VI. Barriers to Building Partnerships

When we interviewed family literacy practitioners and their partners in the fall of 1995, we asked them what worked in building community partnerships, and what didn't. When asked what the barriers and challenges were to developing strong links with other agencies, many people had the same answers. Lack of time and poor communication were among the most frequently cited problems. Research into community collaborations confirms our experiences here in Alberta.

The following section identifies common problems encountered in developing partnerships, and barriers that you should be aware of as you develop relationships with other agencies.

These descriptions of barriers to collaborations are based on FLAG's 1995 interviews. Only additional sources will be cited.

"Turf" issues and self-interest

Turf issues can be a significant barrier to developing partnerships. You may encounter resistance, defensiveness, or suspicion when you approach a potential partner. Agency staff may feel the proposed partnership implies that they are not doing their job properly, or that the partnership will reduce the need for their services.

Turf issues may be due to a need for autonomy, perceived competition for limited funding, job uncertainty, or a lack of knowledge about the services other agencies offer (Irwin 1994, Kadel and Routh 1993, Mawhinney 1993).

One community agency explained territorial problems as "agencies wanting to protect their accomplishments, or being afraid that someone will take over their role."

Shortage of time and resources
This is a very common problem in developing effective, long-lasting partnerships. Staff are often already over-extended and sometimes underpaid. Adding more responsibilities and activities in the way of a partnership may be viewed as simply too much. If an agency does not have money in the budget to pay for extra staff time, or to make time available for contributing to a partnership, it may not be given very high priority.

The process of choosing appropriate partners, developing an agreement on the project goals and design, and preparing funding proposals and applications is time consuming (Seamen et al 1992). Once the group is functioning, the extra time required to reach recommendations and make decisions in a diverse group as opposed to in a single agency can be seen as an obstacle or deterrent (Bradford 1993).