What does it take to be a good “lead partner”?
Oliver Hilbery, director of the MEAM coalition, reflects on recent work with Second Step about what it means to be a successful “lead partner”.
Tackling multiple disadvantage requires a system-wide approach based on strong local partnerships. It goes without saying that no single organisation can address the issue alone.
Despite this, for a range of practical, financial and legal reasons many funding initiatives still require a “lead partner” to hold the funding and be accountable for the work. Having a single lead can risk causing inequity in local partnerships and can limit the chances of systemic change. However, when required and if done well, the role of lead partner can also become an enabling factor in work to improve services and systems for people facing multiple disadvantage.
Second Step in Bristol have broad experience of being a successful lead partner – they fulfilled the role for the eight years of the Golden Key programme, working with a range of partners to achieve significant change across the city. In recent months they have also been confirmed as the lead agency for Bristol’s Changing Futures programme.
As system leaders, Second Step were keen to explore the experience of being lead partner and to invite a constructively critical assessment of the last eight years from a range of perspectives. What had being lead partner meant for their staff? How had the work been experienced by partners across the city? What had gone well and could be improved? What lessons could be learnt for future partnership programmes?
MEAM were pleased to be asked to lead this work. We held two facilitated discussions exploring the early experiences of the programme, the successes and challenges of the last eight years, the role of governance and wider relationships, and the learning that has emerged.
From these discussions we identified a set of ten ‘criteria for success’ which attendees felt were important not just for the success of Golden Key, but which also had impact, relevance and transferability for future partnership programmes. These are presented in the resulting report, alongside some context for each. The criteria cover a range of issues including: the recruitment process for lead partners; the involvement of people with lived experience; the balance between delivery and system change; and how to enable a process of “systems governance” rather than “organisational governance” in partnership structures.
As future partnership programmes emerge and develop (including Changing Futures) we hope that the learning in the paper can support organisations to succeed in the role of lead partner and to avoid common pitfalls and challenges.
The document is intended as a contribution to an ongoing debate and we welcome input and feedback.