Fio Partner’s co-founder, Jane Arsenault, wrote one of the first books on strategic alliances in the nonprofit sector, Forging Nonprofit Alliances. While many things have changed since 1998, the fundamentals of creating and nurturing effective nonprofit partnerships have not.
The classic Jane reflection below is about why getting the attitude right is so important to successful nonprofit alliances—whether they’re program partnerships, community impact collaboratives, or full-on mergers. We hope you’ll find Jane’s words of wisdom as timeless and instructive as we do.
When one accepts a partner in any endeavor, it means, I think, that you have taken on the responsibility for mutual welfare. You have given up the right to make decisions independently without regard to the impact on one another in exchange for the mutual benefit that working together will accrue. Both partners are agreeing to make decisions in this wider context, standing in one another’s places to some degree as choices are made.
These relationships can be easily spoiled when that sense of partnership disappears and the affect shifts to “power over” rather than “power with,” to competition rather than collaboration.
At some points along the way, questions inevitably arise about “permission.” Do “we” need “their” permission to do…? I think this is typical of the wrong frame for this relationship. The right one is, I believe, “If this is going to potentially affect our partner, positively or negatively, we want them to participate in the decision process. We want their input before we choose. We want to make sure they understand what is going on and to hear about it from us.”
Similarly, when one asks something of the other, it shouldn’t be framed as “Do we have to do that? Can they make us?” but rather, “Why would we not comply with this request if at all possible?” Unless there is strong evidence otherwise, you must assume good intent on one another’s parts.
Some might say this is deceptively simple and that we need to think through all the contingencies and parse out the decision-making power in a more detailed way. I have not, in my experience, found that to be a useful exercise. First, it is almost impossible to anticipate what circumstances will arise. Second, the very process of attempting to do this sets up a potentially destructive set of dynamics that focuses on dividing power rather than sharing it. What I have found to be most successful is adopting a set of mutually respectful norms based on the ethic of partnership and a strong sense of reciprocity.
