Betwixt & Between

By Leda Stott & Anette Scoppetta , Topic: Action Enquiry , 8 May 2013

Adding Value: The broker role in partnerships for employment and social inclusion in Europe

Abstract: In Europe, the “partnership principle” is promoted as a policy instrument for improving employment and social inclusion and supported by Structural Funds such as the European Social Fund (ESF). Within this context partnership broker organisations play a vital role. However, while much is known about knowledge transfer about different partnership approaches and activities, far less is known about these intermediary mechanisms and the success factors that underpin their work. The article provides a short review of the work undertaken by partnership broker organisations in supporting partnerships for employment and social inclusion in Europe. The authors identify four distinct broker typologies, suggesting how brokers add value to collaborative activities and enhance social capital by promoting deeper cross-sector understanding. They propose deeper investigation and exchanges on brokering experiences in Europe to recognise the broker role and to ensure that European employment partnerships are made more robust.

 

Adding Value: The broker role in partnerships for employment and social inclusion in Europe

Leda Stott and Anette Scoppetta

Background

In recent years partnership has emerged as a central priority in the socio-economic development strategy of the European Union.[1] The rationale for working in partnership is that problems such as the concentration of unemployment among certain groups can best be addressed through the engagement of different social actors at local, regional and national levels. The “partnership principle” is promoted as a policy instrument for improving employment and social inclusion and supported by Structural Funds such as the European Social Fund (ESF).[2] Within this context partnership broker organisations play a vital role. However, while great attention has been paid to knowledge transfer about different partnership approaches and activities, far less is known about these intermediary mechanisms and the success factors that underpin their work.

This article draws upon lessons learnt from the Community of Practice of Partnerships in the ESF (COP), a trans-national network of ESF Managing Authorities which operated between 2007 and 2011.[3] Through its review work in different countries of Europe, the COP identified a number of partnership brokering organisations that play a critical function in developing partnership arrangements tackling labour market challenges. Operating within specific country partnership models and varying in their levels of formality, they include: the not-for profit organisation Pobal working with Local Development Companies (local area partnerships) in Ireland; the public sector service agency gsub GmbH (Gsub) working with Employment Pacts for Older Workers in Germany; the Coordination Unit Kooo working with Territorial Employment Pacts (TEPs) in Austria; and five Thematic Groups working with cooperation projects selected by Structural Fund Partnerships in Sweden. The different roles adopted by these agencies will be briefly examined here. This will be followed by a preliminary attempt to extract some of the key requisites for successful partnership brokering in the European context.

 

While the support activities undertaken by the broker organisations overlap, their evolution over time relates to specific and dynamic country contexts which have necessitated the undertaking of a range of tasks; from monitoring programme processes and progress to providing guidance and policy advice to territorial alliances. These diverse experiences can be broadly categorised in four distinct partnership broker typologies (see Table 1).

 

Partnership Broker TYPOLOGY	The PROGRAMME manaGEMENT BODY	tHE Service Organisation	The innovation hub	The LEARNING AGENCY
Characteristics	Pobal Local Community Development Programme (LCDP) (Ireland)	Gsub Perspective 50plus Pacts (Germany)	Kooo Territorial Employment Pacts (TEPs) (Austria)	Thematic Groups Cooperation projects selected by Structural Fund Partnerships (Sweden)
Legal status	Not-for-profit organisation with charitable status	Independent private enterprise (public-sector service centre)	Project at an independent social science institute (NGO)	Units in academic institutions and ministries, national agencies and multi-sector forums
Number of partnerships supported	50 Local Partnership Companies	78 regional pacts	Nine regional TEPs and their sub-regional structures	Cooperation projects selected by Eight Structural Fund Partnerships
Activities	Monitoring programme processes and progress Supporting strategic plans Examination and confirmation of work concluded by partnerships	Guidance Networking Communicating via internet platform Programme monitoring Supporting PR activities Coordinating research support	Networking, Information exchange and input via meetings Providing support in the context of studies and evaluation PR work & TEP homepage	Support and guidance on integration of key cross-cutting themes Researching and analysing learning from projects Sharing of information and results
Development over time	1992-onwards: partnership working in response to the employment crisis.Today: stronger focus on those in greatest need	2005-2007: motivation work.2008-2010: enlargement activities 2011-today: practice exchange	1999-2006: advising on building of partnerships.2007-today: focus on innovative actions for persons excluded from the labour market	2007-today: have become key players in their respective fields through better analyses and understanding of their “themes”.2012-today: increased focus on results

Table 1: Partnership Broker Typologies

 

Unpacking the typologies – partnership broker organisations in action

In order to understand the nature of the different partnership broker typologies outlined above, a brief summary of their work is provided below.

1. The Programme Management Body – Pobal, Ireland[4]

Ireland has a long history of working in partnership and collaboration underpins urban and rural development, particularly in areas of economic and social disadvantage. Pobal was founded in 1992 and delivers and manages a number of government programmes which promote social inclusion, reconciliation and equality. One of these programmes is the Local and Community Development Programme (LCDP) which aims to tackle poverty and social exclusion through constructive engagement with disadvantaged communities. Pobal is responsible for monitoring the LCDP on behalf of the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government. This work involves ongoing review of programme processes and progress, supporting strategic plans and appraising the activities of Local Development Companies (LDCs)[5] to ensure that their work contributes to programme outcomes and agreed levels of activity based on local needs. Pobal also promotes and shares programme guidelines and good practice, as well as outputs and short/medium term outcomes.[6]

 

Pobal’s main strength lies in its extensive knowledge and experience of working with partnerships. The organisation supports collaborative activities through a liaison system that offers information, feedback, training inputs and discussion, all of which serve to ensure that the voice of target groups is clearly positioned in planning and practice. Great emphasis is also placed on learning from partnership experiences through ongoing exchange and the sharing of good practice examples.

 

2. The Service Organisation – Gsub, Germany[7]

In Germany the partnership principle is implemented through “horizontal partnerships” that work with ministries at federal level to ensure joint programming and delivery, and “vertical partnerships” that work at regional and local levels. Vertical partnerships include projects such as “Perspective 50plus” which is managed by Gsub via a contractual arrangement with the Federal Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs (BMAS).[8] As a result Gsub supports a total of 421 welfare offices and other labour market participants that have come together to form 78 regional employment pacts for older workers across Germany.[9] Gsub has put great effort into building a tightly woven collaborative network where participants can share their knowledge and experience and disseminate new approaches and examples from practice.

 

Both BMAS and Gsub have worked hard to ensure that the Perspective 50plus programme is kept focussed, flexible and non-bureaucratic. Indicators that measure results are kept to a minimum and, in spite of the fact that Gsub has taken on additional responsibilities such as auditing duties and verification checks since the programme started, dialogue and exchange at peer level are consistently practiced. These participative methodologies have facilitated ongoing learning processes and the incorporation of innovative elements such as “idea competitions” and the use of “pact ambassadors” to change public perceptions of older people.

 

3. The Innovation Hub – Kooo, Austria[10]

When the Austrian Territorial Employment Pacts (TEPs) were launched at the end of the 1990s, a ‘neutral’ coordination body, Kooo, was set up by the Austrian Federal Ministry for Labour, Social Affairs and Consumer Protection (BMASK) to assist regional partners in developing TEPs. Kooo was established as an independent organisation, with a base outside the Ministry, to offer networking, coordination, policy advice, evaluation and public relations support to the TEPS. The Austria-wide TEP network has developed over time, starting with joint dialogue on how to best set up partnerships at the regional level and moving towards assisting the development of innovative active labour market policy measures for those in need, all steered with hands-off facilitation by Kooo. The TEPs have developed:

• Process innovations – e.g. the Salzburg TEP’s clearing process which can be used alongside the Austrian needs­-based minimum benefit system;
• Structural innovations – e.g. implementation by the TEP Vienna of a counselling and support structure (ABBE) that assists the integration of the needs-­based minimum benefit system into the wider Austrian system;
• Systemic innovations – e.g. implementation of the one-stop-shop principle for persons with asylum status by the Upper Austria TEP; and,
• Methodological innovations – e.g. the start-up consultancy service for migrants implemented by the TEP Lower Austria.[11]

 

Today, the Austrian TEP model is regarded as an EU best practice. Kooo’s perceived neutrality, the fruitful learning environments it has created among TEP partners[12], and the active engagement and commitment of its staff, have been central to this success.

4. The Learning Agency – Thematic Groups, Sweden

The eight regions of Sweden each have a Structural Fund Partnership in which politicians and other stakeholders are responsible for selecting multi-actor cooperation projects that address employment and exclusion issues. Cooperation projects are provided with a structured support process to ensure that important cross-cutting issues are integrated into their work. The support process includes assistance from five national Thematic Groups that gather project experiences, knowledge and results in order to promote improvements and share lessons. They include:
Theme Group Youth – a multi-actor steering group located at the Swedish National Board for Youth Affairs which assists young people to enter the labour market[13]

• Workplace learning and labour market transition – a collaborative project run by universities and research centres which promotes workplace learning[14]
• Inclusion in Working Life – focusing on inclusion of disadvantaged individuals and groups in the labour market and currently led by the Institute for Futures Studies[15]
• Equality – the Working Life Forum which works to ensure equal rights and opportunities at work[16]
• Entrepreneurship – the Swedish Agency for Economic and Regional Growth which looks at market-based opportunities for employment.[17]

 

The Groups engage with projects through telephone contact, meetings, networks, seminars, training and written guidance. Their focus is increasingly on ensuring that results have a long-term impact and that lessons are shared proactively between projects and regions, as well as trans-nationally. Over time the Groups have become recognised key players in their respective thematic areas.[18]

 

Initial findings from the different typologies

Although further research into the work of the organisations mentioned here is clearly necessary, preliminary analysis suggests that successful partnership brokering in the overarching European labour market context rests upon a set of common factors. These include:

1. Warm neutrality

The fact that partnership broker organisations have an independent status, external to formal Structural Fund structures, enhances their credibility and legitimacy among different stakeholders. Whether they are registered not-for-profit organisations, enterprise agencies or academic units, the perception that they are autonomous agencies that will honour and deliver on commitments to diverse audiences is central to their success. This sense of legitimacy is reinforced by organisational cultures that are accessible, have an open-minded approach to learning, a friendly atmosphere and strong staff commitment to partnering. The warm neutrality offered by the partnership brokers generates respect and, over time, a sense of confidence in their work that has led them to assume high-level programme responsibilities, develop exciting policy innovations, and encourage vibrant partnership learning cultures.

 

2. Coherence and understanding

The strategic support provided by partnership broker organisations, be it in terms of management and administration such as Pobal and Gsub, advice and support from Kooo, or reviewing and integrating cross-cutting themes via the Swedish Thematic Groups, provides partnership stakeholders with an understanding of ‘the bigger picture’ and clarity around the links between policy and practice in relation to EU Structural Funds. As a result of the partnership broker’s liaison role, national requirements are translated and made sense of at regional and local levels, and programme roll out is given coherence. The enhancement of top-down and bottom-up connections assists coordination among different players and is central to the promotion of multi-level governance arrangements within the EU.

3. Bringing in the local voice

The partnership broker organisations all work to ensure that local actors or target groups are clearly positioned in partnership frameworks and activities. Valuing the know-how and expertise of local actors, and including this in ongoing partnership processes, ensures grassroots engagement in resolving societal problems and balances demands for geographical scale with local ownership. Pobal describes this function as providing “space” for local voices, enabling policy and procedures to become a reality at the same time as offering enough flexibility to unlock local commitment and empowerment.[19]

4. Insight and agility

Due to their connections and experience, partnership brokering organisations are able to anticipate, diagnose and respond to situations rapidly. Leadership and staff keep abreast of contextual developments and variations through their diverse and extensive networks and are thus ready to address partnering needs appropriately and competently. Their flexible nature and an ability to adapt effectively to changing circumstances mean that partnership broker organisations act as well-positioned navigators and reference points that offer continuous and relevant partnering guidance and support.

5. Reviewing and learning

The monitoring and assessment role that partnership broker organisations play assists improvements in the management and delivery of partnership activities. Mutual learning is enhanced through networking and exchange processes across projects and programmes at local, regional, national and trans-national levels. In Sweden the Thematic Groups constantly feed positive results back into practice, while in Ireland Pobal’s monitoring work enables corrective or remedial action to be taken to facilitate optimal partnership performance. In the cases of Kooo and Gsub, the knowledge gained through partnership analysis allows shared learning from successes and failures. The “safe space” that brokers provide for dialogue, at what Gsub describes as “the same eye-level”, ensures that exchanges are both respectful and challenging, thus stimulating deeper learning.

 

Conclusion

This article has attempted to provide a short review of the work undertaken by partnership broker organisations in supporting partnerships for employment and social inclusion in Europe. These agencies are clearly essential to the effective implementation of the partnership principle; adding immense value to collaborative activities and enhancing social capital by promoting deeper cross-sector understanding. However, in spite of their significant contributions, we believe the importance of this intermediary function has not been adequately acknowledged. Deeper investigation and exchanges on partnership brokering experiences, including those from Southern and Eastern Europe, are required, with information on: the nature and evolution of their roles; different stakeholder perceptions of their value; and the skills and expertise their work requires. Such efforts will not only give the partnership broker role the recognition it deserves but also ensure that European employment partnerships are made more robust.

References

Age Work Balance (2012) “Good practice on the (re-)integration of older long-term unemployed into the labour market in Berlin”Peer Review Report Berlin http://www.age-work-balance.metropolisnet.eu/reports/ (accessed 05/03/2013)

Community of Practice on Partnership in the ESF (2012) Partnership Learning Manual, compiled by Stott, L., Federal Ministry of Labour, Social Affairs and Consumer Protection (BMASK), Vienna http://partnership.esflive.eu/files/u138/COP_Partnership_Learning_Manual.pdf (accessed 09/03/2013)

Community of Practice on Partnerships in the ESF (2011) “Linking Policy Fields by Partnerships: The Austrian Territorial Employment Pacts (TEPs)” PEO Key Lessons Report Austria http://partnership.esflive.eu/node/650 (accessed 05/03/2013)

Community of Practice on Partnerships in the ESF (2010a) “The Irish Experience of Partnership, Working in the Area of Gender Equality” PEO Key Lessons Report Ireland http://partnership.esflive.eu/node/585 (accessed 05/03/2013)

Community of Practice on Partnerships in the ESF (2010b) “Partnership Practices on Enhancing Employability in Germany” PEO Key Lessons Report Germany http://partnership.esflive.eu/node/525 (accessed 05/03/2013)

Community of Practice on Partnerships in the ESF (2010c) “Linking Regional Growth and Labour Market Policies via Partnerships in Sweden” PEO Key Lessons Report Sweden http://partnership.esflive.eu/node/479 (accessed 05/03/2013)

Community of Practice on Partnership in the ESF (2008) Guidebook How ESF Managing Authorities and Intermediate Bodies Support Partnership, compiled by Stott, L., ESF-Agentschap Vlaanderen, Brussels http://partnership.esflive.eu/files/guidebook_spread_lowres.pdf (accessed 09/03/2013)

European Commission (2012) “The partnership principle in the implementation of the Common Strategic Framework

Funds – elements for a European Code of Conduct on Partnership” Commission, Staff Working Document, Brussels, 24.4.2012, SWD (2012) 106 final http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docoffic/working/strategic_framework/swd_2012_106_en.pdf
(accessed 10/03/ 2013)

European Commission (2006a) Regulation (EC) No 1081/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 on the European Social Fund and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1784/1999, Official Journal of the EU, L 210, Volume 49, 31 July 2006 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2006:210:0012:0018:EN:PDF (accessed 10/03/ 2013)

European Commission (2006b) Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 July 2006 on the European Social Fund and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999, Official Journal of the EU, L 210, Volume 49, 31 July 2006 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/site/en/oj/2006/l_210/l_21020060731en00250078.pdf (accessed 10/03/2013)

Fazlagic, A. & Scoppetta, A. (2003) Open Reflection Cycle – A Knowledge Management Method Supporting Reflective Learning ZSI (ed.), ZSI-Discussion Papers, Nr.1, ISSN 1818-4154, Vienna https://www.zsi.at/attach/ZSI_dp1.pdf (accessed 10/03/2013)

OECD LEED Forum on Partnerships and Local Governance (2010) The Vienna Action Statement http://www.oecd.org/cfe/leed/44598484.pdf (accessed 12/03/2013)

Stott, L. & Scoppetta, A. (2011) Promoting Transnational Learning: Using a critical friend peer review process in the Community of Practice on Partnership in the European Social Fund, European Journal of Transnational Studies, Vol.3. Issue 1, Spring http://transnational-journal.eu/3_1_2011/EJOTS_1_2011.pdf (accessed 10/03/2013)

 

Authors

Leda Stott is a specialist in multi-stakeholder collaboration and development issues. Currently Director of the International Master in Sustainable Development and Corporate Responsibility at the EOI Business School in Madrid, she teaches, trains and conducts partnership research with a variety of academic institutions and international agencies. Leda is the author of the European Commission’s EQUAL Guide for Development Partnerships (2004), How European Social Fund Managing Authorities and Intermediate Bodies Support Partnership(2008) and the Partnership Learning Manual (2012) and was the content expert for the European Social Fund’s Community of Practice on Partnership between 2007 and 2011.

Anette Scoppetta is Head of the Work and Employment Unit and Board Member at the Centre for Social Innovation (ZSI) in Vienna, Austria. She has worked extensively on labour market and employment policies, regional economic development and projects in the field of demographic change, new forms of governance, social dialogue, participation and partnerships that focus on employment and socio-economic development issues. Anette supervises the Coordination Unit of Austrian Territorial Employment Pacts (TEPs) and from 2009 until 2011 was responsible for project management of the Community of Practice on Partnership in the European Social Fund.