Part II on Nonprofit Collaborations.

The nonprofit collaboration implementation phase requires a great deal of strategic coordination and planning. Once two or more organizations have completed all of the leg work of exploring a collaboration, have structured what the collaboration will look like, and have signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), it is time to implement the nonprofit collaboration.

Click here for Part I to read about how to prepare your organization for collaboration.

The Nonprofit Collaboration Implementation Phase:

The nonprofit collaboration implementation phase requires a strong focus on relationship-building, orchestrated communication, and a strategic approach to problem-solving in the face of unexpected circumstances, which arise more often than not. 

Below are some issues to monitor: 

• In-group versus out-group thinking,
• Maintaining focus on functionality,
• Developing a culture of relational communication,
• Fostering a culture of helping,
• Checking self-bias, and
• Assessing and celebrating.

In-Group vs. Out-Group:

Adjustments must be made to ensure that the organizational cultural differences are adequately attended to so that an in-group and out-group dynamic does not develop. Otherwise, it is very easy for working relationships to break down and become toxic.

This incidentally can also occur when people work in similar lanes, but practice different disciplines. For example, psychologists versus psychiatrists versus clinical social workers. This discipline-specific jealousy or competition can surface in all areas of the third sector. For example, policy people versus lawyers, directors versus actors, doctors versus nurses, etc. These clashes can occur because the training that each group receives in their specialty necessitates differentiation in their respective work processes. As a result, time must be devoted to explaining what the professional needs of each person working on a project. Other strategies include: 

• Sufficient flexibility is shown by all collaborating parties to focus on problem solving;
• Professional integrity guides all interactions so that the needs of the clients or the target population are met;  
• Mutual support is afforded to all of the members of the team; and
• Corrective action is taken immediately when a problem is identified or a process needs to be improved. 

Maintaining Focus on Functionality:

The collaboration process must be sufficiently flexible to allow for adaptations when unexpected circumstances surface, but robust enough to ensure a consistent and mutually-beneficial implementation. The way to achieve this is to have a strong focus on functionality. All meetings must have a purpose, and all participants must be prepared to address the most important issues. Small issues should not involve everyone. All members across the organizations must understand their roles, how to relate to one another, how decisions are made when changes are made, and what everyone’s roles and responsibilities are. This, then allows for a stronger flow of communication, effective plans of implementation, and seamless coordination of logistics. 

Developing a Culture of Relational Communication:

An effort must be made towards fostering a culture of relational communication. Presumably, a strong communication system has been put in place before the nonprofit implementation phase of the collaboration began. This requires training the staff on how to implement the following practices.

• Listening – This includes paying attention to concerns that persons from other disciplines are raising, not drawing conclusions before you have all of the information, and knowing what to do when a problem is identified. 
• Empathy – This includes showing understanding for peers that may be overextended, making adjustments so that all members of the team can do the jobs that they are assigned, and providing support to one another when facing unexpected obstacles. 
• Communicating efficiently – The communication system should have been already put into place before the collaboration process began with a regular schedule of meetings. However, as part of this process, it is important to share all important information that is relevant with all of the appropriate partners. Information hoarding can result in significant errors that could harm the target population.

It is also important to have clarity regarding what information is confidential beforehand, so that confidentiality is not confused with information hoarding.

As the collaboration evolves, it is important to discuss what is the most efficient way to communicate so that people actually understand what is important and relevant to them. Sending 15 email blasts and copying everyone on them in a two-hour time period overwhelms peers and guarantees that they won’t read your or respond to everything you need.

Fostering a Culture of Helping:

Creating a culture of helping and everyone pitching in is often given when people from the same organization work together. However, pitching in across organizational teams can become more difficult for employees if their work on the inter-organizational team impedes them from fulfilling their responsibilities in the organization that gives them a paycheck.

This is why it’s important for managers to assess the workload of employees before entering into a partnership. It’s important to have realistic expectations for employees so that they can both do the work efficiently and represent the organization effectively externally. Thus, if it is essential for an employee to play a significant part in collaboration and she/he/they are overextended, there must either be a reassignment of responsibilities, a re-shift in priorities, or a plan to hire more staff. The collaboration work must then be integrated into the annual evaluation.

Checking Self-Bias:

Checking for self-bias is best achieved through a facilitator or a mentor. However, sometimes organizations cannot afford this. Therefore, the following are some questions you should ask yourself before passing judgment on your peers. Sometimes employees, particularly in nonprofits, can feel as if something unethical is happening in an organization when people choose to carry out work in a different manner than they would. Sometimes biases regarding the abilities of one’s peers can be driven by one’s field-specific specialty. Therefore, it is important to ask yourself, am I bothered by this situation because something is actually wrong or is it because things are being done differently than how I have recommended? If it is the latter, sometimes one has to accept that this is part of working in a collaborative environment. Decision-makers take into consideration many issues at the same time, often have access to the information you don’t, and they try to focus on the overall group, instead of one person.

However, if something is happening that is unethical or improper, employees across both organizations must know beforehand what remedies to take and the steps they should take to make a correction. There must also be clarity regarding how to address inappropriate acts by collaborating with employees who work outside of your own organization.

Sometimes, bias can stem from biases that practitioners hold with respect to gender, race, social class, gender orientation, religion, ethnicity, etc. Addressing these types of biases in a meaningful way requires a greater investment of time, expertise, resources, and the utilization of numerous tools. Under these circumstances, it is preferable to turn to professionals to help address these biases.

Problems can also surface when one organization has been trained in a specific way to manage and address the bias that is different than the partnering agency. If this surfaces as an issue during the nonprofit collaboration implementation phase, then it is important to take time out to find a facilitated process to prevent potentially toxic situations in a way that is healthy and respectful of all participants in the process.

Assessing and Celebrating!

Assessing and celebrating nonprofit collaboration successes and accomplishments is key to a positive experience for both organizations. As noted earlier, monitoring systems should have already been established beforehand to determine how the collaboration is working and to make corrections when issues are identified for adaptations or changing circumstances require a modification of the scope of work. With that said, the ongoing monitoring should not just focus on negative items. It should also integrate opportunities to celebrate successes, and the accomplishments of peers, and provide recognition for all members of the inter-agency team.

The successful implementation of a nonprofit collaboration is an incredible feat. Bringing together two or more organizations that have different cultures, systems, and processes to successfully implement a program should be a reason for everyone to pat themselves on the back. Celebrating successes, not only helps to build a sense of cohesion and trust between the partners but also reminds the collaborators how they are carrying out their values and progressing on their missions.

Please Subscribe

Please subscribe to Third Sector News, which will also provide resources and toolkits for managing real-life situations that those working in the nonprofit field experience. For example, this week, we have included a “Nonprofit Website Toolkit”. However, these resources are only available to those that subscribe.