COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT LEVEL 6 NOTES

Compiled by: P Gunde

UNIT 1: COMMUNITY AND INTER-AGENCY WORKING

Unit Aim

The unit enables learners to analyse the different types of agencies involved in community
development and the various ways in which they work together. The unit gives learners the
opportunity to evaluate the problems which might be encountered between sectors during
collaborative working, from the social aspects to strategic direction, and analyse conflict and
tensions which can occur, including conflict resolution initiatives

Learning Outcomes

After successfully completing this unit, the learner will be able to:

1. Analyse inter-agency working

2. Evaluate the impact of inter-agency working on professionals working in different sectors

3. Evaluate the problems encountered between different sectors through collaborative working

4. Analyse the conflicts and tensions which can arise through inter-agency working

LEARNING OUTCOME 1: ANALYSE THE CHANGING CHARACTER OF INTER-

AGENCY WORKING

WHAT IS INTER-AGENCY WORKING?

It is something that involves two or more agencies as such it can be defined as process in which
two or more agencies work together to solve a problem or meet a need. Inter-agency co-operation
or working can be defined as any joint action by two or more agencies that are intended to increase
public value by their working together rather than separately.

Agency is defined as the capacity of individuals to act independently and to make their own free
choices.so if two or more agencies work in collaborations then they form inter-agency. It can
involve;

 The exchange of information,

 Altering activities,
 Sharing resources, and
 Actively enhancing of the capacity of other agencies for mutual benefit.

Inter-agency co-operation can;

  Be formal or informal,
 Take place across different sectors, and
 Take place at policy, at operational or at front-line service delivery level.

It is an activity that covers a very broad range of actions and can be applied in numerous areas
and settings.

THE ORIGIN OF MULTI-AGENCY PARTNERSHIP WORKING

Multi-agency partnership working is not a new development. As early as the mid nineteenth
century, health and social services were working together to endeavor to reduce poverty in
England. It wasn’t really until the 1980s, during the Thatcher government years, that the
foundations of multi-agency partnership working were laid. The Children Act 1989 established the
statutory requirement for inter-agency collaboration and joint working in relation to children and
young people, requiring professionals to ‘work together better’. The 1990s emerged the
development of multilateral partnerships where public, private and voluntary sector organizations
joined together to tackle cross-cutting issues such as;

 social exclusion,
 community safety and
 Neighborhoods regeneration.

Partnership overload and fatigue began to occur, resulting in the need for practitioners from multi-
agencies to begin to reflect upon where and when the partnership ‘bandwagon’ should stop. The
last two decades have seen several government-funded initiatives aimed at promoting integrated
services and more coordinated partnership working. For example, Sure Start, Children’s Fund,
Youth Offending Teams, BEST and Connections, have all promoted multiagency working.

RATIONALE

1. To address problems with multiple and inter-related causes. To provide answers or

solutions to complex problems the causes of which are multiple, inter-related and often
cross sectoral and so cannot be effectively addressed by one agency alone.
2. To generate economies of scale. To generate economies of scale (i.e. to take advantage of
reducing cost per unit as ‘output’ increases). For example, co-operation in the provision of
a service that is too expensive for agencies or services to provide on their own.
3. To benefit from collaborative advantage. To benefit from the advantages that can flow from
two or more people from different agencies working together for a special purpose, e.g.
better understanding of issues, improved or new working practices.
4. To reduce policy and service fragmentation. To reduce policy and service fragmentation
through local level co-operation. For instance, the existence of multiple targeted program
or services means that the target population for one program may overlap with the target
population for another, which can create problems for both program managers as well as
 participants. Local co-ordination, in terms of eligibility rules or the location of services,
can reduce these problems.
5. To adhere to policy or legal requirements. Adhering to public policy or legal requirements
can be a rationale for inter-agency co-operation. Typically, the underlying reason for a
specific public policy or legal requirement for interagency co-operation will be one, or a
combination of, the four reasons above

It is clear from the rationale for inter-agency cooperation that it can be one way of achieving
service integration. Service integration ‘refers primarily to ways of organizing the delivery of
services to people at the local level. It is not a new programme to be superimposed over preexisting
program: rather it is a process aimed at developing an integrated framework within which ongoing
program can be rationalized and enriched to do a better job of making services available within
existing commitments and resources.

PURPOSE OF INTERAGENCY WORKING

It focuses on tackling social exclusion: that is, the loss of access to life chances that connect
individuals to the mainstream of social participation. Social exclusion can occur when individuals
or communities suffer from combinations of linked problems such as unemployment, poor skills,
low incomes, poor housing, high crime, bad health and family breakdown

These working definitions include:

Interagency working: more than one agency working together in a planned and formal way, rather
than simply through informal networking (although the latter may support and develop the former).
This can be at strategic or operational level.

Multiagency working: more than one agency working with a client but not necessarily jointly.
Multiagency working may be prompted by joint planning or simply be a form of replication,
resulting from a lack of proper interagency co-ordination. As with interagency operation, it may
be concurrent or sequential. In actuality, the terms ‘interagency’ and ‘multiagency’ (in its planned
sense) are often used interchangeably.

Joined-up working, policy or thinking refers to deliberately conceptualized and coordinated

planning, which takes account of multiple policies and varying agency practices. This has become
a totem in current UK social policy.

Characteristics of inter-agencies in community development

1. The degree of openness to new ideas and individuals

2. The structural resilience of networks
3. Capacity to resolve power and conflicts issues.
4. Interdependence
5. Democracy
 6. Common goal

DIFFERENT TYPES OF AGENCIES IN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND THEIR

CHARACTERISTICS

The United Nations defines community development as "a process where community members
come together to take collective action and generate solutions to common problems. It is a broad
concept, applied to the practices of civic leaders, activists, involved citizens, and professionals to
improve various aspects of communities, typically aiming to build stronger and more resilient local
communities

Community development seeks to empower individuals and groups of people with the skills they
need to effect change within their communities. These skills are often created through the
formation of social groups working for a common agenda. Community developers must
understand both how to work with individuals and how to affect communities' positions within the
context of larger social institutions.

To achieve all these, there are several agencies which include schools, churches, social services,
health services, government departments, NGOs, charities, e

ENABLING AND INHIBITING FACTORS OF INTERAGENCY WORKING

There is an extensive literature on the enabling factors as well as inhibiting factors in interagency
working and many of these are common

ENABLING FACTORS

There are a number of factors that encourage inter-agency working. These include

 Effective leadership
 Commitment of the members
 Availability of adequate resources
 The presence of good communication
 A shared understanding of roles and responsibilities. They also include
flexibility, tolerance of ambiguity  Appropriate stakeholder involvement
and
 The recognition of obstructive actors. Across a number of studies.

INHIBITING FACTOR

Tend to be the reverse of these enabling factors and include;

 poor leadership,
  lack of commitment,
 poor role definition,
 lack of understanding of responsibilities,
 obstructive professional and agency culture and
 Lack of inter-agency training opportunities.
 Duplicated assessment to identify needs and subsequent provision;
 lack of information sharing across agencies and services
 Poorly coordinated integrated activities across agencies
 Too much ‘buck passing’ and referring on of clients between agencies
 A lack of continuity and inconsistent levels of service provision
 Unclear accountability

THE CHANGING ROLES OF INTER AGENCY WORKING

Refers to how duties and responsibilities of agencies can be affected or altered during collaborative
working.

FACTORS AFFECTING THE CHANGING ROLES OF INTER-AGENCY WORKING

Economic issues- Inter-agency working is affected or influenced by the economic factors. For
agencies to work together there is need for money, therefore if there is lack of funding, it becomes
a problem for agencies to work together.

Government policies or Legislations- Government policies as well as legislations can have an

impact on the changing roles of interagency working. However, if the policies are not creating a
conducive environment for interagency working, collaboration of agencies would be a problem.

Dependency on donor aid or funding -It is undisputable fact that most of the agencies depend on
donors. Therefore, every donor has policies that govern the donations; this can influence how
agencies work in various communities as well as countries.

Political influence- Sometimes inter-agencies can change direction or roles due to political
interference. This makes the agencies not to work independently.

HISTORICAL AND CONTEMPORARY ASPECTS OF SOCIAL PROVISION

Social provision is the social systems that provide assistance to individuals and families through
programs such as health care, food stamps, housing and childcare assistance.

The welfare state refers to an ideal model of provision where the state accepts responsibility for
the provision of comprehensive and universal welfare for its citizens.
Welfare can take several forms which include:

 monetary payments,
 subsidies and vouchers, or
 Housing assistance.

Welfare systems differ from country to country, but welfare is commonly provided to individuals:

 who are unemployed,

 those with illness or disability,
 the elderly,
 those with dependent children, and
 Veterans.

Welfare is provided by governments or their agencies, by private organizations, or a combination

of both. Funding for welfare usually comes from general government revenue, but when dealing
with charities or NGOs, donations may be used. Some countries run conditional cash transfer
welfare programs where payment is conditional on behavior of the recipients.

TRANSITION AND REORGANIZATION IN WORK SETTING OF INTERAGENCY

WORKING

Transition simply means a movement, passage or change from one position to another, therefore
interagency transition is the general process of moving or being moved from set of services to
another.

Reorganization refers to the action or process of changing the way in which something is
organized. (The implementation of a business plan to alter a corporation’s structure or finances
because of financial duress, desire to change strategy or through government order.

One main principle of interagency working is the dissemination of information. The dissemination
of information and the need to give everyone feedback on a regular basis and to keep everyone ‘up
to speed’ is one of the prime principles. In addition, it was felt that there was a need to share data
more effectively to avoid the replication of services or repeat requests for data from key
individuals.

Communication was also raised as the second most important principle in overcoming the
challenges to multi-agency working generally. Participants reported that a range of strategies could
be adopted through which communication could be improved, and these strategies (mainly focused
on information dissemination) operated at three broad levels:

 Enhancing the procedures of communication, for example, by establishing clear

protocols and principles underpinning communication between individuals or
 agencies, so that some individuals or parties were aware of their responsibilities to
others.
 Improving systems of communication, for example, by setting up an intranet or
email groups, so that communication was not hindered by over-reliance on agency-
specific systems (such as internal memos).
 Communicating more frequently with other professionals at the human level, for
example, by physically sharing workspace and enhancing opportunities for face-to-
face contact with partners in frequent interagency meetings at both strategic and
operational level

Therefore, one of the most frequently identified barrier of teaming and collaboration is
communication. To overcome it there is need to adopt a common language which can be used
across the board.

COHERENT APPROACHES AND MODELS OF COMMUNITY WORKING

Coherent approaches are strategies that are well planned so that they are clear, sensible and all its
parts go well with each.

Models are physical representation that show what they look like or how they work. In short, a
model is an informative representation of an object, person or system.

Interagency governance is concerned with integration within local children’s trusts and with
integrated inspection. Interagency strategy is concerned with having a Director of Children’s
Services and producing a children and young people’s plan. There are many integrated processes
including the Common Assessment Framework (CAF), an Information Sharing Index and a lead
professional. To enable integrated front line delivery there are separate toolkits for managers and
practitioners and a Common Core of Skills and Knowledge for all those working with children,
young people and families. The Common Core includes a section on multi-agency working.

Some of approaches’

The social work approach- focuses on the whole society. It pays more attention towards building
a sense of community. It helps the community in identifying their problems and tries to overcome
them by gathering existing resources from the community and get some help from the people who
are in power.

The political approach- It looks at a community as a political entity. The approach says that most
of the problems are due to unequal distribution of power and resources. Power is concentrated in
the hands of few people and the majority of the community is deprived of it. His then brings
conflict as some focus on gaining power.

Community development approach- It uses peer group pressure to provide services in the
community. The strategy includes pressuring the officials to deliver the services to the community.

MODELS OF INTERAGENCY WORKING

There are several models of interagency working which include:

Decision making groups model

 Provide a forum for different agencies to meet and make decisions.

Consultation and training model

 Professionals from one agency provide consultation and/or training in order to

enhance the skills and knowledge of another agency

Centre-based delivery model

 Gathering professional expertise in one place in order to deliver a much more

coordinated and comprehensive service

Coordinated delivery model

 This is similar to center-based delivery but with a coordinator to pull together

previously disparate services

Operational-team delivery model

 Professionals from different agencies work together on a day by day basis to form
a cohesive multiagency team delivering services directly to service users.

Locality development model

 Process of community building( once people realize their needs and interest , they
come together to solve them to improve their life)

Social planning model

 Concerned with social problems. The goal is to solve community problems. It

emphasizes a technical process of problem solving (e.g) healthy, housing.

Social action model

  Society has small communities and groups and are controlled by the government
policies and laws. At the same time are controlled custom, traditions and beliefs.
This model change decision, societal structure and cultural beliefs.

MODELS OF MULTIAGENCY WORKING

 Information sharing
 Joint decision making
 Coordinated intervention
 . Multi-agency panel
 . Multi-agency team
 . Integrated service

LEARNING OUTCOME TWO: EVALUATE THE IMPACT OF INTERAGENCY

WORKING ON PROFESSIONALS WORKING IN DIFFERENT SECTORS

THE CONCEPT OF PROFESSIONALISM

Professionalism means communicating effectively and appropriately and always finding a way to
be productive. Employers want new workers to be responsible, ethical and team oriented and to
possess strong communication, interpersonal and problem solving skills. It relates to a particular
set of values and workplace behavior, ranging from appropriate business attire to considerate
treatment of coworkers. Professional behavior in the workplace impacts the entire organization,
affecting every aspect of day to day operations and ultimately impacting the company’s bottom
line.

Professionalism is powerful quality .it allows you to fulfill your role to the best of your ability. It
helps you to impress and inspire others and gives you a deep sense of satisfaction and satisfaction.
Therefore, professionalism is not the job you do rather it’s how you do the job. As such it involves
consistently achieving high standards both visibly and behind the scenes

IMPORTANCE OF PROFESSIONALISM

Professional is measure of how well you carry yourself at work, how you treat coworkers and how
you handle stressful situations. Here are five reasons why it is important:

1. Personal Growth-Not only in terms of job advancement, but there are a certain
dignity and pride in one’s work that develops. You get appreciated for consistently
good quality output and that in turn builds your confidence, makes you a more
 secure person who is then capable of handling difficult situations with refined
emotional maturity.
2. Creates Boundaries- Workers who conduct themselves professionally avoid
crossing their line with subordinates, superiors or clients
3. Conflicts are minimized- Businesses which promote a professional atmosphere
also makes it easier to deal with diverse environments in which subordinates or
even clients could have a difference of opinion however they can agree to disagree
and come together on common grounds.
4. Increased Job Satisfaction- Professionalism eliminates stress to a great degree and
once that is taken care of an employee thrives in a healthy atmosphere leading to
enhanced performance.
5. The sense of Responsibility - In a professional atmosphere, an employee while
handling a task, sees the larger purpose, and hence are able to own their actions and
take appropriate decisions. One takes pride in performing the tasks assigned to
them. This adds to the overall image of not only the employee but also showcases
the value by which the organization stands.

WAYS TO SHOW OF PROFESSIONALISM

It’s clear that professionalism is important, but what are the real-life signs of professionalism
employers are looking for? Our experts have shared the examples of professionalism that are sure
to catch their eye.

1. Dress appropriately.
Like it or not, appearance plays a part in how others view you, and that includes your level
of professionalism. The way that you speak and dress are both first-impression indicators
of your professionalism. In an attempt to show potential employers that you have these
characteristics, you need to act and look the part.
2. Practicing communication skills
Being able to communicate with your colleagues is essential. Having good communication,
listening and critical thinking skills are all important part of acting in a professional way
3. Show accountability
“Being honest and ethical suggests professionalism,” Masterson says. “Whether that’s
clocking in honest hours of work or holding yourself accountable for your mistakes, part
of being professional means that you abide by ethics both in and out of the office.” Sharing
an example of a mistake you made and what you did to correct it can show interviewers
that you operate within a strong code of ethics.
4. Remain calm under stress
 Showing how calm you can be while a storm of deadlines, pressures and even increasing
demands swirl around your department. These are the times to rely on your ability to
demonstrate professionalism.

IMPACTS OF PROFESSIONALISM TO INTER-AGENCY WORKING

 Encourages Improvement working of standards

 It enhances sharing of resources and Skill and knowledge
 Saves money as certain activities can be done with members within the inter-agency
working and no need for hiring which attracts certain costs.
 It makes professionals to keep working within the inter-agency working

Every job has its difficult moments. True professionals can handle issues that crop up without
causing a scene or complaining to coworkers. “Professionalism is being able to handle yourself in
a professional environment,”

THE COMMUNITY CULTURE OF INTERAGENCY WORKING

Community culture is the shared set of values and expectations that influence how people interact
and collaborate with one another to achieve common goals. It is characterized by fundamental
assumptions about valid behaviors, guidelines and their manifestations. A fit between culture and
strategy is desirable because it creates added value for the organization and society.

HOW CAN A COMMUNITY CULTURE BE CREATED TO FIT INTERAGENCY

WORKING

1. There is need to live common values and accept values that differ from one another
2. Design a system in such a way that community behavior is encouraged and non-community
behavior is made more difficult.
3. Make sure that culture is reflected as part of everyday life.
4. Create a balance between tolerance and sanctioning
5. Address fears and eliminate taboos.

Community culture allows people to learn how to understand other people’s culture, promote
engagement in contacts with others and build strong, diverse communities. Sometimes a
community culture is a problem in interagency working, to solve it there is need to create a
common culture. This is done through cultural planning. As such everyone helps to create an
inclusive and respect for the local communities and the environment. The cultural planning process
evaluates the current social culture and creates an implementation plan to achieve the vision of the
local community

SECTORS INVOLVED IN INTERAGENCY WORKING

Interagency involves two or more agencies deciding to work together in partnerships.it originates
in the recognition by these agencies that they have a common concern or that they are often
working with the same people.it Is possible that an agency may not even be aware that other
agencies have that same concern so that they make their contribution without regard to the
involvement of others.

Now most agencies appreciate that some degree of collaborations and information exchange will
help both agencies to do their more efficiently and effectively. For example the offender who is
under probation supervision and the drug misuser who attends the clinic are the same person.
Different agencies have their own duties, their own expertise and resources. Collaboration will
help to meet complex needs and enhance community safety. These different sectors include:

 Police service
 Health practitioners
 Faith based organizations
 Legal practitioners etc

COMPLEX, MULTIPROFESSIONAL CONTEXTS AND SETTING

The challenges that are identified with multi-agency working arise largely as a result of the
complexities involved when practitioners engage in collaborative ventures. The following main
challenges are reflected in recent research into multi-agency working in schools and children’s
centers.

 Communication – ensuring clear routes for two-way communication between the

educational setting, agencies and practitioners in order to exchange information and
improve joined-up coordinated working.
 The danger of a lack of clarity arising about the roles and responsibilities of
practitioners in a wider and more diverse children’s workforce.
 The management of different professional and multi-agency service cultures, for
example, staff recruitment and retention, disparities in status, pay, conditions of
service, working hours and working conditions. Health works 24 hours a day, seven
days a week and education does not.
 Lack of coherence in the aims, intentions and joined-up thinking between different
agencies, resulting in role overlap or duplication of services.

RANGE OF SITUATIONS

An[other challenge that was identified as having the potential to affect practice was the ‘agency
culture’ within which practice took place. There was a perception that multi-agency working
disrupted, or intruded on, existing agency cultures, in other words, values and protocols. Specific
policy and procedural differences, such as different personnel and referral systems, were also
reported to create challenges for those working in a multi-agency environment, whilst different
data management systems had implications for sharing information.

APPOINTMENT OF KEY LEADERS

The skills and experience of the professionals involved had been the main factor in determining
roles and responsibilities for 14 interviewees. In some cases, people who were already working in
a similar field were allocated certain roles, but where new appointments were made, this was often
on the basis of individual expertise rather than agency background. Interestingly, in contrast to
this, within two initiatives, an interviewee from each stated that, within multiagency working,
personal qualities were considered more important than professional expertise or training. Thus,
they had been appointed to specific roles on that basis and considered profession secondarily

PERSPECTIVES OF DIFFERENT PROFESSIONALS IN INTERAGENCY WORKING

a. Differences in expectation, boundaries and authority organizations.

A confusion also arises when different professionals meet and work in a
collaborated manner in terms of their expectations of the working conditions, the
boundaries of their duties and how authority will be organized towards coordinating
the people for the common goal. For instance, problems of cross-authority working
may arise where health authority and the local authority or education authority
boundaries are different.
b. Differences in priority and working methods.
Among the challenges that are identified with multi-agency working arise largely
as a result of the complexities involved when practitioners engage in collaborative
ventures. The main challenge reflected in recent research into multiagency working
is the differences in the priorities and working methods of professionals from
different organizations. For instance, competing priorities placing multiple
demands and expectations on educational settings and services, for example,
Healthy and Schools initiative, ECM, Building Schools for the Future (BSF),
personalized learning. This results into danger of initiative overload occurring if
not well managed.
 There is also a challenge of differing in working methods and roles.
Thus management of different professional and multi-agency
service cultures, for example, in a collaboration of health and
educational agencies, staff recruitment and retention, disparities in
status, pay, and conditions of service, working hours and working
 conditions become difficult to integrate. Health works 24 hours a
day, seven days a week and education does not.
  There is also a challenge of understanding each other’s
professional language and protocols.
c. Investment of time and energy
Recall that interagency working involves different professionals from different
organizations working collaboratively towards the achievement of the common
goal. Thus Inter professional refers to the working relationships between different
groups of professionals, for example between social workers, teachers and police
officers. Each professional group will bring its own perspective to the collaborative
process. This type of working can be of great importance as the differing
perspectives can be brought together and the respective professional contributions
can be harnessed to improve the standard of service and the experiences of service
users and careers. At the same time, it also becomes a problem, when it comes to
the integration of time and energy

CHALLENGES ASSOCIATED WITH MULTI-AGENCY WORKING

The challenges identified in association with multi-agency working were numerous and reflected
the same complexities involved when professionals engage in collaborative ventures. The issues
involved, however, centered broadly around the areas of:

Funding and resources,

 Roles and responsibilities

 Competing priorities,
 Communication,
 Professional and agency cultures
 Management.

These challenges that are encountered by the agencies involved in the collaboration work included
the following.

LACK OF FISCAL RESOURCES

Funding and resources emerged as the major challenge to multi-agency working, above all other
issues. Within this broader challenge of funding, identified were the three main concerns:
  Conflicts within or between agencies
 A general lack of funding
 Concerns about sustainability of the resources.

The evidence suggests that a fiscal ‘precariousness’ (instability) was often associated with
multiagency working. At one level there was an acceptance that, under budgetary pressure, service
providers often retrenched into a more minimalist role, at another level there was the perception
that multiagency working was a more effective use of resources, reducing repetition, or overlap.

ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES.

The second main challenge concerned the roles and responsibilities adopted by those individuals
working within multi-agency initiative. Issues around roles and responsibilities fell into three main
areas:

 Understanding the roles of others

 Conflicts over areas of responsibility
 The need to move beyond existing roles

Interestingly, there was a perceived need to move beyond existing roles to work in new ways this
‘blurring the edges’ was not without difficulty. For example, participants reported that it required
a degree of reflection, or even a capacity for self-criticism on the part of individuals and, at the
same time, questioned their sense of identity, gained through following existing practice or
procedure.

Competing priorities, competing individual and agency priorities were also frequently cited as a
challenge to multiagency working. When asked about the existence of any conflict between the
aims of their agency and the aims of the project, in the vast majority of cases, interviewees felt that
agency and project aims were closely aligned. However, even so, most went on to describe
‘different priorities’ or ‘tensions’. For example, differences in the target group, different
government targets and a focus on preventative work versus crisis intervention.

Non-fiscal resources were implicated in sustaining as well as developing multi-agency initiatives.

The ‘right’ staff had to be available and come together in order to work out any different
perspectives on the same issue. Challenges concerning the allocation of time, the provision of staff
and the physical space in which to work together effectively were highlighted.

Poor communication within and between agencies was also cited as a major challenge to successful
multi-agency working. Frequently, concerns were raised about the day to-day communication
between those involved. Within agencies there were reported to be problems between those
working at different levels, in other words, strategic and operational level, whereas between
agencies concern was expressed about communication being hampered by the different availability
of service professionals. In addition, there was a perception that successful multi-agency working
was being undermined by poor communication between government departments.

However, the process of collaboration between authorities is often challenging due to various
reasons, namely difference of cultures, processes and systems, different motivations, incentives
and competition for limited resources , and a lack of coordination between the agencies involved

PROFESSIONAL AND AGENCY CULTURES.

Another challenge that was identified as having the potential to affect practice was the ‘agency
culture’ within which practice took place. There was a perception that multi-agency working
disrupted, or intruded on, existing agency cultures, in other words, values and protocols.

Specific policy and procedural differences, such as different personnel and referral systems, were
also reported to create challenges for those working in a multi-agency environment, whilst
different data management systems had implications for sharing information.

MANAGEMENT.

One of the challenges raised by multi-agency working is how any single initiative is managed at
strategic level. There was evidence that multi-agency initiatives had to be seen as strongly
supported and promoted at strategic level in order to remain credible at operational level, yet that
this strategic drive had in itself to be very carefully managed in order to carry along all the various
participants. One of the challenges was to engage like-minded individuals at strategic level –
‘creative entrepreneurs’, who sought new ways of working in order to meet shared goals and who
worked within, beneath and across existing management structures in order to achieve change.

TRAINING OPPORTUNITIES

Because multi-agency working could involve new ways of working, it posed challenges to those
involved. There was therefore a perception among some participants that they required additional
multiagency training in order to meet the demands of any new or extended role, as well as training
to enhance their knowledge and understanding of other agencies and the way they operated. Linked
to this was a concern that those working within a multiagency team missed opportunities for
professional single-agency development delivered at ‘base

PERSPECTIVES OF DIFFERENT PROFESSIONALS INVOLVED IN INTER-AGENCY

WORKING.

Perspective is the capacity to view things in their true relations or relative importance. Different
professionals involved in inter-agency working view this collaboration as platform that Allows for
better information sharing. Proactive interagency collaboration opens the lines of communication
between agencies. This allows for better, more accurate information sharing between departments
it also brings improved or more effective services and joint problem solving, as well as the ability
to take a holistic approach, and increased understanding and trust between agencies

THE IMPACT ON PROFESSIONALS AND THEIR CLIENTS OF INTER-AGENCY

WORKING

Today, many companies rely on employees to work together as part of a team. Ideally, people
working as a group can accomplish more, and more productively, than one person can on their
own. The following team collaboration benefits have been selected to illustrate this point.

It encourages problem-solving

It’s less likely that employees will face difficulties solving problems at work if they have a strong
collaborative culture within their interagency working.

It allows employees to learn from each other

When employees from different backgrounds and at varying levels of experience are allowed to
work together, everyone benefits.

Employee productivity rates go up

As employees start working together more collaboratively, their overall productivity will likely
increase. Team collaboration increases the organization’s potential for change

When employees collaborate effectively, the company has a higher capacity to adapt to changes.

Research on multi-agency working has found benefits including improved or more effective
services and joint problem solving, as well as the ability to take a holistic approach, and increased
understanding and trust between agencies.

Interagency collaboration also reduces duplication of services and allows for greater efficiency in
use of public resources. Hence experience gained from crossing professional boundaries.

LEARNING OUTCOME 3: EVALUATE THE PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED

THROUGH THE COLLABORATIVE WORK BETWEEN DIFFERENT SECTORS

a) Sectors that are involved with community development

-If two or more sectors come together and work in collaboration, challenges arose due to the
problem of coordinating.
 -This problem mainly is due to headship disparity as well different strategic and operational
management

-But still when it comes to community development a lot of sector joined hands and work
together. ( e.g. community educational organisations, rural community council, local
authorities, charities) .Sectors role and responsibilities include:

1. Financial sector – This sector provide finances/find the project activity

2. Political sector – Comes with different strategies and normally those strategies are
implemented when there is political will.

3. Religion sector – Though much on spiritual welfare of people they also provide other
services like operating hospitals as well as involved in education which are crucial in
community development.

4. Healthy sector – Only healthy people are the one who can participate fully in development
of community this sector do promote healthy living.

5. Education sector – For people to have skills and knowledge, there is need to have education
sector which promote that.

DIFFERENT STYLES OF WORKING IN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

-In every workplace there are usually a variety of personalities and working styles. By learning
more about the different types of work styles and discovering your own approach you become a
better team member and collaboration. Elements like needs-based, goal oriented, and asset-based
are elements that is used to choose kind of working styles. All these do impact the sector working
styles. As such there is difference among the sectors.

TYPES OF WORKING STYLES

1. Logical
-Individuals with this work style are the often known as drivers or does, because they can
analyze a problem and tackle it head-on. Those that have this work style are typically data-
oriented and love a good challenge
-Their linear way of thinking allows them to dedicate an incredible amount of focus toward
their goals and get things done. The amount of concentration these have counsel them to
forget to communicate the action they are talking on overlook the importance of planning.

2. Detail Oriented

-This means that individuals pay close attention to all of the small particulars when working
on a task or project. Detail-oriented employees complete each assignment of flawlessly as
possible before moving to the next task.
3. Supportive
-Individuals whose main goal is to for deep connection with their colleague and clients.
Team members with this style are adept at facilitating team interaction and will be able
to tell you if something is a mess with one of their coworkers.
4. Idea-oriented
Often thought of as pioneers leaders or big-picture thinkers individual with this working
styles are skilled at creating a vision and inspiring other to believe in it. These workers
strive on endless risk and possibilities making them incredible source of energy.

TYPES OF LEADERSHIP STYLES

-When is a leadership style?

A leadership style refers to a leader’s methods and behavior when directly, motivation
and managing others.
-A person’s leadership style also determines how they strategize and implement plains
while accounting for the expectations of stakeholders and the wellbeing of their team.
-Knowing your leadership style is critical because it can help you determine how you
affect those whom are under your direct influence.

1. Democratic leadership (commonly effective)

-The leader makes decisions based on the input of each team member. Although he or
she makes the final call each person has an equal say on a project’s direction.
-Democratic leadership is one of the most effective leadership styles because it allows
lower-level people to exercise authority.

2. Autocratic leadership (Rarely Effective)

-It is the inverse of democratic leadership. The leader makes decisions without taking
input from anyone who report to them. No considered consulted prior to a chase in
direction and people are expected to adhere to the decision at s time and pace stipulated
by the leader.

3. Laisses-faire leadership (sometimes Effective)

-It means “let them do” and leaders who embrace afford really all authority to their
people.
-It is the leadership style which empower people by trusting them to work. Therefore it
is important that this leadership style is kept in check.

4. Bureaucratic leadership (Rarely Effective)

-It goes by the books (history). Leadership might listen and consider input of the people
but the leader tends to reject if it conflicts with policies or past practices.
-People under this leadership might not feel as controlled as they would under autocratic
leadership but still a lack of freedom in how much people are able to do in their roles.

5. Strategic leadership (Commonly Effective)

-Strategic leader set at the intersection between a company’s main operations and its
growth opportunities. Leader interest’s while ensuring that current working conditions
remain stable for everyone else. However leaders who operate this way can set a
dangerous precedent with respect to how many people they can support at once and what
the best direction for the company really is if everyone is getting their way at all times.

POLITICAL TENSION OF CORABOLATION WORKING

Politics is concerned with administration of interagency working since each
organization has its own administration. Tensions emanate when there is power
imbalances in decision making, the process of agreeing collective action, tensions and
contradictions, challenges of balancing different accountabilities
-Some of tension include:

1. Conflict of interest.
-occurs due to individual’s interest- since different agencies work together workers
will priotise their agency rather than collaborative team and this could compromise
one’s judgment decision or action in the workplace. Government agencies take
conflicts of interest so seriously that they are regulated.

2. Power struggle:
-It is situation in which two or more people or groups complete for control in a
particular sphere. This happens when two people have very strong opposing
opinions or conflicting desires about a particular outcome and cannot find a
compromise. Both partners hold on tightly to their position. As they are coming from
different organization it may happen that they had some positions as such they may
have the hope of playing a leading role in collaboration working.

3. Political ideologies
- Is a certain ethical set of ideals principles, doctrines or symbols of a social
movement, institution that explains how society should work offering some political
and cultural blueprint for a certain social order. Therefore different agencies or
institution have different ideals as such makes difficult for collaboration work.

4. Financial issues.
-Issues to do with finances are very important as such tension may arise as to how
to get funding for the project of the collaboration working.
 SOCIAL ASPECTS OF COLLABORATIVE WORKING
-Social aspects of collaborative working look at the cultural and demographic part
of collaborative working. There is need to understand that when two or more
agencies work in partnership there is differences and diversity between them as such
agencies should recognize that different communities are both independent and
interdependent.
-Some of aspects of collaborative working are:
1. Motivation: it is the process that initiating guides and maintain goal-oriented
behavior. It is what causes you to act. Collaborative working brings varied talents
together making a pool of different skills and knowledge. When more complaint and
experience are brought together teams will undergo better problem solving approach
hence motivated.
2. Communication: it is important to recognize the difference between
communication –one way process where a single person is responsible and
collaboration where a group takes responsible and agrees on how to achieve the same
thing. From setting out specific objective and roles to keeping a team informed of
progress and challenges, strong communication is vital to team achievement.
3. Diversity: Just as a soccer team would fail if it consisted of eleven centre forward,
collaborative team will flounder if it consists of identical personality type or roles.
A variety of personalities and demographics brings a far broads range of perspective.
4. Sharing: It makes more that everyone is recognized and that finding are shared
across the team leads to stronger bonding and deep understanding. Other shared
information such as calendars and schedule which lead to team efficiency.
5. Support: When everybody supports each other, without finger- pointing, the team
dynamic is infinitely more powerful. Those able to express ideals in a supportive
environment are more likely to make breakthroughs whereas’ team with a blame
culture repress innovation mistakes can be some of the most powerful learning
opportunities in a supportive group.
6. Problem-solving: Any collaborative is about solving problems. So a group that
can’t solve a problem can’t work. Diversity and problem-solving often go hand in
hand.
-So problem-solving personality in the group is essential (Diversity). For example
engineer solves a market problem and a customer service clerk indifies the flam in
a new app decision

STRATEGIC VERSUS OPERATIONAL DECISIONS WITHIN

COLLABORATIVE WORKING
Decision making is defined as the activity engaged in making choices by collecting
information, evaluating, identifying a decision and choosing the best-suited
decision. Effective decision making involves taking meaningful decision to provide
a direction to the organization operations. These decisions are categorized into main
ones which are strategic and operational.

STRATEGIC DECISION
These are decisions that are concerned with whole environment in which the firm
operates the entire resources and the people who form the company and interface
between the two.
Strategic decisions typically starts with three question
a) Where is the organization now?
b) Where do I want it to be?
c) How are am I going to get it there?

To come up with strategic decision, you analyse the external factors like customer,
suppliers and politics. It is also essential to look at internal factors like finances the
strength and weakness of staff and organization’s culture.

OPERATIONAL DECISIONS

These are decision that are adjusted more frequently in corresponded to the correct
external and internal conditions which usually have impact for no longer than a year
or even a day.

- Operational decisions are about how you are going to carry out your strategic
decisions.

- They are focused on growth but they target the production process. They are “the
how” of meeting your strategic goals

- The strategic decision are made by the top level management and by the strategitd
wheeas the operational decision are made by the managers at lower level. Strategic
decisions are alerted to the contribution to the organizational objectives an d goals
(long term plan/thinking for community development) whereas operational
decision describes ways and methods that can be used to achieve that objective/goal
(– how are we going to get there?)

Problems arise if top managers ignore the advice of lower managers which makes
difficult in implementing organizational goals and objects.this then rings about
conflictes when strategic decisions are not met by line managers.

New patterns of activity in collaborative working

Collaborate” means to work together or cooperate to accomplish a task. But what

does it really take for a group of unique individuals to come together to create a
 true collaboration? The definition tells us what to do, but the question people often
ask is how to do that

One of the most common challenges clients share is about how to create and sustain
effective collaboration. Leaders ask employees, who otherwise are highly
professional, skilled contributors, to work as a team to accomplish a task or series
of tasks. Sometimes, the teams take off, creating relationships and activities that
move them toward assigned goals. Other times, however, leaders find that teams
they create move into internal conflict or unhealthy competition, and are unable to
move toward set goals.

We move beyond surface challenges to explore the underlying patterns of interaction and decision
making that shape the culture of a team. Exploring those patterns together and asking team
members to track their own progress on more productive patterns engages them in a different level
of accountability and action.

We have identified a set of patterns that contribute to generative interactions and collaboration.

 Engage in shared Adaptive Action. Sharing work in a team is about sharing decision
making and expertise to plan the next wise action. Members of effective teams consider
current and desired patterns of the whole system, and then gauge the potential impact of
shared and individual decisions on those patterns. They consider the whole of the project,
rather than just the portion that is their own responsibility. Shared Adaptive Action does
not ask any individual to ignore their own accountabilities or to abdicate their
responsibilities. What it requires is that decisions about those accountabilities and
responsibilities are informed by the needs and perspectives of the whole team and the
desired outcomes at the larger scale, as well as by needs and perspectives of the smaller
pieces.

 Grant and generate voice. In collaborative work, team members engage with each other
to understand the work to be done, to negotiate differences that matter, and to take wise
action toward greater whole system functioning. In HSD we talk about responsibilities
inherent in these engagements. Each person grants voice to others, with the intent to
understand what’s being said, both verbally and nonverbally. At the same time, each
individual generates voice by speaking clearly and completely, by avoiding jargon and
hidden messages, and by making sure their messages meet others’ needs. Granting and
generating voice in a collaborative relationship depends on the ability to stand in inquiry.
Collaborators put aside judgments, disagreements, and assumptions to engage deeply with
their colleagues and co-workers.

 Give and take productively. Each individual in a team brings unique information and
perspective to the work to be done. Successful collaboration depends on the degree to
which each of those individuals share their unique expertise and questions, accept what
others bring, and negotiate across differences that emerge. This level of reciprocity and
personal authenticity allows for richer, more resilient responses that take advantage of the
 wealth of expertise in the collaboration.

 Share access to resources. Collaboration calls for equitable access among the
collaborators. Whatever they need—information, fiscal or material resources, time,
influence—has to be distributed across the whole in equitable and accessible ways. When
regulations or policies preclude full sharing, as in the case of personnel confidentiality, for
example, what matters is that each individual has the information or resources they need,
with full understanding of any constraints that may exist around that access.

Each person takes on accountability for setting conditions in individual and shared work to shape
these patterns, and the team’s shared Adaptive Actions allow for constant shifting and responding
to needs in the system. In sharing the responsibility for shaping these patterns, each member of the
team moves to a greater level of understanding the system’s needs and contributing to the greater
success of the whole.

LEARNING OUTCOME 4: ANALYSE THE CONFLICTS AND TENSIONS WHICH CAN

ARISE THROUGH INTER-AGENCY WORKING

a. INTER-AGENCY WORKING AROUND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT.

Interagency is "the process of agencies and families joining together for the purpose of
interdependent problem solving that focuses on improving services to the community”.
Collaboration occurs when people from different organizations, produce something through joint
effort, resources, and decision making, and share ownership of the final product or service." This
collaboration can occur on multiple levels, from frontline collaboration among caseworkers,
families, mental health providers, teachers, and others, to collaborative relationships between
policy-makers and administrators responsible for addressing organizational mandates, financing,
and management. In addition to State and local organizations, interagency collaboration can
involve public, private, and/or faith-based sectors as partners. As all agencies invested in serving
youth and families are partners, participants may include parents and family advocacy groups,
among others.

Proactive interagency collaboration opens the lines of communication between agencies. This
allows for better, more accurate information sharing between departments. It reduces
misunderstandings and miscommunications, which can be dangerous in emergency situations. As
such it brings development in community since issues to do with discrimination is eliminated.

b. CONFLICTS WHICH MAY OCCUR IN POLITICAL SITUATIONS.

Agencies have different institutional cultures, political allies, or policy priorities that lead to
clashes” and that conflict “can be most constructive when they bring differing expertise,
information bases, constituencies, and values into policy decisions
Political conflict stems from the perspectives, interests, and values of individuals and, so, gauging
differences, strengths, and changes in public opinion can provide crucial information on potential
and actual responses to policy issues and initiatives

Conflict can be defined as a threat, or perceived threat, to an individual's interests, values, or needs.
In interagency working, conflict plays out in a range of ways; in some cases, parties will agree on
goals but disagree on how to achieve them, and in other cases, parties will disagree on goals, and,
lastly, sometimes parties will not agree on the facts to the dispute obscuring any potential for
problem-solving. In practice, there are two fundamental types of conflict: constructive conflicts
and destructive conflicts. Constructive conflicts are those that generate positive outcomes and
problem-solving, and destructive conflicts produce negative outcomes and deteriorated
relationships.

c. CONFLICTS WHICH MAY OCCUR IN SOCIAL AND CULTURAL

SITUATIONS.

A cultural conflict is a dislike, hostility, or struggle between communities who have different
philosophies and ways of living, resulting in contradictory aspirations and behaviors. The notion
originates from sociological conflict theories and anthropological concepts of intercultural
relations.

Cultural fluency means familiarity with cultures: their natures, how they work, and ways they
intertwine with our relationships in times of conflict and harmony. Cultural fluency means
awareness of several dimensions of culture, including

Communication (Communication refers to different starting points about how to relate to and with
others)

Ways of naming, framing, and taming conflict, (Ways of naming, framing, and taming conflict
vary across cultural boundaries. For those accustomed to subdued, calm discussion, an emotional
exchange among family members may seem a threatening conflict. The family members
themselves may look at their exchange as a normal and desirable airing of differing views.
Intractable conflicts are also subject to different interpretations.)

Approaches to meaning making, (suggest that people have a range of starting points for making
sense of their lives, including:

 universalist
 specificity
 Inner direction.
 Synchronous time.

Identities and roles. (Identities and roles refer to conceptions of the self. Those who see themselves
as separate individuals likely come from societies anthropologists call individualist. Those for
whom group allegiance is primary usually come from settings anthropologists call collectivist, or
communitarian.)
 d. HOW CONFLICT OCCURS THROUGH INTER-AGENCY WORKING.

One rationale for reorganizing government agencies and programs is to reduce conflict and
increase coordination. The trend towards increased collaboration is happening against a backdrop
of historically stove-piped programs and institutional conflict—between agencies as well as within
them. Coordination is viewed as good and conflict as bad. But can interagency conflict be good?

Coordination is not always desirable, or may not be desirable immediately. Conflict among and
within agencies can provide substantial political, social welfare, and legitimacy benefits.

Conflicts arise when two groups or individuals interacting in the same situation see the situation
differently because of different sets of settings, information pertaining to the universe, awareness,
background, disposition, reason or outlook.

THREE TYPES OF INTERAGENCY CONFLICTS

Hierarchical Conflicts. In this set of relationships, one agency is formally subordinate to another,
or one agency can effectively overturn another’s decisions in at least a subset of case

Conflict in Advisory and Monitoring Relationships. In this set of relationships, one agency has
decisional authority but another can exert some degree of influence on a decision. This can create
internal checks and balances by generating information to be shared

Conflicts between Agencies with Equal Power. In this set of relationships, two agencies have
equivalent and overlapping authority. This results in some degree of competition between
agencies. This approach can result in redundancies but has both benefits and costs.

Therefore, Poor communication is one of the main causes of conflict between employees in the
workplace. This can result in a difference in communication styles or a failure to communicate.
Failing to communicate in the workplace may cause employees to make incorrect assumptions and
believe workplace gossip. Poor communication in the workplace not only causes conflict but
decreases productivity and employee morale.

A difference in personalities among employees is another cause of workplace conflict. Employees

come from different backgrounds and experiences, which play a role in shaping their personalities.
When employees fail to understand or accept the differences in each other's personalities, problems
arise in the workplace

Similar to personalities, the values of employees differ within the workplace. A difference in
values is seen clearly when a generational gap is present. Young workers may possess different
workplace values than older workers. The difference in values is not necessarily the cause of
employee conflict in the workplace, but the failure to accept the differences is. When employees
fail to accept the differences, co-workers may insult each other's character and experiences. When
insults occur, the conflict intensifies until the right solution is offered and accepted
Unhealthy workplace competition is a cause of employee conflict. Some industries foster
competitive environments more than others. When salary is linked to employee production, a
workplace may experience strong competition between employees. Competition that is not
properly managed can result in employees sabotaging or insulting one another, which creates a
hostile work environment. Unhealthy workplace competition discourages teamwork and promotes
individualism.

e. EFFECTIVE CONFLICT RESOLUTION.

Generally there are good working relationships between agencies, but occasionally there will be a
difference of professional views. This protocol is designed with the intention of clarifying the
actions required where there is a professional disagreement. It is consistent with, but extends the
conflict resolution protocol within the Continuum of Need and Response framework. Effectively
resolving workplace conflict can improve your organization and increase your bottom line.

How to resolve workplace conflict through communication

Here are five ways to resolve conflict – and improve colleague relationships – through better
communication.

1. Address issues immediately and openly.

When a conflict arises among your team members, action should be taken quickly to resolve it.
Instead of ignoring or avoiding conflict, accept it and work towards addressing it immediately.

Not addressing the conflict until a later time allows resentments to simmer. It’s important to
address the issue immediately and transparently.

Fast resolution retains a sense of harmony in the workplace and advised leaders to encourage open
dialogue during these discussions. Similarly, in their book, The Essential Workplace Conflict
Handbook (Career Press, 2015), authors Cornelia Gamlem and Barbara Mitchell said getting to
the source of a problem involves honest conversations and a little detective work. Get good
information by varying the types of questions you ask, such as open-ended questions, close-ended
questions, fact-based questions or opinion-based question

2. Set clear expectations.

Managing expectations – both in terms of what you expect from others and what they expect of
you – is one of the most important things a team can do to facilitate better communication.
Anything you or your colleagues need from each other should be clearly defined and expressed.
“If people don’t understand what the organization, their manager, or their teammates expect,
confusion and conflict can result

3. Build active listening skills.

You may hear what your colleagues say, but are you actually listening to them? People’s minds
wander when others speak, especially in a group setting, and they don’t truly absorb what’s been
said. Even in digital communications, it’s easy to read and immediately forget about a message.
Gamlem emphasized the importance of creating a culture where people really listen to each other.

“Listening is such an undervalued skill, and it can have a real impact on how often conflicts arise
and how they can be avoided

Additionally, with the application of good listening skills, conflict can be helpful. “Differing
opinions and ideas can lead to great innovations. Take the consistent stance of being open to
someone whose opinions differ from yours. This allows you to see things from a new light (and
decide when to go to bat for your idea).”

4. Use neutral terms and open body language.

When engaged in a conflict, it is natural to want to be closed off – but this only hinders the chance
of resolution. Give yourself (or those in the conflict) time to cool off first. When managing the
conflict, speak in a calm, agreeable manner.

Use neutral language and separate the other person from the problem. It is better to speak in “I”
language, as opposed to “you” language to avoid the other person feeling attacked. For example,
saying “I feel undervalued in my position” is going to be more effective than saying “You don’t
value my work.” Using “you” language will only cause the other person to get defensive, which
doesn’t bode well for conflict resolution.

In addition to choosing your words carefully, do not underestimate the power of body language
and tone. Often, it is not what is being said that propels conflict further, but how someone is saying
it. Use open body language to signify your willingness to resolve the conflict and reach an
agreement. People tend to mimic those around them, so this can help elicit a calm, open demeanor
from anyone else in the conflict.

5. Recognize and respect personal differences.

Opposing viewpoints, behaviors and work styles can cause a lot of arguments and
misunderstandings among colleagues, Wortham said. If clashing personalities are the root cause
of a lot of your team’s problems, work on being more aware of the differences in how you view a
situation.

Whether it be how a meeting was run, how a strategy was deployed or how stakeholders were
engaged, recognizing that other people can interpret the same event in different ways is important
to remember in order to resolve conflicts when they arise,” Wortham said. “[Knowing] how you
prefer to communicate and being able to recognize others’ communication styles can help build
the bridges of understanding.”

“Each of us sees and experiences the world differently using our own experiences, values,
individual diversity and culture,” Mitchell added. “We each interpret what we’ve heard or seen,
give it meaning and draw conclusions based on our experiences. Recognizing that differences exist
makes it easier to begin having discussions that help resolve workplace conflicts.”

f. THE CONSTRAINTS AND ISSUES RELATING TO INTER-AGENCY

WORKING.

Inter-agency working is about more than one agency working together in a planned and formal
way rather than simply through informal networking (although the latter
may support and develop the former).This can be at the strategic or the operational level
whereas collaboration is a process in which organizations exchange information, alter
activities, share resources, and enhance each other’s capacity for mutual benefit and a common
purpose by sharing risks, responsibilities and rewards
 Agencies need to accept that interagency working is a learning process, with tensions and
difficulties as well as insights and innovation

Some of constraints and issues relating to inter-agency working include inconsistent

approaches, duplication of work, lack of continuity and things ‘falling through the cracks’
when lines of reporting and accountability are not clear. Below is a table that summarizes the
issues and challenges to inter-agency working.

g. WHY SOME INITIATIVES FAIL; FACTORS THAT HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO

THEIR FAILURE.

Initiative is all about taking charge. An initiative is the first in a series of actions. An initiative is
the start of something, with the hope that it will continue. But a lot of change initiatives fail because
they lack bottom-up support. Failure also refers to a lack of sustainability of your change efforts.

Our tendency is to try things out capriciously (in a way that changes suddenly and
unexpectedly) without an in-depth grasp of their underlying foundation, and without the
commitment necessary to sustain them. When a new idea or initiative fails, we give up instead of
investigating the causes of failure and addressing them systematically

Any initiative without execution or implementation is a waste of time, effort and money. Following
are 10 common challenges or factors inter-agency working face when implementing effective
change initiatives.

1. Absence of leadership consensus: The primary reason initiatives fail is lack of consensus
and support from the firm’s leaders. Firm leaders must be at the forefront of communicating
 the importance of the change and show visible support for its results. If leaders don’t care
enough to stay involved, then it will be difficult to expect employees to get behind an
important project.
2. Lack of accountability: Along with measuring progress comes holding employees
accountable for the success of the initiative. This includes well-communicated rewards and
consequences for meeting expected milestones and outcomes. Ensure all team members
know excuses will not be tolerated and specific consequences, such as being removed from
the team, will accompany failure to follow through with assigned tasks.
3. Failure to communicate: Communication is critical to getting employee buy-in and
eventual user adoption. The core of the communication should center on why the project
is critical to the firm’s success and the value it will bring in the short and long term. Make
sure employees understand how it will impact them directly—or resistance will be higher.
4. Inadequate resources: Each internal improvement projector initiative needs adequate
resources of time, money and people to be successful. Many firms underestimate what it
will take to get change management initiatives implemented and are surprised to see what
it costs or how long it takes in the end.
5. Poor planning: Every internal initiative should be treated as a project with a scope, budget,
and timeline and given the same attention as you would a billable project.
6. Failure to measure: A lack of specific measurable metrics established to analyze results
will make it very difficult to determine if the initiative is a success or failure. Everyone
should know how the results will be measured and there should be a regular process for
reviewing progress against expected milestones.
7. Disjointed team: Without the right team, any initiative is doomed to fail. Ensure all team
members are committed, have the right skills and time available, and are passionate about
the project's mission.
8. Missing feedback: Employees and other stakeholders can provide valuable feedback and
clues about potential obstacles. Failure to ask for feedback often leads to a lack of buy-in
and unexpected problems.
9. Resistance: This is a normal reaction to change that be anticipated. Having a plan for
resistance is an effective way to prepare for its inevitable consequences.
10. Lack of defined outcomes: Failure to determine specific measureable goals and objectives
for the project.

By ensuring these 10 challenges or factors are anticipated and prepared for in advance, inter-
agency working leaders can give their firms the highest chance of success in implementing critical
business improvements. They must take the time to understand where their firm stands before
starting any new projects and have realistic goals that everyone can get behind.