Local cross‐sector partnerships

Cairns, Ben; Harris, Margaret

doi:10.1002/nml.20027

Cited by 36 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Even though the three Action Centers and their respective Governance Councils operated independently in different neighborhoods (Brownsville, Tremont and East Harlem), members across sites concurred that Governance Councils foster collaboration among co-located occupants of the Action Centers through sharing of information and resources, consistent meetings, and engaging in continuous communication. Because community-based organizations often want to connect with other organizations or health departments but the integration and coordination infrastructure is sometimes lacking [16,17], the Governance Council model, as evidenced by our findings, can provide a feasible structure to facilitate improved communication and integration across partners from different sectors seeking to improve neighborhood health. In fostering information sharing and communication, this model helps to build relationships among Action Center staff, co-located partners and external partners that allow them to have increased reach and access to community members as well as access to additional resources for their clients.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Building a Culture of Health at the Neighborhood Level Through Governance Councils

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To explore facilitators and barriers to developing and sustaining collaboration among New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene's Neighborhood Health Action Centers and co-located partners, who share information and decisionmaking through a Governance Council structure of representative members. Semi-structured interviews were conducted in 2018 with 43 Governance Council members across the three Action Centers of East Harlem (13), Tremont (15), and Brownsville (15), New York City. Governance Council members identified collaboration through information-and resourcesharing, consistent meetings and continuous communication as valuable for fostering a culture of health in their communities. Immediate benefits included building relationships, increased access to resources, and increased reach and access to community members. Challenges included difficulty building community trust, insufficient advertisement of services, and navigation of government bureaucracy. The Governance Councils forged collaborative relationships among local government, community-based organizations and clinical providers to improve health and well-being in their neighborhoods. Sharing space, resources and information is feasible with a movement towards shared leadership and decision-making. This may result in community-driven and tailored solutions to historical inequities. In shared leadership models, some internal reform by Government partners may be required.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Building a Culture of Health at the Neighborhood Level Through Governance Councils

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Coordination of actions is often more difficult if more than one actor participates in decision-making. Meanwhile, Cairns and Harris (2011) consider that enthusiasm is an essential first step in collaborative social innovation as organizations look to work together, however, it is not enough. Animosity between organizations arises as they have different assumptions, values, and beliefs; that is different institutional logic (Ashraf et al, 2017), in addition to different organisational structures, objectives, and missions.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A trilemma in social extrapreneurship?

Aranda-Jan¹

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social extrapreneurship needs to depart from 'trilemma' understandings. Social extrapreneurship should not be considered as such. We are not choosing if either/or particular sectoral partnerships are more suitable, but we are balancing partnerships in a both/and logic: a paradox rather than a "di/tri-lemma" form of understanding. The balance of private, public and civil sector collaboration is different given context. Our search is not for the perfect combination, but our best possible balance. We left the challenge in identifying the strategies that help us find that balance between sectors in private-public-civil collaborations.

show abstract

“…In an alliance context, this kind of open communication is critical because it allows members to work through issues collectively, promotes member buy-in, and sustains support for decisions over the long term (Campbell 2008). Likewise, open communication helps sustain consensus by identifying potential conflicts in early discussions, thereby preventing minor conflicts from escalating into major fallouts that might derail the entire decision-making process (Cairns and Harris 2011).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Decision‐Making Fairness and Consensus Building in Multisector Community Health Alliances: A Mixed‐Methods Analysis

Hearld

Alexander

Bodenschatz

et al. 2013

Nonprofit Mgmnt & Ldrshp

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Given their inherently diverse composition and potentially competing interests, a foundational activity of community health alliances is establishing consensus on the vision and strategies for achieving its goals. Using an organizational justice framework, we examined whether member perceptions of fairness in alliances' decision-making processes are associated with the perceived level of consensus among members regarding the alliance vision and strategies. We used a mixed-methods design to examine the relationship between perceptions of fairness and consensus within fourteen multisector community health alliances. Quantitative analysis found the perceived level of consensus to be positively associated with decision-making transparency (procedural fairness), inclusiveness (procedural fairness), and benefits relative to costs (distributive fairness). Qualitative analysis indicated that the consensus-building process is facilitated by using formal decision-making frameworks and engaging alliance mem-bers in decision-making processes early. Alliance leaders may be more successful at building consensus when they recognize the need to appeal to a member' s sense of procedural and distributive fairness, and, perhaps equally important, recognize when one rather than the other is called for and draw upon decision-making processes that most clearly evoke that sense of fairness. Our findings reinforce the importance of fairness in building and sustaining capacity for improving community health.

show abstract

Local cross‐sector partnerships

Abstract: We focus in this paper on the challenges faced by local governmental (municipal) and third sector (nonprofit)

Cited by 36 publications

References 40 publications

Building a Culture of Health at the Neighborhood Level Through Governance Councils

Building a Culture of Health at the Neighborhood Level Through Governance Councils

A trilemma in social extrapreneurship?

Decision‐Making Fairness and Consensus Building in Multisector Community Health Alliances: A Mixed‐Methods Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About