MSP Success Factors

Each stakeholder in a partnership has individual interests and objectives, which may differ from those of other partners. The challenge for a partnership is to agree on a strong common set of objectives. This means achieving a consensus on the mutual benefits of working together. Developing joint objectives and a vision outlining the transformational potential of the partnership requires both commitment and ownership. Agreement on results chains and milestones creates a solid framework for action and gives partners and third parties assurance regarding the common approach. Only by clearly defining strategic objectives are partners able to assess the investments that are needed in institutional capacity development and to critically reflect on these.

The concept of leadership in multi-stakeholder partnerships is fundamentally different from that of individual organisations. Where decision-making in organisations is hierarchical, in multi-stakeholder partnerships decisions are reached through processes of negotiation. MSP leadership is defined as the willingness of partners to take responsibility for the joint project, share any risks and invest the necessary resources. So particularly in the initial phase, committed individuals are needed who can form a kind of ‘core group’ which drives the partnership forward and takes responsibility for its success.

The success of multi-stakeholder partnerships depends not only on the commitment of partner organisations, but can also be greatly influenced by external stakeholders. In the political context, in particular, public support through influential individuals can make an important contribution to the achievement of partnership objectives. High-level support helps to maintain political momentum for an issue and to mobilise both public and private resources. It is therefore important for stakeholders in a partnership to identify institutions for which their topic may be of importance and how to involve these in order to increase the partnership’s effectiveness. In addition to external advocates, high-level support from within participating institutions is also essential. Without support from management levels within the partner organisations, the MSP will not be able to sustain its success.

Involving stakeholders from different areas of society in multi-stakeholder partnerships is not an end in itself, but should be about producing effective solutions to complex challenges. The aim of forming a multi-stakeholder partnership is not necessarily to involve as many stakeholders as possible, but more importantly to reach those partners who contribute to achieving the partnership’s objectives. It is therefore crucial to begin by identifying the resources and knowledge required to realise these goals and the groups directly affected by the issue. Once the relevant stakeholders have come to the table, multi-stakeholder partnerships have enormous potential to bring about change by combining the core competencies of various sectors of society. On the other hand, the credibility of a MSP can suffer if key stakeholders are not involved.

The way partnerships function is often decided at the personal level. Only when people are able to work together constructively can formal relations between organisations be established. A key resource in partnerships is therefore the trust between those involved. Although this resource is not a precondition for initiating a partnership, it has a considerable impact on the long-term success or otherwise of the partnership. While trust can be developed through mutual respect and by dealing with each other on equal terms, it is quickly lost if there is no constructive and respectful culture of discussion. Since each stakeholder entering a partnership is aware of the common benefits of the partnership, it should be in the interests of all stakeholders to remain open to the views and approaches of the partners.

Partnerships involving organisations from the same societal groups are often already complicated. So in multi-stakeholder partnerships the challenges facing the cooperation system are even greater. Partners in a MSP often come to the table not only with different sets of aims and problems, but also with a different organisational framework, identities, operating logic, terminology, etc. It is important to recognise and discuss these differences in culture and language in order to arrive at a common vision and shared understanding of the problem to be solved.

Multi-stakeholder partnerships are generally complex cooperation systems which call for a great deal of coordination and process management. Steering a MSP therefore requires a well-equipped secretariat –from the operational phase at the latest – with at least one person responsible solely for coordination and process management. While the size and functions of the secretariat may vary depending on the partnership, it is essential that this operates neutrally. Only then can internal and external credibility be established.

Cooperation on equal terms among all partners is a key part of multi-stakeholder partnerships. In practice, this means establishing structures that guarantee access to all decision-making processes for all stakeholders. In order for steering in a MSP to function through processes of negotiation, these must take place on equal terms. All partners must therefore have at their disposal the relevant information for decision-making. This approach towards inclusive and transparent governance ensures legitimacy, trust, effectiveness and impact.

Although multi-stakeholder partnerships offer enormous potential to address complex challenges, they may involve significant use of resources –in terms of time and human and financial resources. The volume and type of resources required by a multi-stakeholder partnership depends to a large extent on its objectives and scope. At the same time, many of the success factors listed here – such as steering, management and monitoring – can be calculated as cost items. Frequent checks should be carried out to ensure that the available budget is sufficient to cover the activities and ambitions of the partnership. Ideally, the funding for a partnership should not come primarily from just one source as this can lead to over-dependence and power imbalances. In each case, any expectations that go hand in hand with financial support must be made transparent from the outset. Consideration should be given not only to the finance required, but also to the time and human resources needed. The organisations involved should look at whether or not their operational capacity matches the demands of their respective roles within the partnership. The provision of resources is important as a means of establishing trust, mutual respect and peer-to-peer cooperation; it also creates stability and continuity.

The social and political context is of key relevance for a MSP. If a MSP is to position itself appropriately, it is important to conduct a context analysis and to evaluate the activities of other stakeholders in the same field. Beginning with the planning phase, partnerships should align their strategy with this analysis in order to prevent duplication, competition and fragmentation among initiatives in the same sector. With the correct balance of global strategy and local implementation, a MSP can reduce the complexity of solutions to global challenges and at the same time enhance its specific contribution.

In order to ensure that different initiatives complement one another and make a contribution to society at an aggregated level, meta-structures are needed at both national and international level to provide a common framework. The central framework for multi-stakeholder partnerships is Agenda 2030. Every initiative to develop a MAP should be assessed in advance for its contribution to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals. Moreover, it is useful for stakeholders to look to meta-platforms for a mutual exchange of ideas. The exchange between various multi-stakeholder partnerships promotes mutual learning and also increases the chances of achieving sector- and system-transforming results.

Continuous monitoring of both results and processes within the partnership is essential in order to ensure progress, facilitate learning processes and thus guarantee the success of the partnership. Good results monitoring enables the MSP to rapidly identify new circumstances and challenges and adapt its strategy and approach accordingly. It shows how the work of the partnership makes an effective contribution to achieving defined milestones and in so doing ensures the partnership remains on track. At the same time, it is important to check whether the partnership itself functions correctly and observes established cooperation, communication and steering processes. Monitoring requirements vary according to the type of partnership.

Just as with continuous monitoring, evaluation is necessary to check that the partnership is oriented to results, and to facilitate learning. Reporting on results is important for internal stakeholders, external donors and the wider public. Open and transparent handling of outcomes is central to the partnership’s legitimacy. At the same time, it is useful to tailor available information to the relevant target group. Whereas external donors prefer a formal report, for the general public it may be appropriate to provide an account with a more personal touch. Finally, evaluation and reporting ensure that the outcomes of a partnership are visible and therefore generate backing and support.

Even more important than keeping track of progress and results through monitoring and evaluation is making this knowledge available and using it to inform learning processes. In addition, learning must be institutionalised as part of the monitoring process. The objective should be to convert both successes and failures into opportunities through participatory learning processes. In the context of changing conditions and challenges it is also essential to continuously identify capacities that are lacking – both at individual and organisational level – and to address these through capacity development measures. This increases the partnership’s effectiveness and reduces problems that may arise as a result of unequal distribution of resources.

Consultation processes are always implementation-oriented and aimed at generating measurable results as a contribution to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals. The focus on solutions is just as important as monitoring results. A clear focus on implementation and results contributes directly to the success of a partnership. Only when there is clear evidence of a direct relationship between resources spent and intended results, is it possible to ensure the long-term commitment of stakeholders to the partnership.

An ideal multi-stakeholder partnership involves all stakeholders necessary to achieve the desired outcome. Each partner brings specific and relevant contributions. In order to guarantee effectiveness and identify asymmetric power structures, the partner’s contributions and commitments must be clearly defined. At the same time, each organisation should take on the role which best suits its skills and capacities. In this way, skills are put to good effect. Joint identification of roles and commitments is an element of the steering structure and should be recognised as such in a written agreement – be that a contract or a memorandum of understanding (MoU). The clearer and more binding the approach, the easier it is for each party to demand accountability.

Continuous and cost-saving communication channels between process managers and partners on the one hand, and between individual partners on the other, have a direct impact on the effectiveness of the partnership. A key focus should be placed on transparency. For the full strength of a multi-stakeholder partnership can only be leveraged if there is a transparent exchange of information between all stakeholders involved. Transparent communication also enables all stakeholders to make informed decisions and meet as equal partners. Open communication helps to ensure that unequal power structures within the partnership can be resolved.