The Purpose (and Perils) of Government-Nonprofit Partnership

Abstract

This study seeks to understand similarities and differences in why local governments and nonprofits choose to collaborate, particularly when those relationships are not governed by formal contracts or grants. Exchange, transaction, and resource dependence theories are used to understand the perceived advantages and disadvantages of collaboration as expressed by local government and nonprofit executives. Based on two large, comparable samples from Georgia, the analysis finds that the two sectors demonstrate a remarkable similarity in the benefits they seek from public-private partnerships, but with some key differences. The motivation to partner is driven by a desire to secure those resources most scarce for the respective sector: expertise and capacity for government, funding for nonprofits. Nonprofit executives generally exhibit a stronger undercurrent of negativity toward intersectoral partnership than do their public sector counterparts. This article discusses possible reasons for these similarities and differences and contributes to the scholarship linking capacity with organizational outcomes.

The Current State of Interorganizational Collaboration: Lessons for Human Service Research and Management

“…At the human level, as noted, certain traits and experiences (collaborative and other) motivate decision makers to pursue interorganizational partnerships or, occasionally, to avoid them when a past experience was unsuccessful (Foster & Meinhard, 2002;Gazley & Brudney, 2007). At the partnership level, political theories suggest that ideology can motivate or demotivate public officials to collaborate with nonprofits.…”

“…Economic theories also play a role in observing that collaborators can be motivated by the prospect of greater efficiencies or the opportunity to reduce environmental uncertainties (Gazley, 2008). To sustain a successful partnership, we also know that collaborators must share complementary (although not necessarily the same) goals but that the hard effort of aligning goals pays off in the end in better services (Gazley & Brudney, 2007;Selden, Sowa, & Sandfort, 2006). In other words, partnerships involve shared risk, flexibility, and much more than superficial, "inch-deep and mile-wide" endeavors.…”

The Role of the Information Society in Promoting a Better and a More Democratic Governance

“…Although public organizations do not die out (Kaufman, 1976), they do need to rely on other organizations for various kind of resources in order to accomplish their goals and to thrive in their environment. This explains why most of public services are no longer exclusively delivered by government organizations but by networks of governmental and nongovernmental actors across sectors that coordinate, collaborate, and allocate resources to address societal problems (Gazley & Brudney, 2007;Mitchell, 2014). ISSN 2161-7104 2017 In this sense, McGuire (2006) defines collaborative management as -the process of facilitating and operating in multi-organizational arrangements for solving problems that cannot be achieved -or achieved easily -by single organizations‖ (p. 33 ).…”

Intersecting Sectors? The Connection Between Nonprofit Charities and Government Spending

“…Current research holds that nonprofit charities and governments often develop collaborative relationships that are interdependent (Gazley & Brudney, 2007;Jang & Feiock, 2007;Salamon & Toepler, 2015). In this context, we expect governments to strategically use the charitable sector as providers of certain public goods and services due to their expertise in an area, perceived cost savings, or other budget maximizing incentives (Knauer, 2010).…”