Another input was the provision of resources. This tangible support was provided by the Business and Labour Partnership Program in terms of partnership project funding, a staff dedicated to the process of partnership building and, later, more formal committee structures intended to reflect a political imperative of accountability. During the foundation building and development and demonstration years, there was strategic support for local partnerships and this helped to build the reputation of the Business and Labour Partnership Program. Other resources in their own right were the knowledge and skills that accumulated as partnerships began to work.

Active leadership was also a critical input in determining the extent and pace of partnership development. Leadership occurred both at the NLS level and at the partner organization level. Individual personalities were a dimension of this good leadership. Related to this was the autonomy around decision making which happened as partnerships continued to spread. Establishing linkages with other organizations and deepening an understanding of the issues connected to workplace literacy were also viewed as leadership strategies.

Processes of Partnership Working

Knowledge and information sharing were of central importance to the building of partnerships. This was horizontal across all partners in the form of dialogue and consultation. Networking both formally and informally strengthened the partnerships. “Big” decisions, such as the allocation of funds were made inside the partnership meetings.

Differences of opinions were valued in the decision-making process with very little conflict and more of a consensus-building approach. In most cases, partnership cultures developed that were different than their individual organizational cultures. Individual project accountability for decisions and activities were entrusted to all partners. As well, reporting requirements to the funder were clear during the foundation building and development and demonstration years. In the period of program change, demonstrating accountability became more complex and this variation confused partners.