As a continuation of the previous section, this theme area delves into another level of information about the more specific dynamics of this partnership with the NLS Business and Labour Partnership Program over the three time periods. At the forefront of these dynamics was the leadership taken by the NLS during the foundation building and development and demonstration years. They advocated for business and labour projects that came from the ground. This leadership helped move the program from a vision to a solid starting point. They provided information to the stakeholders in terms of what was happening nationally, which helped to further develop the individual partnership projects. Strong alliances were formed with provincial governments, and connections among new partners continued to happen. At the same time, project accountability was always present but did not overshadow workplace issues.
Also during these two periods of time, all partners felt comfortable in risk-taking behaviours. Cutting-edge project ideas were encouraged and reflected unique and diverse local needs. This was an era of experimentation. Although business, labour, and education partners recognized that the NLS held the purse strings, they provided an openness toward interpreting program guidelines. Coupled with this risk taking, came a certain style of negotiation among partners. During these same time periods, there was a complete openness and trust when negotiating among partners. Rooted in the local needs of the community, projects had a practice-oriented focus and stakeholders felt they owned their projects. There was a sense of balance between framing project ideas and the parameters of the funding arrangements. All partners understood the funding spirit of the law as opposed to the letter of the law.
During the third period of time, government policy changes influenced the dynamics of the fostering of partnerships in terms of leadership, risk taking, and negotiation styles. As the delivery mechanisms for the NLS Business and Labour Partnership Program changed, the balance of power among partners also changed, especially for advocating local needs. Reciprocity was different because of a top-down accountability ethos, and business and labour organizations became frustrated trying to figure out the government priorities. The partnership dynamics were tarred with the federal government’s accountability chaos.