Strong commitment from top-level management 

Shared participation and sharing of information

Positive spirit and approach

Open-mindedness

Adoption of a transparent approach which emphasised staff involvement

Accommodation of the alternative view – often leading to consensus decision making

Confidence building

Respect for other peoples’ views

Opportunity to improve communications between management and staff

Issues raised in non confrontational manner

Provision of greater sense of ownership of issues

Maturity within groups

Not being defensive or an apologist

Use of partnership to encourage staff learning and development

Positive follow up

Achieving tangible outputs

Confusion over role and function of partnership committee and participants

Lack of real engagement by top-level management – lip service

Lack of involvement in key strategic issues affecting the department/office

An ad-hoc approach lacking direction

Management domination of meetings and agenda

Insufficient debate

Difficulty of unions and staff in influencing the agenda

Perception that partnership committee is a ‘talking shop’

People reverting to type at local level

Lack of listening/recognition of the alternative view

Entrenchment and defensiveness among the partners

Lack of action and respect

Lack of confidence

Frustration due to the time and effort required to reach a result through partnership

Perception that management feel they have to have all the answers

Adequate staff training and resources

Establishment of sub-groups

Development of local and regional partnership structures

Use of extensive groups for developing internal communications

Effective chairing of meetings

Tabling of  agenda items with no pre-existing IR baggage

Tabling of agenda items linked to modernisation and change strategy

Positive response from support individuals/structures e.g. SDU

Involvement of individuals with expertise in a specific area

Involvement of committee in policy development

Sticking to the agenda

Agreeing an action plan

Reporting and reviewing

Lack of definition of role of partnership within departments

Lack of clarity regarding the role of staff in partnership and lack of readiness to address the divergence of views on this issue

Domination from centre steering committee

Failure of committees to establish and disseminate a Business/Action Plan

Partnership committee too small in size to be fully representative

Partnership committee representation disproportionate – i.e. too many management representatives and too few trade union representatives on some committees

Meetings depend on management diary

No preparation time allowed

Views of committees not taken into account at central level

Chairing not always conducive to full participation and achievement of consensus based decision making

Poor organisation of meetings

Documents sent late for review – people cannot come up to speed in time for meeting

Tabling agenda items constrained by IR dimension

Tabling of local issues that could be decided elsewhere

Difficulty of setting a boundary between what is an IR issue and what is not

Repeating agenda items

Not drawing on the expertise of all participants in order to achieve a better result

Difficulty of some union representatives in operating in a new decision-making environment without the benefit of the requisite knowledge or skills

Failure to meet the ongoing training requirements of partnership committees

Failure to establish project deadlines

Lack of cover at work – shortage of resources

Time and staff constraints and time taken to travel to meetings

Lack of continuity of staff involved in progressing an issue

Lack of attendance at meetings

Uneven sharing of the workload

No uniform reporting mechanism for committees to report back to staff

No reporting mechanism for staff members back to staff

Failure to develop sub-groups

No system for replacing personnel

No process to deal with induction and socialisation of new members

Not enough use made of external facilitation

Not enough process reviews and self evaluation aimed at achieving more openness

Loss of momentum

PMDS

Customer service and quality

Staff training and development

Integrated HRM strategy

Strategy Statements and strategic development process

Recruitment and retention

Equality/disability/diversity

Teleworking

Internal departmental communications

Work organisation and restructuring

Widening of participation in the partnership process

Issues related to modernisation and the change agenda

Merit and Performance Awards

Communications

Code of conduct – Bullying

Working conditions

Smoking policy

Policy on ‘acting up’ positions

Travel policy

Annual reports

Health and safety

Quality assurance

Accommodation/movement to new premises

Car parking

Worksharing

IT strategy

Decentralisation

Social and cultural events

Management information systems

Staff attitude survey

Stress

Security related issues

Ensure better definition of the role of the partnership committee

Ensure full commitment of top-level management – not limited to the HR division

Establish a national co-ordination of partnership activities

 Identify ‘champions of change’ to ensure commitment given to partnership

Ensure that boundaries between partnership and conventional IR practices are respected and upheld

Afford committees a role beyond deliberation and into implementation, monitoring and review

Identify the development of task-specific partnership groups as a strategic objective

Agree date/time for regular monthly meetings

Ensure more input into the agenda from staff

Ensure better communication of activities of the partnership committee

Devise a method for allowing staff to put agenda items to the committee

Provide clearer guidance on method of dealing with issues with IR implications

Afford committees with a central role in the strategic development process

Encourage greater sharing of information between departments

Ensure adequate resourcing of committees

Ensure involvement in committees is seen as part of the job rather than an extra curricular activity

Recognise the contribution of union representatives and officials

Afford partnership committees a role in monitoring gender equality and equality of opportunity

Develop and enhance intra-departmental communications

Involve external facilitators to stimulate development in committees where progress has been limited – perhaps use the National Centre for Partnership

Identify and promote the outcomes and results of partnership

On resourcing…

·     “Problems arising from lack of cover to prepare for and attend meetings and do work assigned by the committee are becoming an ever more pressing issue for members.  Overtime is a key resource here.” 

·      “Work related to partnership must be recognised as part of the normal daily/weekly/monthly workload.”

On the operation of committees…

·     “There is confusion over the roles of various committees and a consequent need to be clear about the work being undertaken by each, and its relevance to the organisation.”

·     “A clear definition of purposes and objectives is essential.”

·     “There is a feeling that the process is overly led by management and driven from the centre.  The level of contribution of individual members needs to be reviewed and improved on.”

·      “To date there has been very little use of facilitation within the civil service partnership groups even though the trade union side has suggested it and there is provision for it in the agreement.”

·     “I believe that all involved now accept, however, that there has been a certain loss of momentum.”

·      “…The establishment of regional and local committees would greatly enhance a communication strategy and increase the opportunity for members to become involved.”

·      “Sometimes members see Partnership as an ‘easy run’ for management in terms of getting decisions made but do not always acknowledge their role or responsibility in being part of the decision-making process.”

·      “Partnership committees need to have some form of business or action plan which sets out the objectives of the committee over a one or two year period.”

On Relationships and trust

·     “In some departments there was a strong perception that management dominated the framing of the agenda and in essence, this management-led approach ensured that the other constituents were constrained in their efforts to have issues of interest to their constituency included within the partnership process.”

·     “In practice however, the official side in certain departments has attempted to use the partnership structure to bypass existing and established industrial relations structures.  In particular, certain departments have consciously placed on the agenda of the partnership committee, issues that have a clear and fundamental industrial relations dimension and as such are not appropriate to the partnership forum… Conversely, in other departments where it is recognised that the existing IR structures must be respected and supported, such contentious problems have not arisen.”

·     “Despite partnership’s three/four year existence it has not yet been able to overcome the cultural or traditional differences common across the civil service.”

On Communications and partnership…

·     “All in all, Partnership has made a valuable contribution.  The challenge now is to build on that by sorting out roles and more importantly direction for its various constituent parts at national, regional and local level.  An infusion of energy is needed or we’ll lose our way.”

·     “The current partnership structures throughout the civil service are heavily dependent on the concept of a steering or central committee to guide activities. The immediate consequence of such a committee could be the perception that partnership is an elite group with no real connection with the day to day business of the organisation.”

·     “There has been very little central leadership or guidance in relation to the   operation of partnership committees generally.”

·      “Partnership is considered a more inclusive approach to problem solving and decision making in the workplace.  Therefore, the establishment of regional and local committees would greatly enhance a communication strategy and increase the opportunity for members to become involved.”

·     “[Partnership] provides a greater sense of ownership of issues.”

·     “There are many problems facing the partnership committee in the future but with some guidance from a facilitator and a renewed interest by members we should be able to have a committee who will share ideas and decision making…”

·     “I am not aware of partnership developments generally across the civil service.  I am not aware of any mechanism that enables the input or receipt of information or feedback in relation to partnership experience in other departments/offices other than occasional articles in Link Magazine.”

·     “Overall the partnership process has been beneficial within [department name].”

·     “If the Partnership process, despite its good work through its subgroups, does not make a real and visible impact with those staff who are not directly involved, then its relevance and effectiveness will continue to be disputed.”

·     “…Partnership should continue to be, and should be subject to regular review.”

·     “The challenge is to focus the goodwill – which exists on all sides towards partnership – into structures and processes which support the achievement of optimum organisational efficiency and effectiveness and which ensure also that the needs and concerns of our staff/internal customers are properly recognised and addressed.”

·     “…There is also a view that partnership has become process driven i.e. the Partnership model exists to serve the Partnership Committee and little else.  To be truly effective it could be argued that Partnership needs to become more issue driven.”

·     “It is recognised that partnership has an increasingly vital role to play in relation to the ongoing and increasingly intensive modernisation and change programme within the Civil Service…”

·     “[To be effective partnership must]…be more efficient and effective than structures that prevailed prior to partnership.”

·     “In particular, the failure in certain departments/offices to establish task specific partnership sub-processes continues to act as a bulwark against the evolution of partnership within said organisation.”

·     “A constant policy of communication is essential.  In this regard, it is equally important to brand partnership successes and publicise them widely.”

·     “The level of communication between partnership groups within departments and to staff across the civil service departments/offices is almost non-existent.”

On Progress and the Future…

·     “Very few partnership committees would appear to have been afforded the opportunity to have a direct input into either the development of strategy statements and related business plans or action programmes or other initiatives designed to give effect to departmental strategy statements.”

·     “…developing and embedding partnership within the civil service should be seen as complementary to rather than a substitute for industrial relations structures, practices and conventions.”

·     “Without the appropriate level of commitment from [both unions and managers], the future of partnership could be in some doubt.

·     “To show that organisations are sincere about partnership, they will need to empower the process in the area of decision making.  Without such power, the charge of  ‘talking shop’ could be levelled at the partnership process.”

·     “It will be necessary to equip partnership personnel with the requisite skills to make the appropriate decisions and then defend these decisions if and when necessary.”