Organisation: The Government Outcomes Lab
There is widespread acknowledgement that the current transactional approach to Public Private Partnerships in delivering public services isn’t working. Policymakers and practitioners regularly emphasise the need for more cooperative, productive relationships between stakeholders. Relational contracts have been shown to foster successful partnership working in private sector contracting, but what about their potential in complex public-private settings?
In this session, we drew on the latest insights from research, policy and practice to explore how a formal relational approach to public-private partnerships seeking to resolve complex social problems might prove more fruitful. We began by hearing the latest insights from a forthcoming book, which examines the lessons we can learn from two contrasting case studies in the UK and US. We then turned to an expert panel of academics, practitioners and policymakers to explore the broader benefits and challenges that may arise in trying to adopt such an approach to public contracting.
This discussion brought together a rich mix of policymaker and practitioner perspectives from around the world for an in-depth exploration of formal relational approaches to public-private partnerships seeking to resolve complex social problems.
This session, chaired by GO Lab's Dr Felix-Anselm van Lier, noted a widespread acknowledgement that the current transactional approach to public-private partnerships in delivering public services isn’t working. Policymakers and practitioners regularly emphasise the need for more cooperative, productive relationships between stakeholders. The session discussed on the latest insights from research, policy and practice to explore how a formal relational approach to public-private partnerships seeking to resolve complex social problems might prove more fruitful.
Professor Carolyn Heinrich reflected on some of the dimensions influencing the spectrum from formal to relational including the number of partners (few/ many), scope of the work (narrow/broad), communication practices (formal/informal) and implementation plans (flexible /specific). James Magowan of DCMS discussed the need for accessing risk and finding common language for relational contracting. Professor David Van Slyke left the audience to ponder this “Think about any non-contractual relationship you’ve been in. Every time you add a set of rules you get a funny look, as you layer on more rules, which layers on more rigidity which signals mistrust."
The session noted the need to continue developing knowledge on frameworks to improve the uptake of relational contracting.