Drawing on a recent pilot, this briefing considers ways in which the risks associated with increased partnership activity, a lack of central guidance and inefficiency in partnership working can be overcome by learning from the concepts set out in the new national standard on structured collaboration.

1. The importance of structured
collaboration
Spring 2012
Context • introducing a common language to improve
Partnership activity has both benefits and risks, and the track communication between organisations
record for local government has been mixed, leading to • aligning aspirations and capabilities between partners and
varying degrees of positive outcomes and, in the case of playing to organisations' strengths to improve productivity
poorly designed partnerships, sometimes making the position • providing greater continuity and flexibility of resource
worse. across organisations
Where partnerships have not been successful, this is often • enhancing governance across organisations, such as by the
attributed to a lack of formal structure and clear, robust risk use of shared approaches to risk management
sharing arrangements. • promoting innovation and continuous improvement.
The imperatives of the Coalition Government's 2010
Spending Review, allied to its policy agendas such as Big At a time of increasing partnership working, it is more critical
Society and Open Public Services, are seeing local authorities than ever to understand the costs, benefits and outcomes of
considering - more seriously than ever before - alternative collaboration. Structured collaboration provides the focus on
forms of service delivery with other public sector bodies, the value and outcomes that local authorities and their partners
private sector and civil society organisations, including need.
possible 'spin offs' from their own organisation.
How can we help?
What are the main issues? Grant Thornton and Pera have developed a structured
1 increased risk as partnership activity increases - For collaboration review methodology that has recently completed
example, the Open Public Services white paper suggests that a successful pilot with a London Borough and some of its key
the growth of outcome based contracts and payment by statutory and contractual partners.
results will see an increased risk of provider failure, at a time In applying our methodology we triangulate stakeholder
when the minimum standards and expectations of perspectives on key factors such as partnership strategy,
commissioners increase. objectives, delivery, measurement and outcomes, to provide an
2 lack of central guidance and inefficiency- Whitehall has assessment of the 'health' of collaboration activity, based on
not always provided guiding principles. Many new concepts relating to the standard's collaboration spectrum.
partnership-based initiatives over the past 20 years started
without 'ground rules' which led to civil servants re- The collaboration spectrum
inventing the wheel. The Coalition Government's localism
agenda means that guidance will be further reduced.
What needs to be done?
So, how can the risks of partnership working be managed and
the benefits maximised, given the context set out above?
There is renewed interest in promoting formal arrangements
between public sector bodies and third parties via structured
collaboration. Some of this interest follows the release of the
first national standards on collaboration (BS 11000).
Collaboration, as codified in BS 11000, represents an
evolution on how partnering can be managed. The standard
advocates sharing visions and resources and has a particular
focus on approaches and mechanisms that can create
efficiency and effective delivery.
Structured collaboration is relatively new to the UK and
early adopters include the defence, aerospace and rail
industries. There could be considerable benefits in learning
how the concepts and tools set out in the
Standard can be applied to the public sector, to improve the
effectiveness of collaboration, such as:
• changing behaviours and improving trust, to make
collaboration more efficient within and between
organisations
.

2. We can review strategic partnerships, both contractual and "The structured collaboration review undertaken by
statutory, and identify areas of good practice and areas for Grant Thornton and Pera was really valued by our
Corporate Management Board for providing an
improvement, providing councils and their key partners with
independent assessment on how our partnerships
an opportunity for maximising the benefits available from a compare to a spectrum of collaboration levels and
more structured approach to collaboration. to each other. It helped us identify areas of good
practice and also areas where we need particular
focus.
Who should I contact?
We had already developed a corporate
If you would like to find out more about our structured collaboration strategy, to ensure the council
collaboration review, please contact: understands the costs and benefits, and maximises
the outcomes, of all our current and future
Guy Clifton partnership working, and this was particularly well
Grant Thornton UK LLP regarded by Grant Thornton and Pera, in taking
forward the structured collaboration agenda."
T 020 7728 2903
E guy.clifton@uk.gt.com James Rolfe
Director of Finance, Resources and Customer
Services, London Borough of Enfield
© 2012 Grant Thornton UK LLP. All rights reserved
Grant Thornton’ means Grant Thornton UK LLP, a limited liability partnership. Grant Thornton UK LLP is a member firm within Grant Thornton International Ltd (‘Grant Thornton International’).
Grant Thornton International and the member firms are not a worldwide partnership. Services are delivered by the member firms independently.
This publication has been prepared only as a guide. No responsibility can be accepted by us for loss occasioned to any person acting or refraining from acting as a result of any material in this publication.
www.grant-thornton.co.uk