KSIA Case Study –
Theory and
Literature Review
Tage Research, Training
and Consulting
12 St. Albans,
Craighall Park,
Johannesburg
Tel: 011 024 9811
Fax: 086 611 0375
1/24/2012
12 St. Albans Avenue
Craighall Park
Johannesburg, 2194
Tel: 011 024 9811
Fax: 0866110375
www.tagegroup.co.za
www.trtcgroup.com
1 Introduction
The ability to manage positive relationships has become increasingly important in today’s
organisational environment. Mattessich and Monsey (1992:10) state that “a shrinking base of
resources has led to organisations asking themselves if cost efficiencies could be possible
by addressing common issues and delivering similar services together”.
The sentiment is shared by other collaboration experts, who suggest that the quality of
results often increases when a problem is addressed through interagency collaboration,
where organisations work jointly to achieve goals. (Gray, B. 1989; Huxham, C., 1996;
Thomson et al. 2007; Thomson & Perry, 2006)
In recent years, there has been a substantial investment in collaborative engagements and
partnership based on the assumption that collaboration enhances the capacity of
organisations to achieve goals. This assumption is based on a positive view of collaboration
as a process that enables organisations to combine their human and materials resources to
accomplish objectives they are unable to bring about on their own. (Lasker et.al., 2001).
Chris Huxham (1993) in his research on achieving “collaborative advantage” notes that
collaborating in a networked environment is advantageous for achieving complex policy
goals and efficiently using scarce resources. Complimentary resources invested by
individual collaborating partners can diversify the capability of organisations to accomplish
tasks, which provides great potential for collaborative activities to solve service delivery
issues.
Achieving collaborative advantage means meeting an objective which no individual
organization could have met alone and achieving the objectives of each collaborating
organization better than it could alone (Huxham and Macdonald, 1992). Collaborative
advantage involves developing synergy among organizations toward the achievement of
common goals. It means managing the balance between the pitfalls that may occur through
an organization acting individualistically and those that may occur through the very act of
collaborating.
A systemic approach is required to effectively manage collaborations and as the number of
collaborative partnerships expand, partners require tools to effectively manage collaboration,
which can only be developed based on an improved understanding of collaborative
processes.
2
12 St. Albans Avenue
Craighall Park
Johannesburg, 2194
Tel: 011 024 9811
Fax: 0866110375
www.tagegroup.co.za
www.trtcgroup.com
However, Huxhum, C. (2006) contends that without a clear understanding of collaboration
and the ability to assess the success of collaborative efforts, practitioners will fail to
implement successful collaborations that can add value and give collaborating organisations
competitive advantage.
Thomson et al (2007) suggest that the inability to understand collaboration and inherent
issues is due to multiple conceptualisations of collaboration developed by researchers in the
field. While the different conceptual definitions add richness to the research, it has led to a
lack of consensus on the meaning of collaboration by practitioners, making it difficult for
partners to measure the benefits of collaborating.
2 Literature Review
Literature suggests that rising organisational interdependence, scarce resources and rapid
changes in technology are some of the factors that are giving rise to interorganisational
collaboration. This increasingly ‘networked’ world has led to an emerging and distinct focus
on collaboration in scholarly research according to Thomson et al. (2007).
The study adopts a view that with the increasing number of collaborations, there is a need to
measure the effectiveness of the collaboration in order to determine the benefits gained from
collaborating. Given the complexity of collaboration, if critical success factors are not
determined, then the inertia that often transpires as partners seek to achieve common goals
(Thomson et al, 2007) can negatively impact collaborating organisations.
2.1 Framework for Assessing Collaborative Arrangements
Gray and Wood’s (1991) framework for assessing collaborative processes is a good starting
point for understanding collaboration. The framework provides a construct of five variable
dimensions: governance, administration, organizational autonomy, mutuality, and norms that
Gray and Wood argue must be understood and managed in order for organisations to
collaborate effectively.
Conceptually, the five key dimensions have emerged from the growing body of knowledge
that suggests that collaboration occurs over time as organisations interact formally and
informally through repetitive sequences of negotiation and the development and execution of
commitments. These sequences mean that collaboration is describe in terms of a continuum
of stages.
3
12 St. Albans Avenue
Craighall Park
Johannesburg, 2194
Tel: 011 024 9811
Fax: 0866110375
www.tagegroup.co.za
www.trtcgroup.com
2.2.1 Governance
A joint development of the rules and standards that govern behaviour and relationships, with
the concurrent structures is required for reaching agreement on collaborative activities and
goals. These agreements form the basis of collaboration and are a critical element of all
negotiations and the ensuing commitments that define collaborative activities.
2.2.2 Administration
Organisations collaborate for a specific purpose, implying that the achievement of the
purpose for the existence of the collaboration must exist to move towards action and to
manage the collaborative activities inherent in the collaboration.
The key to getting things done in a collaboration grouping is finding the right combination of
administrative capacity and social capacity to build relationships. Functions such as
coordination, clarity of roles and responsibilities and monitoring mechanisms should
characterise the built relationships according to Mettessich and Monsey (1992).
2.2.3 Organisational Autonomy
Wood and Gray (1991) suggest that the dual identity that collaborative partners share, their
distinct identity as individual organisations and the collaborative identity, creates a dichotomy
between self-interest – achieving individual organisational missions – and collective interest
– achieving collaboration goals and maintaining accountability to collaborative partners.
In order to successful manage collaborations, then partners should “justify their involvement
in terms of its contribution to their own aims” (Huxham, 1996). When collaborating partners
can do this, then there is a reduction in conflicting goals between the individual partner
organisations and a better likelihood of support for collaborative missions.
2.2.4 Mutuality
The existence of mutual benefits and interdependence is at the root of all collaborations and
organisations that collaborate must experience mutually beneficial interdependencies based
on shared interests. This creates homogeneity and appreciation and passion for the
collaborative mission. Mutuality creates win-win situations and allows partners to address
conflicts through consensus, as a result of the shared commitment to the mission.
4
12 St. Albans Avenue
Craighall Park
Johannesburg, 2194
Tel: 011 024 9811
Fax: 0866110375
www.tagegroup.co.za
www.trtcgroup.com
2.2.5 Norms
According to Thomson and Perry (2001) in collaboration, individual partners often
demonstrate a willingness to interact collaboratively on if other partners demonstrate the
same willingness. This willingness can be demonstrated through a desire to bear initial
disproportionate costs in the hope that this will equalise over time out of a sense of duty.
Reciprocity is however based on an element of trust and good faith in that partners believe
that other partners will (1) behave in accordance with commitments both explicit and implicit,
(2) be honest in negotiations preceding these commitments and (3) will not take advantage
of disadvantaged partners. (Cummings and Promiley, 1996 in Thomson et al, 2007)
5
12 St. Albans Avenue
Craighall Park
Johannesburg, 2194
Tel: 011 024 9811
Fax: 0866110375
www.tagegroup.co.za
www.trtcgroup.com
2.2 Conceptual Models for Collaboration
Chris Huxham (1996) states that while collaboration research abounds with variables that
are likely to enhance collaboration, these variables either go unanalyzed or are not
systematically modelled. For the purposes of the study, we review existing models to
develop a standard for evaluating the effectiveness of collaborations. D.L Moody asserts that
conceptual models are central to AS-IS analysis.
Drawing on research literature from several disciplines, Dawes and Eglene (1997) designed
a conceptual model covers Macro, Meso and Micro levels of analysis of collaboration
projects.
(Source: Dawes and Eglene, 1997)
The model provides a conceptual structure that is flexible enough to account for
differences in case study analysis, but also the differences in the environmental settings of
different collaborative projects.
6
12 St. Albans Avenue
Craighall Park
Johannesburg, 2194
Tel: 011 024 9811
Fax: 0866110375
www.tagegroup.co.za
www.trtcgroup.com
2.3 Critical Success Factors for Collaborations
According to Mattessich and Monsey (1992) factors that influence the success of
collaborations can be grouped into six categories, namely Environment, Membership,
Process/Structure, Communications, Purpose and Resources. These factors provide
indicators of success in collaboration, and can be used to determine measures for evaluating
successful collaborations.
2.3.1 The Environment
The history of collaboration and cooperation that partners have engaged can offer increased
understanding of roles and the expectations required in collaboration and enable partners to
trust the process. Leadership is also critical in how perceptions are managed, particularly in
how they relate to goals and activities that are accomplished. As Mattessich and Monsey
(1992) state, collaboration is likely to succeed where there is a history of such and where it is
encouraged.
Also, if the political and/or social must be favourable, with the necessary political leadership,
opinion-makers, persons who control resources and there is general public support of the
mission of the collaborative group then there is a better chance of success.
2.3.2 Membership Characteristics
If collaboration is to be successful, members should share an understanding and respect for
each other and their organisations. This will determine how they operate, the expectations,
limitations and values that will guide the process.
Representation is key component of successful collaboration, with an appropriate crosssection of each segment affected by the activities of the collaboration required to ensure
success. However, representation should also be balanced by self-interest, with the benefits
of collaboration offset costs such as a loss of autonomy. The belief that the collaboration has
benefits will ensure the ability of members to compromise, since “the many decisions within
a collaborative effort cannot possibly fit the preference of every member perfectly” (1992:15)
2.3.3 Process/Structure
Within the process of collaboration there are multiple layers of decision-making with different
levels of each organisation – upper-management, middle-management and operations –
7
12 St. Albans Avenue
Craighall Park
Johannesburg, 2194
Tel: 011 024 9811
Fax: 0866110375
www.tagegroup.co.za
www.trtcgroup.com
involved in decisions made as part of the collaboration. This requires flexibility and
adaptability from partners to ensure that the group is open to varying ways of organisation
required to accomplish its goals and to deal with changing conditions throughout the
process.
This is particularly important when consideration is given to the fact that members share a
stake in both the process and outcome and may feel ownership of both the way the group
works and the results or products of the collaborative groups work.
2.3.4 Communication
Open and frequent communication is key to successful collaboration. When members
interact often, update one another and discuss issues openly then links are established that
produce a better, more informed and cohesive group working towards a common goal.
2.3.5 Purpose
As shared vision, supported by concrete, attainable goals and objectives that are clear to all
partners creates a sense of purpose and allow all parties the opportunity to determine their
involvement and approach towards how each individual member will contribute to achieving
the collaborative goals.
2.3.6 Resources
An adequate financial base that is supported by the right mixture of skills and expertise is
required to achieve the required collaborative outcomes. When each partner can contribute
the necessary resources, then legitimacy is granted by the other collaborative partners.
2.4 Measurement (KPI) for successful collaboration
Thomson et al. (2007) states that few instruments that measure collaboration exist and those
that do are difficult to adapt. However, by asking close ended questions that asked
respondents the extent to which their organisations or partner organisations engaged in
certain behaviours or exhibited certain attitudes and characteristics, one can be able to
measure variables on collaborations to which respondents and their organisations belong.
Responses on a Likert scale allow for analysis of observable variables within the five key
dimensions of collaboration.
The five collaboration dimensions are related to a set of observed indicators determined
through an empirical and theoretical review of literature and categorised as follows:
8
12 St. Albans Avenue
Craighall Park
Johannesburg, 2194
Tel: 011 024 9811
Fax: 0866110375
www.tagegroup.co.za
www.trtcgroup.com
2.4.1 Collaborative Governance Measures
Reliance on formal structures and agreements specifically created to address the
relationships between partners, especially the extent to which these agreements and
structures are adhered to can be used to measure the success of collaboration. The
existence of steering committee and other decision-making structures and the involvement
of partners in decision-making can be used as a measure for successful collaboration.
2.4.2 Administrative Measures
How collaborative partners or organisations coordinate collaborative activities, manage
conflicts and rely on external authorities to resolve conflicts provide measures for the
success of the collaboration. The existence and use of formal communication channels
between partner organisations and an understanding of the roles and responsibilities of
membership in a collaborative partnership is critical to determining the success of a
collaborative partnership. The understanding of roles and responsibilities is also determined
by how well partners agree on the goals of the collaborations.
2.4.3 Organisational Autonomy Measures
The extent to which collaboration hinders an individual organisation’s ability to meet its own
organisational mission is critical in the determination of how successful the collaboration is.
Thomson et al (2007) suggests that an organisations independence is affected by having to
work with partner organisations and representatives can feel pulled between trying to meet
both their organisation’s and the collaboration’s expectations. This can be dealt with by each
partner organisations being upfront about what it can and cannot give (in time, money,
energy and other resources) to achieve collaborative goals. Being upfront about resources
that can be given to the collaboration protects the integrity of the partner organisations.
2.4.4 Mutuality Measures
Familiarity with the programs and operations of partner organisations is critical for successful
collaboration as it determines the extent of the influence of the collaboration on partner
organisations services and operations. This influence can be perceived through an
exchange of clients, the support of partners in accomplishing goals and the sharing of
resources and services.
Win-win solutions and recognition of joint successes then become the norm when there is
collaborative mutuality.
9
12 St. Albans Avenue
Craighall Park
Johannesburg, 2194
Tel: 011 024 9811
Fax: 0866110375
www.tagegroup.co.za
www.trtcgroup.com
2.4.5 Measurement of Norms
The perception that partners are trustworthy and each partner meets its obligations in the
collaboration determines the success of the collaboration. When partners feel that some of
the partners try to get the upper hand in negotiations and take advantage of vulnerable
partners, then this can affect the sustainability of the collaboration. The pursuit of individual
interests can impact the development of long-term relationships between partner
organisations negatively.
3. Conclusions and Suppositions
From the literature, the following conclusions can be drawn:
1. The political, social and economic context within which collaboration is important in
evaluating the success of collaborative initiatives;
2. The history of issues preceding any collaborative project must be taken into account
when evaluating the success of a collaboration;
3. Specific legal authorities and frameworks, as well as political commitment are
important elements of any collaborative initiative;
4. The Characteristics and motivation of each organisational partners must be
evaluated to assess their impact on successful collaboration;
5. Critical Success Factors must be employed when assess collaborative processes
and these the CSF’s are predicated on existing literature, which makes them subject
to change over time;
6. Governance, authority structures, interorganisational management are all key
elements of collaboration that should be evaluated to determine successful
collaboration; and
7. Collaboration expectations and performance from an organisational point of view
impacts the perceived success of each collaboration.
10