During the foundation building and development and demonstration years, a great deal of freedom was exercised in proposals and projects. When a project idea was outside the program guidelines, advice was given regarding how to rethink or revisit the ideas. This also encompassed proposal revisions around the project budget. In general, there was open dialogue and a regular pattern of reconsideration. This encouraged partnership development and was considered a cornerstone of the program. When funding constraints occurred, some partners who had had a track record of successful projects continued in their developmental work. In other instances, these funding constraints discouraged the establishment and progress of new partnerships.
During the period of program change, support and advice for proposal ideas were slow coming and in the form of top-down communication. This process became more bureaucratic and less responsive to the project goals. As a result, two main perceptions developed from the field. One perception was that well-established partnerships were being favoured over newly formed ones. The other perception was that these newly-formed partnerships were not even given a chance to get off the ground. In addition, the tier system, which prioritized the type of applicants, knocked some partners off the playing field. Other partners did not have the capacity to conform to the new complicated contribution agreements. Added to this were the peer-review committees for proposals which required different writing skills and time commitments. These new program features changed the way some organizations went about the business of workplace literacy. These changes were partially responsible for transforming the Business and Labour Program into a narrower model for partnership development.