Theme 4: Factors of a Successful Partnership with the Business and Labour Program

This theme further elaborates the notion of successful partnerships, but with more of a focus on how these partnerships developed through the NLS Business and Labour Partnership Program. Several factors are discussed in relation to the three time periods. The importance of visioning the full range of possibilities with the field was considered a factor in building a successful partnership with the NLS. During the foundation building phase there was a social development approach used to understand the complexities of workplace literacy in the broadest sense. The intricacies and difficult issues that surfaced as project work got off the ground were always at the forefront of discussions. This visioning continued into much of the second period along with a recognition that a new field of knowledge was emerging. The search for more champions to carry forward this vision also continued as the new agenda now included essential skills. A tier system was developed during the period of program change which gave priority to national projects over provincial, territorial, and local ones.

A second success factor was related to the full commitment of all the partners including the NLS. For both the foundation building and development and demonstration years, commitment of the partners was evidenced by a respect for stakeholder values, differing points of view, and open and frank discussions. Each partnership project involved an equal sharing of the workload and a lack of hidden agendas. During the period of program change, this sense of commitment was not as solid, with stakeholders repeating the need to evaluate how this Business and Labour Partnership Program was actually happening.

Also central to the successful partnership with the NLS was the flow of information among members. Knowing the “big picture” which could influence proposal and project development was important. For the first and second periods of time, the NLS acted as a facilitator of information and less like an administrator of regulations. Mechanisms for dialogue were plentiful and as national training trends and policies shifted partners were close to the ever-changing information. During the period of program change, there was a need for resource people in regions where provincial offices in workplace literacy did not exist. However, funding was not allocated for additional staff. As review committees for proposals were put in place, feedback to unsuccessful applicants did not always occur, but when it did, it was characterized by long waiting periods.

The receptivity of the NLS as a funder to foster business, labour, and education partnerships was also a success factor. During the first and second periods, there was an atmosphere of experimentation and risk taking around projects and an awareness that this was the way to move forward, as opposed to the more rigid structures of the United States’ Workplace Literacy Initiative. This receptivity of field ideas that did not have to be “all the same size” helped to build strong alliances among stakeholders. In the period of program change, this receptivity was less flexible and more administrative.