Understanding Collective Impact in Australia: A new approach to interorganizational collaboration

Abstract

Countries around the world spend substantial amounts of money on programmes designed to address social issues such as place-based disadvantage, health and aged care. Despite such huge investments, evidence shows that many of these social problems are complex and remain far from being resolved, and in some situations, they are worsening. To face these challenges, many organizations have turned to interorganizational collaboration as a more effective means of dealing with social issues. This exploratory qualitative study investigates a relatively new framework for tackling complex social challenges-Collective Impact. We show that while the interpretation and application of the Collective Impact framework varies, broad similarities can be found. We conclude that Collective Impact is best conceptualized as a method for network-based collaboration rather than a distinct methodology or philosophy, and emphasize the importance of the relational aspects of interorganizational collaboration.

Measuring dynamic collaborations: Collaborative health assessment tool

“…However, item P2 was simplified to ‘those affected by the issue are members of this collaboration’, which captured elements of the dropped item P1. The necessity for engaging communities of interest in collaboration activities is widely assumed in the Collective Impact literature (Salignac et al., ). However, there has been little assessment of the long‐term benefits of community engagement for collaboration success.…”

“…Establishing a sense of shared accountability through clarifying roles and responsibilities, as well as instilling a sense of shared responsibility and shared ownership of the results and outcomes of the collaboration, is thus important (Dal Molin & Masella, 2016). A shared measurement system can facilitate such a process by enabling members to monitor each other's performance and hold each other accountable, as well as promoting continuous learning and improvement (Salignac, Wilcox, Marjolin, & Adams, 2017). Monitoring the health of the collaboration can further allow partners to understand how the system functions (Marek, Brock, & Savla, 2015).…”

“…The holding/authorising environment is also important to take into account; an effective environment maintains enough pressure to support action without being overwhelming (Chrislip, , p. 5). In this environment, developing trust between collaborating members by developing a context in which they feel ‘ safe ’ (Salignac et al., ) is critical (Himmelman, ; Huxham & Vangen, ). A certain level of urgency is also suggested as being helpful for collaborative initiatives to evolve.…”

New modes of managing grand challenges: Cross-sector collaboration and the refugee crisis of the Asia Pacific

“…The refugee crisis has been described as a grand challenge, as it is complex, uncertain and evaluative (Ferraro et al, 2015). Grand challenges cut across organisational, national and state geographical boundaries, and therefore, the scale and complexity of addressing them is beyond the remit of any individual organisation (Salignac et al, 2018). Governments have traditionally played leading roles in responding to grand challenges at the national and transnational levels to address problems such as sustainable development, climate change or refugees (Bebbington and Unerman, 2018; Kumarasiri and Jubb, 2016; McPhail et al, 2016).…”

Getting in Each Other’s Way: Enlarging the Possibilities of Sustainable Community Development through Communication

“…Koschmann (2016) conceptualizes collaboration as a set of communicative and discursive processes that take place within civil society. Salignac, Wilcox, Marjolin, and Adams (2017) suggest that interorganizational collaboration is best understood as relation-based networking to collectively deal with social issues, such as poverty. The collaboration process involves much more than just interactions (Zhao, Sullivan, & Mellenius, 2014).…”