Partnership; real or imagined?

Partnership. What does this word mean?

I am getting the feeling lately that many people see partnership more as a way for them to get something, rather than a relationship where they give and get. Why do you think it has come to this? Perhaps the jaded view of partnership is driven by the typical construct:

1. Two parties are brought together by a mutual third party to cooperate for the benefit of the 3rd party.
2. The two parties don't really understand each other and cannot afford to spend time doing so.
3. Both meet, greet for benefit of 3rd party and agree some innocuous form of measuring the partnership to please the 3rd party.
4. Partnership ends after engagement with 3rd party ends. (e.g. contract expires!)

Sound familiar. If you work in the 3rd sector, it should.

The only way to change this perception?

Start delivering real results in a partnership. We are embarking on such a mission with one of our  partners - attempting to deliver revenue to them (with no direct compensation to us). Most people would ask; why? Because it makes good business sense. In this case, our partner's offer adds value to our offer and for the ability to use that perceived value - we will drive revenue to them. It's not clear that their value will add tremendous amounts to our bottom line, but that's the chance you take in a partnership. What is clear, is that we are working hard to deliver real results to them. Unfortunately, they think it's all just window dressing and remain suspiscious. There must be some hidden agenda. There isn't.

I am looking forward to having that meeting at the beginning of the 2nd quarter; pointing to the results. Let's hope we can deliver - for I fear trying will not be enough to move the generally accepted view on partnership.

Comments

[mike chitty]

Sounds very familiar.

I work with a chief executive who has a plaque in his (home) office that says 'Partnership: the temporary suspension of mutual loathing in pursuit of funding'. And too often this is very close to the truth!

One of the challenges is that partnership is a 'weasel word' with many definitions:
1) a relationship of two or more entities conducting business for mutual benefit
2) a legal contract entered into by two or more persons in which each agrees to furnish a part of the capital and labour for a business enterprise, and by which each shares a fixed proportion of profits and losses.
3) The persons bound by such a contract.
4) A relationship between individuals or groups that is characterised by mutual cooperation and responsibility, as for the achievement of a specified goal: Neighbourhood groups formed a partnership to fight crime.

Then there are different types and levels of partnership:
a) Self interested Partnerships - only put in place in pursuit of funding
b) Mutual Partnership - in pursuit of a single relatively narrow agenda
c) Strategic Partnership - characterised by a wider and longer term context and relationship
d) Shared Destiny Partnership - close to a merger situation where both partners share a single vision and go a long way towards the integration of cultures and systems. All partners face extinction as a consequence of failure.

Perhaps one of the challenges that you have in making this partnership work is to recognise the type of partnership that each organisation wants. It looks to me like you are offering them a 'self interested partnership' while perhaps you are looking for something that is more 'mutual' or 'strategic'.

This sort of differing expectation can be very damaging - and I suspect 'delivering results' will not be enough to sustain it. The possibility is that once the other partner sees how results are generated they will try to take over more of that work themselves - or otherwise attempt to strengthen their position.

The best bet for long term success is to try to move quickly to strategic or shared destiny partnership.

Good Luck!