partnering and collaborative work processes what are they and why do they work?

Partnering and Partnering and Collaborative Work Collaborative Work

ProcessesProcessesWhat Are They and Why

Do They Work?

Overview:Overview:

• The Management Edge experience

• Partnering Definitions

• Collaborative Work Processes

• Previous IR paradigm: Assumptions & Characteristics

• Outcomes of “old way” of doing business

Overview: continuedOverview: continued

• What are they and Why do they work?

• Partnering Assumptions

• Keys to success

• Summary

• Questions and Answers

The Management EdgeThe Management Edge ExperienceExperience

The Management Edge (TME) provides:• Team Building and Partnering• Facilitation • Training and Development• Conflict Resolution • Organization Development Consulting

Project & Management Environmental Teams ()

• DOD: Navy, Air Force, Army, Marines, & Pentagon• Department of Energy (DOE)• EPA (7) regions• States (15)

Partnering DefinitionPartnering Definition

“Partnering is a process by which two or more organizations with shared interests act as a team to achieve mutually beneficial goals.”

Dept. of Defense Guide to Partnering

Other Definitions of PartneringOther Definitions of Partnering

• “Partnering is a commitment between government and industry to improve communications and avoid disputes.” Army AMC Partnering Guide

• “Partnering is common sense. Partnering is good government, in that we are trying to streamline the process to integrate the missions and mandates of the different agencies. Consensus Journal Interview,

CollaborationCollaboration• A decision making or problem solving

process that is both assertive and cooperative

• The problem is defined together• Negotiations do not begin from a

“position”• There is actually no negotiating or

bargaining• Win/Win solutions are the goal• It fosters innovation, builds trust and

strengthens buy in

Collaborative Work Processes Collaborative Work Processes AssumptionsAssumptions

• We define the problem together• We work together to resolve it• Everyone’s concerns are important• Everyone’s input and participation are

essential• The problem can be resolved or dealt

with to our satisfaction• We are open to creative solutions• We are seeking what works best for all of

us

Prior to Partnering…Prior to Partnering…

• Any of you in EPA Region 4 and 3 still remember those old days---it would be 1994 and before.

• Any recollections to share?• How did you get your work

done? Easy? Hard? Slow? Fast?

Characteristics of “old way” of Characteristics of “old way” of doing businessdoing business

• Distance and formality between agencies

• “Arms length” relationships , especially with contractors

• Use of impersonal means of communicating, such as official letters

• Low level of information sharing and lots of unwelcome surprises

• Rare “face-to-face” meetings• Guarded interactions between the

parties seemed appropriate and prudent

Characteristics of “old way” of Characteristics of “old way” of doing businessdoing business

• Parties dealt with each other as positions, not as individuals

• Other organizations were perceived to be the “enemy,” with hidden agendas

• Tension and mistrust between the “regulators” and the regulated agencies was seen as normal

Assumptions Underlying the Assumptions Underlying the “old way”“old way”

• “We do not have the same interests.”• We versus They, i.e. “We” must

protect our agency or our interests from “Them”

• “There is no Win/Win possibility.”• “We cannot afford to lose, so we

must Win.”• “They screwed us before --- they’ll

screw us again!”

Outcome of old way of doing businessOutcome of old way of doing business

• Strained communications and cumbersome procedures

• Slow document review with many drafts, reviewed by each agency in isolation---”throwing documents over the wall”

• Difficulties resolving problems---which led to increased conflict, even over minor issues


• Inability to take or manage inherent risks, need or requests for more and more data

• Little creativity or innovation in remedy selection

• Individuals acting on unclear, often conflicting assumptions and propensity to blame others

• Slow, inadequate, and very costly clean up


• Fines, court actions, and attorneys influencing environmental decisions

• Extremely inefficient meetings and poor decision making

• Low level of information sharing and lots of unwelcome, last minute, urgent “surprises”


• Low trust, high suspicion and cynicism between individuals and organizations

• More money was spent on the conflict than on the clean up

• Public frustration and loss of confidence in the Agencies

Partnering and Partnering and Collaborative Work Collaborative Work

ProcessesProcessesWhat Are They and Why

do They Work?

Partnering Assumptions/ Partnering Assumptions/ FoundationFoundation

• There must be a better way!

• There are tools to help teams make good decisions

• The goals of the organizations are really the same, including the contractors

• The teams need formal team building


• The teams need to meet regularly face-to-face

• Teams need training in Partnering processes

• Regular, on-going training in non-technical, inter-personal skills benefits the teams


• Trust must be built and maintained

• Understanding and respecting differing styles of thinking and communicating is extremely helpful in building an effective team


• Conflict is inevitable; conflict management and resolution skills must be taught


• Management involvement, preferably with a team structure, greatly enhances success

• Quick, informal communication between team members is essential

• The teams benefit greatly from regular, professional, neutral facilitation


• Team members need to know what is expected of them. Clear Roles and Responsibilities need to be established, team by team

• Team members need to be empowered to make binding decisions at the meeting, if at all possible

Partnering Lessons Partnering Lessons LearnedLearned

• When the team is built, it needs to be maintained, or gains will be lost

• More time and money will be spent on team development in the beginning---the pay off is in the acceleration of progress as they build momentum

• Team member turnover is a constant issue that contributes to holding a team back

These Elements Work to move These Elements Work to move groups from conflict to High groups from conflict to High

Performing TeamsPerforming Teams• Lower conflict through setting:

• Ground Rules• Roles & Responsibilities• Boundaries on unacceptable behavior• Clear expectations• Clear accountability• Establishing conflict management

training• Establishing conflict

resolution/management processes• Establishing conflict escalation plan


Performing TeamsPerforming Teams• Increase trust by:

• Increasing contact with each other:• At meetings At trainings• At team building events At social times

• Training and team building activities designed to foster trust

• Discovering similar histories or traits and interests

• Resolving problems together, making successful decisions together

• Taking a risk that turned out well


Performing TeamsPerforming Teams• Develop Interpersonal skills,

through training and coaching:• Myers-Briggs Type Indicator® (MBTI) to

understand differences in thinking, communicating, dealing with data and making decisions

• Communication skills: listening, especially Active Listening, 3 part “I” Messages, rather than “You” messages

• Assertiveness, rather than Aggressiveness or Passiveness


Performing TeamsPerforming Teams• Develop Meeting Management skills

through training in how to:• Develop Standard Agendas• Develop workable Ground Rules• Lead a meeting• Manage group input• Stay on topic• Make decisions• Resolve problems


Performing TeamsPerforming Teams

• The processes and the Facilitation ensure that the power differences in the group are more equalized, whether those are from position, organization, or personality.

• Collaboration and consensus decisions are very liberating


Performing TeamsPerforming Teams

• There is a comfort level achieved by working together with people who consider you neutral, at least, perhaps an ally----that one gets from these Collaborative Work processes.

Common Elements of Partnering ModelsCommon Elements of Partnering Models

• Inter-agency team approach, with or without contractors

• Active team building, facilitation & active management support

• Include all agencies/organizations whose buy in was needed

• Exclude attorneys from regular meetings

Common Elements of Partnering Common Elements of Partnering ModelsModels

• Training: communication skills, work style differences, conflict management/ resolution skills, decision making, meeting management, problem solving

• Regular, frequent face-to-face meetings

• On-going support: training for new members, facilitation and team building for teams, whenever needed, management ombudsmen-like interventions on behalf of teams on policy issues.

Partnering SuccessPartnering SuccessSubstantially Reduced:• Document review time• Violations and fines• Need for formal dispute resolution• Cleanup costs• Length of time from site investigation to close

outIncreased:• Cost savings and cost avoidance• Positive Inter-agency relationships• Level of trust• Collaborative (and innovative) designs and

decisions$ Ten-to-One Estimated Return on

Investment

Keys to SuccessKeys to Success

• Management buy-in and active support, preferably a management level team

• Resolving interpersonal conflict early

• Dealing effectively with “Baggage”

• Understanding and respecting personality and style differences

• Individual team members able and willing to work within the new team paradigm


• Training in stages of team development

• Interpersonal skills training

• Developing meeting processes (ground rules, communication skills, conflict resolution and conflict escalation plans)

• Facilitation by skilled, professional Team Builders / Facilitators who maintain a neutral, objective stance


• On-going support: training for new members, facilitation and team building for teams, whenever needed.

Including the management team providing ombudsmen-like interventions on behalf of teams and escalating issues, when necessary.

Summary:Summary:

• Inter-Agency Partnering has made significant, positive changes in relationships and early, informal communication between regulators and regulated Dept. of Defense installations, and contractors.

• These improvements in relationships and communication have produced far stronger, more supportable technical decisions.

Summary:Summary:

• These decisions have resulted in dramatic and quantifiable savings in costs and time required for clean up.

• The higher level of trust and low level of conflict resulting from the partnering team experience and training has increased creativity, innovation and job satisfaction.

For more information:For more information:

Gayle Waldron

The Management Edge

Phone: 727.588.9481

www.themanagementedge.com

[email protected]

partnering and collaborative work processes what are they and why do they work?

Documents

business slide

guide partnering

prudent slide

normal slide

definition partnering

characteristics of old

outcome of old way

old days