‘Partnership’ has become a buzzword in development circles. The term is used to
describe almost any relationship that pools the resources of different actors to address
societal challenges and concerns. Because it encompasses such a broad range of
perspectives, the contention of this thesis is that partnership can only be fully
understood in relation to practice. A critical assessment of a selection of my research
publications is used to explore how partnership is interpreted in different contexts,
why and by whom, and to what extent it might offer possibilities for achieving social
progress. This review finds that partnership can be construed as both a structure and
a process, and as a means to an end and an end in itself. Attention thus needs to be
given to its instrumental value as a development tool and to its intrinsic worth in
cementing social capital. Consideration is given to connections between these
different forms of partnership and other development ‘solutions’; the complex
interplay between external, organisational and individual drivers for multi-stakeholder
collaboration, and evidence for the benefits of working in this way. This
analysis reveals that it is hard to judge the effectiveness of partnership due to the
complexity of different levels of interaction; lack of clarity on goals and motivations
for partnering; and, because process-related results generally emerge in the long
term, attribution is a challenge. It is thus suggested that assessments of partnership
might more usefully focus on methodologies that enhance its potential to generate
individual and societal value. The attributes of such ‘transformational’ arrangements,
and how these compare with other collaborative connections, are examined using a
typology that builds upon a transactional-transformational partnership continuum.
Further investigation into the nature of stakeholder participation, and related power
dynamics, indicates that partnership can both promote and embody social progress
when participation is carefully facilitated by ‘partnership brokers’; embedded in
sociohistoric contexts, and based upon open-ended dialogue processes that seek to
comprehend different points of view rather than change them. In order to explore this
potential more fully, as well as continued research into particular partnership
experiences and possible alternatives, more imaginative exchanges of knowledge
about working in this way are recommended