The non-existence of a comprehensive, up-to-date, empirically-based review of partnership in enterprises and workplaces makes the task of assessing the current state of play difficult, and makes it even more difficult still to benchmark progress over time. From a synthesis of relevant studies and reports, the following broad conclusions nevertheless appear to be warranted.
— A significant level of innovation and experimentation with partnership- based approaches to decision-making and work reorganisation has been evident in recent years in the private and public sectors; in non-union and unionised organisations, and in foreign-owned multinationals as well as indigenous companies. Therefore the social partners and many firms, workforces and unions have already acquired significant experience with the operation of various modes and forms of partnership (McCartney and Teague 1997; Roche and Turner 1998; IBEC 1999; Roche and Geary 2000; Geary 2000; O’Donnell and Teague 2000).
— Notwithstanding the level of activity recorded, little compelling evidence can be found that Ireland can be viewed by international standards as a leader with respect to the diffusion and depth of workplace partnership (Roche and Geary 2000). Such comparative evidence as exists suggests that the opposite may be the case insofar as European benchmarks are concerned (Cahill 2000; Gill and Krieger 2000).
— A number of EU programmes have supported the development of partnership, the preparation of training and diagnostic materials and the dissemination of models and learning experiences. These are widely judged to have made an important contribution to diffusing partnership.
Initiatives like the joint IBEC-ICTU ADAPT Participation in Action at Enterprise Level (PACT) Programme, the IBEC-ICTU and IPC’s New Work Organisation Programme and the SIPTU ADAPT Programme, made inroads in familiarising companies and unions with working through partnership (O’Donnell and Teague 2000).
— Networks of partnership facilitators, many of these ongoing, have been created in different sectors, particularly health, local government, in some public utilities and large private sector firms. These networks probably amount to several hundred persons, but little effort has been devoted to capturing, distilling and more widely disseminating their unique experience and expertise, their perspectives on the challenges of animating partnership and their assessment of its benefits and potential. — Partnership has been more commonly applied to the resolution of operational challenges and problems than to the handling of strategic issues (Roche and Geary 2000).
— Based on such evidence as is available, Ireland may possess a number of exemplars and models of partnership of international significance in both the private and the public sectors.
— Partnership has been adopted as the main approach to handling major programmes of market-driven change or deregulation in a significant number of organisations, with consequences widely accepted as beneficial to management, staff, unions and customers (Roche and Turner 1998; Roche 2001; O’Dowd 1998).
— Assessments of partnership initiatives point to generally positive effects on performance, on employee attitudes and job satisfaction and on union representation (O’Dowd ongoing; Roche and Geary 2001; IPC 2001; O’Donnell and Teague 2000).
— In recent years there is some evidence that the momentum behind partnership initiatives may be waning in areas of the public service and in some public utilities, sometimes triggering reviews and reassessments of existing partnership arrangements. There is evidence also that the rate of adoption of partnership initiatives in unionised companies may have slowed in recent years (Higgins 2001; O’Dowd ongoing).
— The situation in non-union companies is less clear. There is little reason to suggest that non-union multinationals are any less wedded than in the past to modes of partnership based on the direct involvement of
employees. Nor is there any evidence that these modes of partnership are any less robust in the more difficult competitive and commercial circumstances being encountered currently. It is less clear that partnership has been diffusing significantly more widely among non- union companies in general.
Among the implications of these conclusions for the National Centre for Partnership and Performance the following might be highlighted.
— Little authoritative research is available against which progress with partnership can be benchmarked, making a reliable profile of development over time difficult to construct.
— While there has been considerable experimentation and experience with different modes of partnership, arising in different contexts and addressing different types of issues and challenges, with the exception of the ADAPT projects, little of this learning has been captured or distilled in a form that can assist organisations more generally to learn and make progress. — Some exemplars of partnership of major significance can be found in
Ireland’s recent experience, but again very little of the learning that has been acquired by these has been captured for wider dissemination and application.
— Assessments of Irish partnership initiatives available report broadly positive effects on stakeholders, but little systematic research has been done on this critical issue, and the research that is available needs to be synthesised and disseminated.
— There are some indications of a loss of momentum and a slowing of diffusion of partnership in recent years. Why this should be the case remains unclear, as does any link there may be with more turbulent and uncertain industrial relations and pay bargaining arenas considered above. — A research strategy to support partnership and performance needs to be
developed in response to the main issues considered in this section.