Collaborative Governance: Formula for succes?

Increasingly, government relies on collaborative structures in attempt to solve societal issues. This has also made its marks on public administration literature, which frequently highlights the necessity of involving non-state actors in public policy, with theories such as collaborative governance and network governance. This trend of collaboration in the public sector also shows in policy that addresses education, in which an increase in collaborative structures can be noticed. The Rekenfaculteit project is an example of this: several stakeholders collaborate in realization of intensive math tutoring for children in Pendrecht, a neighborhood in the south of Rotterdam. In this research, the collaboration between organizations in realization of Rekenfaculteit project is subject of analysis. The research question is: How do collaborative governance process dynamics and what collaboration produces relate to its perceived success? Several theories on collaborative governance were explored. Different stages of collaborative governance can be identified. Many theories go into the process characteristics of collaboration. Collaborative governance focuses extensively on what elements and characteristics in processes are needed to get to a fruitful collaborative environment. For this, many different frameworks were designed. This research follows Emerson, Nabatchi and Balogh’s (2012) proposed distinction between types of process components: it consists of communication aspect (principled engagement), a relational (shared motivation) and a functional dimension (capacity for joint action). Furthermore, it is important to look beyond the process of collaboration: without it evolving into products it is unlikely that it is perceived successful. The products of collaboration are not as widely studied as its process dynamics are. A distinction was made between collaborative actions, the impacts these actions make (outcomes) and the ability to alter the process and actions according to its needs (adaptation). Lastly, the question remains what success is. When evaluating collaborative governance as a whole, the tendency is to look at the outcomes of collaboration. Kenis and Provan (2009) stress that different people are likely to use different criteria, in which one is not more valid than others. This paper follows this reasoning. It is frequently emphasized that a high quality process is conditional to achieving success. Qualitative research was done in order to answer the research question. As mentioned before, the Rekenfaculteit project was used as a case here. Although unique in the sense that collaborative structures in education rarely offer such intensive tutoring to primary school students, it is one of many examples of collaboration in the sector. The case is worth looking into, because it is regarded as quite successful. Eighteen interviews were held and documents were explored. The data that was gathered here was used for analysis. The findings show that all three components of the process dynamics were present in collaboration. Interviewees were particularly positive about the capacity for joint action: this was established early on and contributed to establishing the other two components: shared motivation and principled engagement. Although these were also thought of in a positive way, they took longer to build and some ongoing issues with the amount of information shared and trust and commitment were noted. Interviewees were positive about the collaborative actions, although areas for improvements are 4 mentioned. It appearsthat all three components of the process dynamics were crucial in the realization of the actions: the findings do not show one being more important than the others. With regards to the outcomes, it appears that the program’s impact on the environment is considered most important. However, differences occur in what is most important in that aspect: socio-emotional development of the children or cognitive skill improvements. Although overall positive, some interviewees were a more negative about the latter. A belief is shared that the noted outcomes are related to the actions, referring to the tutoring. Adaptation appears a key element in this collaboration: it is said that Rekenfaculteit extensively focuses on improving itself and that many adaptations were made that were helpful in improving the quality of the program. Lastly, the question remains what success is and how this relates to collaborative governance. It appears that success mostly relates to the outcomes. Again, differences occur in what is considered most important here, in line with what was said about the outcomes. But success appears to go beyond just outcomes: the quality of the actions, adaptation and the relational aspect of process dynamics are mentioned as ways to define and measure success. Thus, success most directly relates to the outcomes, but from what it seems other elements play a role here as well. However, for the most part one can see that process dynamics, collaborative actions and adaptive capacity more indirectly relate to success, for the outcomes could not have been achieved without the aid of them.