Performance management in partnership

Increasingly, public agencies are working together to meet community aspirations and needs. There is encouragement from the Government to work in partnership and a growing realisation that better community outcomes cannot be achieved through the efforts of one organisation alone.

The principles of good practice outlined in this performance management resource apply equally to individual organisations and partnerships – but working across organisational boundaries introduces additional complexities. Single organisations must consider the wider management issues of working in partnership. They must consider the risks, benefits and costs of any partnership involved and whether the partnership is contributing towards council and community objectives.

Within a partnership, organisations must agree how they will manage performance. Different types of partnerships require different approaches. Those that are primarily about building relationships and sharing information are unlikely to need complicated arrangements but may wish to share and discuss information about partners’ performance. Those that are focused on delivery will need to agree how to manage performance.

Partnerships should consider:

• accountability: how will partners share in contributing to better performance and who is responsible if things go wrong?
• external reporting: are constituent organisations accountable to different external bodies and how will that affect ways of working and performance management requirements?
• individual organisational objectives; identify where they overlap, where they are in conflict and how any tensions will be dealt with when sharing performance information – what will reporting arrangements be?
• organisation and communication: how will partners work together to achieve joint objectives and how will they keep each other informed?
• resources: will budgets be merged or pooled or will individual agency spending be aligned to partnership objectives? How will value for money be assessed?
• assessing the contributions of different partners to complex outcomes: how will partners agree to share risks, costs, benefits and rewards?

Differences in systems, accountabilities and even the definitions of performance measures can be stumbling blocks – but cultural differences between partners may be even more difficult to overcome. Partners need to take time and be aware of each other’s organisational style. It may be worthwhile to identify and agree acceptable behaviour and ways of working together.

In practice

Lewes District Council hosted an ‘engagement’ party to strengthen relationships between partners.

Darlington has supported its partners using the council’s performance management framework, including rolling out its IT performance-monitoring software to them. (Partnerships: Governance and Performance online conference report).

Performance management in partnership is an emerging area for good practice, but there are already a number of resources available to help. For more information, see the:

• Audit Commission's Governing partnerships: bridging the accountability gap
• partnerships section on the Improvement Network website
• IDeA's Local Strategic Partnership (LSP) and Local Area Agreement resource, particularly the LAA case studies on performance management and help with improving outcomes.
• The Audit Commission's information on Comprehensive Area Assessment

The Government's Neighbourhood Renewal Unit, in November 2003, offered help in the form of a national performance management framework for LSPs in the 88 neighbourhood renewal areas. The framework is aimed at helping LSPs to strengthen the delivery of services, review achievements, identify areas of weakness and plan for improvement.

Find out more about the framework and the core requirements on the LSP performance management section of the Neighbourhood Renewal Unit website.