivering Joined-Up Government in the UK: Dimensions, Issues and Problems’, Public Administration, Vol. 80 No. 4, 615-642 McCormack, B. Mitchell, E.A., Cook, G., Reed, J., and Childs, S., 2008. Older personsexperiences of whole systems: the impact ofhealth and social care organizationalstructures, Journal of Nursing Management,vol 16, no 2, pp 105−114. Rutter, D., Tyrer, P., Emmanuel, J., Weaver, T., Byford, S., Hallam, A., Simmonds, S., and Ferguson, B., 2004. Internal vs. externalcare management in severe mental illness:randomized controlled trial and qualitativestudy, Journal of Mental Health, vol 13, no 5,pp 453−466. Tait, L and Shah, S., 2007. Partnership working: a policy with promise for mental healthcare. Journal of continuing professional development. 13: 261-271 Taylor, I., Sharland, E., Sebba, J. and Le Riche, P., 2006, Knowledge review 10: The learning, teaching and assessment of partnership work in social work education, London: Social Care Institute of Excellence. Welstead, M., 2013. Child protection in England-early intervention. [Viewed on 13th November 2013]   available from law.harvard.edu/programs/about/cap/cap-conferences/pp-workshop/pp-materials/27_welsteaddoc.pdf