Risk governance in collaborative public service delivery

Many forms of collaborative working are now standard practice in public service delivery, however, they are not straightforward or guaranteed to result in success. Collaborations are associated with a level of risk: just as... [ view full abstract ]

Many forms of collaborative working are now standard practice in public service delivery, however, they are not straightforward or guaranteed to result in success. Collaborations are associated with a level of risk: just as individual organisations face risks in their organisational management, so too do collaborations. However, in collaborations the risks are perhaps more multi-faceted as there is a degree of interdependence between the partners. While risk has been researched in the traditional forms of public-private partnerships the circumstances and the nature of many collaborations that are formed now differ from this standard model. Collaborations do not merely consist of infrastructure or construction partnerships, but also of partnerships in the broader field of social services. It can be expected that not just the context of the contemporary collaborations is different, but that the risks and their management also differ to those observed in traditional PPPs. This research sets out to investigate the risk governance practices in public service collaborations, in an attempt to explore what models of risk governance can lead to more robust, effective and sustainable collaborations.
The research comprises a cross-national comparative study. The empirical work is based on six case studies in total: two case studies in three countries (Scotland, Finland and Sweden). A variety of public service collaborations have been included in the research, based on different combinations of public, private and third sector organisations. The case studies consist of in-depth interviews, questionnaire data and documentary data.
There is an expectation that all service organisations involved in public service delivery give risk management due consideration to achieve an acceptable level of good governance. This research provides valuable insights into risk related activities in collaborative working and the individual organisations involved. Risk governance practices are limited in the case study collaborations. This is not an entirely surprising finding, given that risk related practices are limited on the organisational level of those involved in the collaborations. Key reasons for the lack of explicitly dealing with risk include: assumptions being made about the capabilities and approaches to risk management taken by partners; risk management is not a priority; risk management is not understood both in terms of how it works and how it can be beneficial; it is simpler to ignore risk management if it is seen as an overly complex managerial tool; and simply not having thought of risk management at all. The overall conclusion of the study is that improvements should be made in terms of risk governance practices in collaborative working. This finding is universally applicable across public service collaborations in the three countries investigated, and likely beyond. Lastly, practical guidance for managing risk in collaborations has been limited, and as a result, this study offers a framework for risk governance in collaborative working in an effort to address this.