Dominance of Organizational Culture or Professional Ability - Essay Example

?Does the success of partnership working rely on organizational factors as much as the ability of professionals to work together? Essence of Partnership Working: Dominance of Organizational Culture or Professional Ability The essence of partnership working lies simply in the value addition that it creates in the working of the organization both internally as well as externally. Establishment of fruitful and result oriented partnerships involves time and structure that is build on a perpetual basis involving organizational factors along with the individual ability of professionals who intends to work in a cohesive environment (Carnwell & Carson 1998). Partnership workings are in itself considered to be complicated instrument for achieving resolutions to day to day business problems and complexities. Most of the research done in the past clearly focuses on the fact that organizations can adopt such an approach only by designing a long term, stretchy, and unrefined approach. Partnerships are more inclined towards developing a shared leadership among people who are acknowledged and authorized by the firm and trusted by each other to build on common consensus and work on issues that emerge in the due course of time. Such partnerships can be strategized and developed only by grounding on the organizational factors that aim to develop a favorable partnership environment (Carnwell & Carson 1998). It becomes the due responsibility of the organization to make the individuals understand the partnership working framework, the culture, ethics, and accost of firm. The organization needs to delegate individual roles and responsibilities so as to avoid future conflicts and contradictions. Organizational factor such as shared organizational goals and aims, certainly leads towards positive outcome and effective coordination. Culture and values act to be an integral part of a successful partnership making people learn to respect each others perspective (CCFNRC 2008). On the other hand, capability of people helps in enhancement of a culture build by an organization. Individual ability of professionals helps in strengthening up a constructive environment that promotes effective partnership and a constructive working environment. Taking into consideration the above scenario whether organizational factor or individual professional ability is responsible for a successful partnership, the current study aims to determine the dominance of the factor mentioned above along with the factors that serve to be a deterrent or incitement in promoting partnership working. It is highly important for an organization to follow management practices and make use of the limited constraint resources in order to accomplish the organizational partnership goals and harmonize the ultimate objective of partnership. Thus, the study would also aim to identify the focal points of partnership that can be of immense help in application specifically related to medical and health sciences. Various professional codes and organizational structures have deep influence on partnerships, their essence, relevance and influence would be adjudged. Setting up and maintaining successful partnership requires establishment of partnership norms that need to be structured and proper plans to be formulated. It is important to highlight the real philosophy and policy of partnerships as referred in the post modern world (Carter 1988), specifically related to social health and welfare. Past researches reveal the fact that considering clients at the focal point of good health and social care, partnerships becomes quintessential. The study would explore the issues that actually create an urge to build partnership workings for resolving complex client problems. Perils and Advantages of Partnership Working Looking upon the recent trends in the health and social care arena, the emergence of business partnerships is peculiar and strongly influenced by the organizational policy and factors which further are prone to changes due to the dynamic nature of the same. It is seen that partnership working in health care is beneficial as segregation of social factor can be better managed with the help of multidisciplinary action, moreover redundancy of services rendered by various organizations can be curbed (Peckham & Exworthy 2003).. Medical care is benefited through a collaborative effort that leads to minimal dilution of tasks and activities performed by various agencies and organizations (Huxham & MacDonald (1992). An added advantage that medical and health care attains is that the frequency of agencies resulting in counterproductive services is also mitigated. But at the same time, partnership working does have its own unconstructive consequences as well. Multiplying relations do get complicated and difficult to handle in due course of time, privacy and confidentiality is generally at stake of the counterparty. Interprofessional differences are bound to arise, making things more intricate and complex (Secker & Hill 2001). Lack of proper evaluation and monitoring systems creates lacunae that can prove to be highly vulnerable in future. Professional identity does get to suffer sometimes which is one of the most critical negative impacts of partnership working (Brown, Crawford, and Darongkamas, 2000). It is most likely that individuals might refuse to involve people in their personal care decision making. Financial and other commitments such as time can certainly overpower the visible benefits of partnership working. Despite the deterrent factors to partnership working mentioned above, it is highly worthwhile to be applied as an affirmative solution to modern health care problems. Researchers (Brown, Crawford, and Darongkamas, 2000) have a strong belief that the real cause for the need of common effort from different people is due to the policy directive or the organizational factor. Partnership in Health Care Many eminent researchers and renowned people have shared their viewpoints regarding the concept of partnership working specifically related to health and social care. Rodgers (2000) based his analysis on the context generated by Gallant et al. (2002), who clearly reveals that the essence of ‘partnership’ has consistently changed during the past five decades. Initially when it started with the consideration of developing an equitable, fair and free society along with the establishment of International Declaration of Human Rights (United Nations 1948), gradually it succeeded to make individuals self dependent and responsible for their own health and well being (WHO 1978), however now the concept of partnership inclines towards making the general public more aware regarding the service standards that are imparted to them and making them informed about the fruitful interactions that one can have from their desired service render (Frankel 1994). The changing nature of health and social service has generated a sudden need for creating effectual partnerships , for instance the NHS Modern Dependable (DoH 1997) is a partnership with legal authorized agencies aimed for realizing community development and growth for resolving all kinds of issues and problems faced by the local community members, Modernizing Health and Social Services is a partnership working that promotes education of the staff members along with their employment so that the local needs of the community can be fulfilled. Developing the Workforce (DoH1999a) and the Health Act (1999) focuses upon strengthening teamwork among members. Such partnership organizations aim to generate more awareness regarding the fact doctors and nurses have a special role in extending certain help which needs to be transformed into professional careers. Not only this, there also has been change in the Health Act which now recommends and desires inclusion of proper formulated agreements that clearly determine the various services which are to be rendered by specific agencies and also the criteria based on which the clients or individuals would be gauged upon. According to Gallant et al. (2002), partnership working is grounded on a well defined structure and proper process set up as well. This clearly indicates the utter importance of organizational factors that have an integral role to play in the success of partnership form of working in health care. Proper organizational environment help in enhancing responsible and strengthened relations among partners that further augments the skills and professional ability of all partners and agency workers (Courtney 1996). Organizational structure also includes identification of suitable partners that can help achieve ultimate organizational goals. However it cannot be denied that professional ability of workers to comprehend situations and work together does make a significant difference. For instance Moreland et all 2002. , in his project ‘Twice A Child Projects’ indicated the involvement of social groups for effectual decision making process which particularly requires the individual ability and skill of professionals that would help in articulating needs of the group . The ideologies of different professionals need to be matched and reconciled to achieve common goal. Thus here, organizational structure has a less dominant role in partnership working when compared to individual competency and skills. Significance of Professional Codes and Organizational Framework Professional codes and organization frameworks are another important issue that helps in determining whether organization and structure a sole factor in developing successful partnerships or there are other variables to be considered as well. According to Gallant et all (2002), when considering users and carers in partnership, significant negotiations are generally prevalent but where professional codes and frameworks are in practice, things become cumbersome. Codes often facilitate in maintaining effective partnership management but at the same also serve to be a major constraint in the scope or capacity of health care and well being. For instance logically and practically it would be highly beneficial for a social worker if he prior assesses the health needs and requirements of his client but at the same it would be extremely difficult for a professional nurse to impart a medical treatment to the user based only on the assessment which is generated by the social worker. Professional codes would compel a nurse to follow her individual assessment based on medical needs and requirements. Such contradictions are a major hindrance to effective partnership working where ambiguity in decision making if often encountered by the partners. Partnership influence can be visibly notified through number of functions and traits of joint collaboration such as the membership scenario, the organizational structure and culture. Past researches have revealed the fact that partnerships require a structure that is well acknowledged and autonomous in nature in order to give partnership proper identity. Partnership working is taken to be as a contradictory approach. For instance in a study conducted by Waine, Tunstill and Meadows (2005), in terms of services to be imparted to children, the conflict among the need and abstinence of partnership is figured out. Young people are considered to be prospective partners and a significant thrust in the structure and policies framed. Similar importance is also laid for parents as implied in the ‘The Framework for the assessment of children in need’ (DH, DfEE and Home Office, 2000) that demands the involvement of parents and children by the social workers in identifying their personal needs. However, there also exist some contradictory viewpoints regarding the same that inclines towards following a gate keeping approach that gradually undermines the preventive nature of social care or service. on one hand, as per the assessment framework, the need of children must be fulfilled in accordance to a flexible gamut. For instance, a social worker ability to render protection to a child must be in tandem with the capacity to extend a preventive response. But at the same time, other standards laid by the government are inclined towards adopting an enduring model of social care where the central focus is more reactive than being proactive. Under such conditions early intruders like parents and youngsters are considered to be dominion of the system rather than social care (DfES et al, 2002) Lyotard (1992) has put forward his notion whereby the immensely spread up national schemes and initiatives have actually turned to be a failure in helping people, the primary reason for which they were created. For instance poor housing and low standards of living has been found to be aggravated according to the past five decades data. Lyotard sternly believes that such instances are the cause for restructuring and remodeling of social problems in terms of the system rather than the users who need to be facilitated. Looking back in 1980s, the systems and the practitioners both are considered as less powerful for both the clients as well as the receivers of the medical services especially in Britain. Slowly and steadily, consumer’s participation is encouraged in the health and social care services so that they suggestions can be imbibed in rendering of such services. High importance which is now given to various clients in form of active consumer’s s is due to the fact that health problems are getting more complicated and multivariate. The traditional and conventional theories and models have been exhausted. For instance earlier it was found that the ‘Department of health’ was concerned about ‘health’ problems while social issues were raised by the social services but the perception has changed. Just by considering the clients as the center or the focal point of health and social care, partnership working has emerged as a powerful tool (Lyotard, 1992). The complex nature of client has compelled interventions from number of services. Bournemouth for matter of fact may requires larger specialized care for elderly where traditionally the needs client might have been fulfilled by NHS and social services separately but now with the changing times such needs would be made availed under one roof through effective partnership working. Problem specific partnerships in practice are the best means to meet up the changing nature of health and social care services. REFERENCES Brown, B., Crawford, P., & Darongkamas, J. 2000. Blurred roles and permeable boundaries: the experience of multidisciplinary working in community mental health, Health and Social Care in the Community, Nov 8(6): 425–35. Carnwell. R., and Carson. A., 1998. Understanding Partnerships and Collaborations. Available at http://www.mcgraw-hill.co.uk/openup/chapters/0335214371.pdf. [Accessed on 13th Nov, 2011]. Compassion Capital Fund National Resource Center. 2008. Strengthening Non-Profits: A Capacity Builder’s Resource Library. Partnerships: Frameworks for Working Together. Available at http://strengtheningnonprofits.org/resources/guidebooks/Partnerships.pdf. [Accessed on 13th Nov, 2011]. Carter, J. 1998. Postmodernity and the Fragmentation of Welfare. Routledge, London. Courtney, R., Ballard, E., Fauver, S., Gariota, M. & Holland, L. (1996) The partnership model: working with individuals, families and communities towards a new vision of health, Public Health, 13: 177–86. DoH (1997) The New NHS Modern Dependable: A National Framework for Assessing Performance. The Stationery Office, London. DoH (1999a) Modernising Health and Social Services: Developing the Workforce. The Stationery Office, London. DH (Department of Health) (2000a) Assessing children in need and their families: Practice guidance, London: The Stationery Office. DfES (Department for Education and Skills), DWP (Department for Work and Pensions), HM Treasury and Women and Equality Unit (2002) Inter-departmental childcare review: Delivering for children and families, London: Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. DH (Department of Health), DfEE (Department for Education and Employment) and Home Office (2000) Framework for the assessment of children in need and their families, London: The Stationery Office. Gallant, M.H., Beaulieu, M.C. & Carnevale, F.A. 2002. Partnership: an analysis of the concept within the nurse–client relationship, Journal of Advanced Nursing 40(2): 149–57. Peckham, S. & Exworthy .2003. Primary Care in the UK: Policy, Organisation and Management. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke. Huxham, C & MacDonald, D. 1992. Introducing collaborative advantage, Management Decision, 30(3): 50–6. Rodgers, B.L. 2000. Concept analysis: an evolutionary view in B. L. Rodgers and K. A. Knafl (eds) Concept Development in Nursing: Foundations, Techniques and Applications (2nd edn). Saunders, Philadelphia Secker, J. & Hill, K. 2001. Broadening the partnerships: experiences of working across community agencies, Journal of Interprofessional Care, Nov., 15(4): 341–50. Lyotard, J. F. 1992 The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge. Manchester University Press, Manchester. Waine.B., Tunstill.J., and Meadows.P., 2005. Developing social care: values and principles. Available at http://www.scie.org.uk/publications/positionpapers/pp04/values.pdf. [Accessed on 13th Nov, 2011]. Read More