how the public thinks about cross-sector …intersector.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/how-the...how...

THE

PROJECT

HOW THE PUBLIC THINKS ABOUT CROSS-SECTOR COLLABORATIONTakeaways from Hart Research Focus Groups

How the Public Thinks About Cross-sector Collaboration 2

The Intersector Project is a non-profit organization that empowers practitioners in the business, government, and non-profit sectors to collaborate to solve problems that cannot be solved by one sector alone.

Learn more at intersector.com.

How the Public Thinks About Cross-sector Collaboration: Findings from Hart Research Focus Groups, The Intersector Project, 2017

About The Intersector Project


Executive Summary................................................................................................................................................. 4 Introduction............................................................................................................................................................. 5 Methodology........................................................................................................................................................... 6 Who Can Benefit from Reading This Report?...................................................................................................... 6Takeaways................................................................................................................................................................ 7 Citizens’ Views on Cross-sector Collaboration....................................................................................... 7 Citizens’ Views on the Government, Business, and Non-profit Sectors............................................... 8 Citizens’ Views on Solving Community Problems................................................................................ 11 Making the Case for Cross-sector Collaboration................................................................................. 12Conclusion............................................................................................................................................................. 15Appendix............................................................................................................................................................... 17

Contents

In the more than 45 years that Hart Research Associates has conducted focus groups, this is the first attempt we have seen to explore the question, How does the public think about collaboration among the government, business, and non-profit sectors? This original report provides a valuable contribution to our understanding of how citizens think about the sectors and of cross-sector efforts to address problems in their communities. It shows that citizens from different communities, who work in different sectors, and vote for different political candidates generally agree on the problems facing their communities and agree that the sectors ought to work together to solve them. — Guy Molyneux, Partner, Hart Research Associates


In fall 2015, Hart Research Associates convened six focus groups on behalf of The Intersector Project to explore citizens’ views toward the business, government, and non-profit sectors and toward cross-sector collaboration. The key takeaways from those discussions are the subject of this report. (A record of data from the groups can be found in the Appendix on p. 17.)

This discussion is likely to be of greatest interest to: practitioners of cross-sector collaboration in the

business, government, and non-profit sectors, who are continually tasked with communicating the value of their work to others, and

organizations that work to support practitioners who are engaged in cross-sector work, as they are often involved in helping practitioners communicate the value of their work, engage potential partners, report to funders, and more.

Key takeaways from the focus groups, discussed in greater detail in the report, include:

Citizens’ Views on Cross-sector Collaboration Citizens generally supported greater collaboration

among the sectors to pool strengths toward tackling community problems. When asked about who is responsible for solving community problems, focus group participants did not mention cross-sector collaboration. But citizens responded very favorably when the idea of the three sectors working together to solve problems was introduced as a potential approach to addressing problems.

While there was general support among citizens for collaboration, there was not active demand for it. While citizens felt that collaboration is productive, for the most part they did not feel that it is essential. They would like to see more of it but did not seem to see it as a “breakthrough” that will solve previously intractable problems.

Citizens’ Views on Sectors While citizens did not intuitively see the world

as divided among sectors, they did view the government, non-profit, and business sectors differently, associating each with differing styles, assets, and limitations.

Citizens’ Views on Solving Community Problems Citizens shared common views of the most

important issues and problems facing their communities. Whether they work in the private sector, for a non-profit, or in the public sector, and whether

Executive Summary

Republicans or Democrats, citizens saw a similar set of issues and problems facing their communities.

While citizens identified similar problems facing their communities, there was less agreement on potential solutions — besides a general impression that community issues are the domain of local government and sometimes average citizens.

Making the Case for Cross-sector Collaboration In making the case for cross-sector collaboration as

a solution to community problems, messages that focused on the benefits of collaboration resonated more than those that focused on the barriers that must be overcome in order to collaborate successfully.

Citizens responded better to some phrases describing cross-sector collaboration than to others. The two phrases with the greatest appeal were “multi-sector collaboration” and “multi-sector partnerships.”

Stories of successful collaboration tended to resonate with citizens when they explained how the collaboration succeeded where past efforts had not, clarified that all three sectors contributed to the partnership, and focused on concrete community outcomes.

While the focus groups revealed that citizens had some awareness and generally approved of cross-sector collaboration when they were presented with the concept, it’s clear that cross-sector collaboration is not yet an issue in which the public is deeply invested. But evidence is mounting that cross-sector collaboration is on the rise in the United States. We argue for a greater role for practitioners and those that support them in telling the stories of their collaboration — both to educate the public on their work and to increase public awareness of cross-sector collaboration as a potential means to solve complex public problems.

What is cross-sector collaboration?While focus group participants were not given any particular definition of cross-sector collaboration, in this report, when we use the term, we mean “the linking or sharing of information, resources, activities, and capabilities between or among two or more sectors [government, business, non-profit] to jointly achieve an outcome”1 — a definition that allows us to consider a broad range of collaborative relationships, from collective impact to public-private partnership to collaborative governance.

1. Bryson, J., Crosby, B. & Stone, M. (2015). Designing and implementing cross-sector collaborations: Needed and challenging. Public Administration Review, (75)5, 647-663.


Introduction

From Frank Weil, Chairman of The Intersector Project

Perhaps more than ever before, addressing problems in our modern life requires navigating across the government, business, and non-profit sectors. Yet these sectors often have differing languages, cultures, and practices that can make it challenging to work together. The intersector is the space where actors from these sectors can establish trust and share expertise, resources, and authority to address problems that cannot be solved by one sector alone.

While the public often points to government as the root of modern problems, what average citizens are really clamoring for is better governance — a better process for solving public problems. And the simple fact is that governance today requires more than just government.

Yet cross-sector collaboration is not yet top of mind for most people — perhaps surprising considering that, more and more, most of society’s problems cannot be solved in one sector alone.

Citizens are a critical part of the movement to improve how government works with other sectors. It’s a well-known fact that public leaders take the temperature of their constituencies, and that citizens have the capacity to influence their actions. So how citizens think about government-, business-, and non-profit-sector collaboration can ultimately have real-world implications. Ideally, citizen support leads to calls and letters sent to

elected officials to share opinions about the need for publicly beneficial collaboration; support for relevant legislation that enables and supports better cross-sector collaboration; and citizens taking community problems into their own hands by reaching out to representatives from the many sectors and silos that affect and are affected by the problems they want to solve.

Because citizens are so important, The Intersector Project worked with Hart Research Associates to convene focus groups to explore citizens’ views toward the sectors and toward government-, business-, and non-profit-sector collaboration.

What we found through six sessions in three cities with a total of about 60 people is the subject of this report – some of which we expected to find, and some of which was surprising. The surprising thing is the degree to which virtually everyone seems to think that government should be the main sector responsible for leading cross-sector collaboration. What is not surprising is that most people agree and understand that if the sectors get together and acknowledge that they share a common interest in a common problem, they can achieve more than they possibly could alone.

We hope this report serves as a launch pad for leaders to understand how to communicate their cross-sector work effectively to members of the public — leading citizens to become more aware, interested, and invested in the cross-sector collaboration as an effective way to solve problems in their communities.

We also invite readers to visit intersector.com. Our Toolkit, library of forty case studies, and other resources are a good first step to building and communicating collaborative solutions of your own.


Methodology

Practitioners of cross-sector collaboration in the business, government, and non-profit sectors Organizations that work to support practitioners who

are engaged in cross-sector work

Throughout cross-sector collaboration, practitioners are continually tasked with communicating the value of their work to others — whether to funders; potential partners the collaboration is seeking to engage; internal stakeholders who are presumably authorizing resource commitments to the collaboration, such as governing boards or senior management; or external stakeholders, such as customers, voters, or donors. This report provides guidance on how to effectively make the case for cross-sector collaboration to these audiences, including insight into whether the public sees cross-sector collaboration as a “breakthrough” approach to solving public problems, how words like cooperation, partnership, and collaboration resonate (or do not) with citizens, and the overall rationale for cross-sector collaboration that the public finds most compelling.

Secondly, organizations in the business, government, and non-profit sectors each have a public constituency whose view of their core values and activities is seen as critical to their success. Business organizations typically care about their reputational impact among current and potential customers and stockholders. Government organizations are accountable to members of the public through elections, referendums, community gatherings, and more. Non-profit organizations work to build perceptions of their value among current and potential donors and programmatic partners. This report contains a great deal of information about how citizens view each sector, both its assets and limitations, including which is seen as providing the greatest value to society, which is seen as benevolent, which is seen as the cause of most public problems, and which is seen as responsible for initiating solutions. A more thorough knowledge of how their own and other sectors are perceived can help practitioners communicate the need for and value of cross-sector collaboration to their constituencies by illuminating the

Who Can Benefit From Reading this Report?

In fall 2015, Hart Research Associates convened six focus groups on behalf of The Intersector Project to explore citizens’ views toward the business, government, and non-profit sectors and toward cross-sector collaboration.These sessions were held with citizens working in each of the three sectors, with one group composed of business-sector workers, one of non-profit-sector workers, one of public-sector workers, and one of individuals with experience working in at least two sectors. Because levels of trust in the different sectors may vary by political partisanship, Hart Research Associates also conducted a group with informed Democratic voters and one with informed Republican voters; these groups were composed of citizens working in all three sectors. Two groups were held in each of three locations: New York, Chicago, and Raleigh, North Carolina. Participants in these focus groups represented rank-and-file voters, blue-collar workers, managers, and leaders. Key takeaways from the focus groups are presented in this report. A more comprehensive record of data from the groups can be found in the Appendix on p. 17.


assets they bring to the collaboration, and how the assets of other sectors can help them overcome their limitations.

The report also provides insight into citizens’ views on how results of successful cross-sector initiatives are most effectively communicated, highlighting elements that made certain stories of success resonate with citizens more than others and recommending three fundamental elements that the most resonant stories include. Sharing the story of a cross-sector collaboration is an important step for cross-sector initiatives, as it creates transparency and enables partners to communicate the value and legitimacy of cross-sector collaboration.

Organizations that work to support practitioners who are engaged in cross-sector work (advisory firms, research institutions, advocacy groups, etc.) may also find these insights to be useful, as these groups are often involved in

Takeaways

I. Citizens’ Views on Cross-sector Collaboration

weaknesses or shortcomings. This makes it unlikely that one sector alone can solve difficult problems.

One mixed-sector worker in Chicago described his own experience with a cross-sector collaboration and its benefits: “The government [is not good] at developing

technology and utilizing resources properly. Businesses do very well with this, so when we as an agency say this is what I need, somebody build it for us, and somebody is able to meet those

requirements, what does that do? That serves the public, it helps the business, and things get

expedited. It’s no longer going to take 10 years to develop this, that, or the other.”

It seemed that citizens with non-profit and public-sector experience were most immediately receptive to cross-sector collaboration. Private-sector participants were not resistant but expressed less enthusiasm, mainly because of their doubts about government’s competence. Similarly, skepticism about government left Republicans somewhat less interested in cross-sector collaboration than Democrats. Nonetheless, all groups agreed that collaboration among the three sectors often could be a positive step.

Citizens generally supported greater collaboration among the sectors to pool strengths toward tackling community problems.

When asked about who is responsible for solving community problems, focus group participants did not mention cross-sector collaboration. In fact, only one person in all of the groups volunteered partnerships between different sectors as a potential solution (this business-sector worker specifically suggested partnerships between the business and non-profit sectors), indicating that this idea is not top of mind among the general public. But citizens responded very favorably when the idea of the three sectors working together to solve problems was introduced as a potential approach to addressing problems.

Collaboration among the sectors had intuitive appeal to most citizens for three fundamental reasons: The involvement of all three sectors can mean that

more resources, more ideas, and more energy will be directed toward solving the problem. Just as a team is stronger than an individual player, it seems obvious to citizens that three sectors often can accomplish more than one.

Citizens believed that each sector has discrete strengths. If each sector takes on responsibilities tied to these respective strengths, then together they will be able to do the job better than any one sector could.

Citizens believed each sector also has specific

Who Can Benefit

helping practitioners communicate the value of their work, engage potential partners, report to funders, and more.


Findings

CITIZENS’ VIEWS ON CROSS-SECTOR COLLABORATION

another. While they agreed that more collaboration could and should happen, it did not strike them as a new idea.

In addition, it was not clear to citizens that the right conditions for successful collaboration exist often enough to make this a frequently employed solution.

Participants felt that collaboration likely works best when each sector has a clear and genuine interest in solving the same problem, and also that it requires strong and effective initial leadership from one of the sectors. They agreed that these conditions will not always be present.

While citizens felt that collaboration is productive, for the most part they did not feel that it is essential. They would like to see more of it but did not seem to see it as a “breakthrough” that will solve previously intractable problems.

Why didn’t people see cross-sector collaboration as transformative? First, they believe there already is a fair amount of collaboration among sectors. Particularly in the sessions with non-profit and public-sector workers, citizens mentioned various ways in which the sectors already interact with one another. In the session with Democratic voters in Raleigh, two individuals named cross-sector initiatives they were familiar with — NASA’s work with educational and private institutions, and a local tri-sector affordable housing coalition. Generally, citizens did not see the three sectors as working in isolation from one

II. Citizens’ Views on the Government, Business, and Non-profit Sectors

Despite many of the participants working for years in one sector, they did not make the distinctions between sectors naturally or think about the world this way in their everyday lives. Prior to these focus groups, other than perhaps complaining about inefficiencies or unresponsiveness in government compared with businesses, many of these citizens had not given much thought to comparing and contrasting the three sectors with one another.

When asked to think about each of the sectors, citizens were able to describe their distinguishing characteristics, and strengths and weaknesses. For the most part, they saw each sector as having a positive impact on their community, even the government sector, although it ranked last among the sectors. As the chart on the next page shows, citizens had a relatively more favorable view of the business and non-profit sectors. On a scale from -5 (very negative) to +5 (very positive), citizens rated the impact that the business sector (3.1) and the non-profit sector (3.3) have on their community higher than the impact of government (1.7).

Citizens generally tended to think of each sector from a utilitarian, transactional perspective, in terms of services rendered (e.g., businesses provide jobs, and government protects its citizens through services like the fire department) rather than in terms of abstract cultural differences (e.g., the business sector is profit-driven and government is bureaucratic). As the discussion developed in each of the groups, however, it became evident that these citizens did associate unique psychological and cultural qualities with each of the sectors, even though this might not be how they approach the topic initially.

Citizens first tended to think about the business sector in terms of economic impact. As a job provider, source of tax revenue, and stimulator of the local economy, the business sector was seen as a critical component of any vibrant community, and citizens overwhelmingly were positive toward it.

Although citizens viewed the business sector primarily as a job provider, several mentioned that businesses

While citizens did not intuitively see the world as divided among sectors, they did view the government, non-profit, and business sectors differently, associating each with differing styles, assets, and limitations.

While there was general support among citizens for collaboration, there was not active demand for it.

Business sector


Community Impact Ratings

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Business Sector

Non-profit Sector

PublicSector

Rating of 4 to 5

Rating of 1 to 3

Rating of 0

Rating of -5 to -1

Num

ber

of c

itiz

ens

contribute to their communities by donating to local non-profits and charities. As one multi-sector worker in Chicago explained, “The smaller businesses are always giving back. People live and work in the community, and so they know each other. There’s a sense of trust.”

“Charitable,” however, was not the predominant view of businesses. “I think businesses have the most potential to exploit,” whether it be the environment, individuals, or tax policy, said one Democratic voter in Raleigh. Multiple citizens said that one of the weaknesses of the business sector is a self-interested, “greedy” focus on money. In general, they applied this sentiment to larger corporations as opposed to small businesses, but these citizens saw business as the sector with the greatest potential for abuse. Because citizens perceived businesses as focused on the bottom line and subject to less oversight, they believed this sector was more prone to trying to cut corners, skirt regulations, and pollute the environment. Citizens noted that

in the case of larger corporations in particular, when businesses are more interested in protecting their bottom lines than protecting communities, they can abandon cities, ship jobs elsewhere, and leave communities in shambles.

Still, citizens sometimes saw the same characteristics that can lead to abuse and damage to communities as potential strengths.

Because of the lack of oversight and regulation, citizens perceived businesses as especially agile and efficient in making decisions and addressing problems in comparison to the other sectors. Businesses were seen as more likely to try an innovative approach. Due to their focus on budget and profit, citizens saw businesses as better suited for managing money. Citizens appreciated how fiscally minded the business sector is and saw it as a meritocracy that rewards hard work and talent. (See a full presentation of these results on pp. 20-22.)

Whereas citizens saw the business sector as self-interested, they conceptualized the non-profit sector as focused on the less fortunate, overlooked members of their communities who might otherwise slip through the cracks. Most citizens saw non-profits as providing valuable services such as food, clothing, and shelter to their communities, particularly to low-income individuals.

Beyond helping the underprivileged, many citizens valued how non-profits enrich their communities with cultural events, clubs for similar-minded citizens, or neighborhood beautification projects. A few citizens cited examples of the important work non-profits do in their communities. “They help the community with social interaction,” a multi-sector worker in Chicago said when describing neighborhood YMCAs.

Findings

CITIZENS’ VIEWS ON SECTORS

Non-profit sector


Findings


engage if they so desire.” Another Democratic voter added that city council meetings are “for everyone to come to discuss what the issues are.”

Due to its size and infrastructure, government was seen as having the greatest potential to enact change in communities. But the size of government also was a weakness in the eyes of many citizens.

The public sector was seen as slow and inefficient, overrun with bureaucrats and burdensome regulations. “The government is exceptionally slow moving, and we [in business] can do things faster and better,” explained one Democratic voter in Raleigh. There was a perception among citizens that people working in the public sector do not have the freedom to take action when they see an area in need of improvement, but rather have to submit endless forms and wait for approval. All of these inefficiencies led to a perception of waste, both in terms of wasted time and, more importantly, wasted money.

There also was a pervasive sense of failed leadership in the public sector — a sense that cooperation has given way to constant infighting because elected officials care more about their political agendas than making positive change in their communities. The problem with the public sector in the minds of many of these citizens was that it is not living up to its potential. Government has the resources and the potential for impact, they said, but is not following through. As a Democratic voter in Raleigh explained, “I think the government has a lot of potential to do good. I just don’t think that it’s delivering on any of that now.” (See a full presentation of these results on pp. 25-27.)

There was a sense of both admiration and gratitude toward the non-profit sector. Citizens admired that non-profits are proactive and that they identify an area that needs support or help in their community and then dedicate themselves to filling that need.

“They’re proactive, not reactive. ... If they see an issue, they step out in front of it, as opposed to waiting,” said a business-sector worker in New York. Citizens described non-profits and the people who work in the sector as passionate, proactive, protective, idealistic, and altruistic. If the business sector is the economic engine driving the city, the non-profit sector is the heart looking out for community needs. As one Democratic voter in Raleigh explained, “They can activate enthusiasm, and they can motivate. ... They do raise awareness of the issues, and they bring things to the table, sometimes in disruptive ways and sometimes not. But at least they got the issues out front.”

But the non-profit sector is not without its shortcomings.

While citizens saw non-profits as excelling in motives and ideals, a perceived weakness of non-profits is that they often do not have the resources to achieve their goals.

Because non-profits often lack the funds of the business sector or the infrastructure of government, many citizens saw the non-profit sector as having a more limited or narrow scope of impact. Citizens believed that non-profits lack power and influence compared with the other sectors and saw them as completely dependent on funding from corporations and government.

Some citizens also expressed skepticism about non-profit leadership and financial management. They worried that changes in leadership too often shift the mission and goals of non-profits in different directions. And because non-profits were seen as focused on providing services to those in need rather than watching the bottom line, some citizens pointed out that there is greater potential for a budget misstep. (See a full presentation of these results on pp. 22-24.)

Citizens were the most ambivalent about the public sector. (It should be noted that in these groups, we focused exclusively on state and local government.)

Citizens recognized and appreciated the services that the public sector provides, such as libraries, public parks, and maintaining and building roads and other infrastructure. They also understood the importance of government in providing order through laws, rules, and regulations. One multi-sector worker in Chicago commended the public sector for its parks and for convening events that bring the community together.

The most positive quality citizens associated with the public sector was that it “protects” the community with the fire department and law enforcement. Those who work in the public sector often saw it as a high calling that attracts people with “integrity.” Ideally, they believed the public sector should work for the betterment of the community. As one public-sector worker in Chicago explained, “I am a steward of the citizenry.”

Several Democrats in Raleigh pointed out that they appreciate that the public sector is accessible to everyone. As one Democratic voter put it, “When you deal with the public [sector], usually it’s an equal opportunity for anybody to

Public sector


care what they spend. The government doesn’t. ... The government just spends and just raises taxes or works with a deficit. I can’t do that as a business person.”

But one public-sector worker in Chicago argued that they are held accountable “to the penny.” Another public-sector worker explained that government is also accountable in ways that business is not. As government workers, they have to deal with the public having a say in how they make their decisions. One citizen pointed out that public-sector employees are representatives of the city, and as such, are accountable in their work as well as in their private life. In law enforcement, he explained, you never get time off, and you cannot have a bad day.

There appeared to be a disconnect between how individuals in each sector view the other sectors in terms of accountability. Individuals generally believed that their own sector is more accountable than the other two sectors. Non-profit-sector workers believed that they are more accountable since they have to report to donors. If a non-profit’s funders do not believe the organization accomplished what it promised to do in an efficient or frugal manner, non-profit workers said they would lose their funding. Similarly, business-sector workers said they are accountable for their financial gains and losses. One business-sector worker in New York contrasted the financial accountability he faces in the business world with government: “In the scheme of things, businesses

III. Citizens’ Views on Solving Community Problems

Whether they work in the private sector, for a non-profit, or in the public sector, and whether Republicans or Democrats, citizens saw a similar set of issues and problems facing their communities.

In all three cities, common themes emerged around housing, economic growth, public safety and crime, public education, and infrastructure.

While some concerns, such as traffic and lack of parking, revolve around the everyday hassles of living in a major city, many related to broader community wellbeing, including homelessness and relationships between citizens and the police. Across cities and sectors, the general consensus was that these citizens want to live in affordable, vibrant, and safe communities that offer quality jobs and strong schools. (See a full presentation of these results on pp. 17-18.)

Findings


Accountability

No matter the sector they work in, citizens shared common views of the most important issues and problems facing their communities.


Findings

CITIZENS’ VIEWS ON SOLVING COMMUNITY PROBLEMS

government topped the list again. Lack of leadership, political agendas and infighting, and excessive regulations all were commonly blamed as obstructing positive change.

There was some tendency for citizens to think of other members of the public and grassroots organizations as important players in addressing issues facing their communities. These citizens believed that apathetic citizens are partially to blame for lack of progress and that if these citizens become more engaged, change will be more likely. Less commonly, citizens named non-profit organizations as potential problem solvers. (See a full presentation of these results on p. 19.)

Citizens had a much easier time generating ideas about what is wrong with their cities than identifying routes for progress and potential problem solvers. There was a general tendency for them to gravitate toward the public sector when they thought about the groups, people, and institutions most likely to help address their community’s issues. Citizens often named local government and their mayor or city council members as those with the greatest potential to help.

In the eyes of many citizens, however, government was not only a potential solution, but also part of the problem. Many were highly skeptical of government and elected officials’ ability to enact change. In fact, when citizens thought about the biggest obstacles to creating change,

IV. Making the Case for Cross-sector Collaboration

In making the case for cross-sector collaboration as a solution to community problems, messages that focused on the benefits of collaboration resonated more than those that focused on the barriers that must be overcome in order to collaborate successfully.

In some of the sessions, citizens were asked to respond to two statements making the case for collaboration.

Statement A described our world as “stuck in the mud,” emphasized the ways in which society’s failure to cultivate collaboration prevents problem solving, and identified barriers to collaboration, including distrust among the sectors and their differing languages, cultures, and practices.

The statement focused on the need for the sectors to overcome these barriers in order to solve intractable problems.

For the most part, citizens did not find Statement A to be a compelling argument in favor of cross-sector collaboration. Fewer than half (16 out of 38) gave the statement a rating of six or higher on a scale from zero to 10. To them, the tone was far too negative, failing to speak to the positive value of collaboration. Many also disagreed with the underlying diagnosis, saying that distrust between sectors was not a major reason for current low levels of collaboration. “If it were in a persuasive essay, this does nothing to persuade me,” one multi-sector worker in Chicago explained.

While citizens identified similar problems facing their communities, there was less agreement on potential solutions — besides a general impression that community issues are the domain of local government and sometimes average citizens.


Findings

MAKING THE CASE FOR CROSS-SECTOR COLLABORATION

Statement B focused on the inability of government to solve important public problems alone, whether because of bureaucracy, resistance to change, or lack of leadership. It highlighted the need for innovative solutions, presenting cross-sector collaboration as one option, bringing together the unique strengths of each sector toward a common purpose and accomplishing more than any one sector could alone.

This message proved much more persuasive in the two sessions in which it was tested, with 14 of 18 citizens assigning a rating of six to 10. An important reason for its effectiveness is a more positive tone and a focus on the benefits that collaboration could bring. Many also agreed with its stipulation that collaboration can help overcome limitations of the public sector. This latter message may prove especially appealing to private-sector citizens and more

conservative citizens in general. “The wording is friendlier,” one Republican voter said. A Democratic voter in Raleigh explained,“I liked how it said there were new and innovative approaches, real solutions.” (See a full presentation of these results on p. 27.)

A key conclusion that emerged from this exercise, as well as the larger discussion, is that citizens do not have to accept your diagnosis of the problem in order to support your solution.

Citizens responded better to some phrases describing cross-sector collaboration than to others.

Citizens rated the appeal of several different phrases designed to describe efforts by organizations in the three sectors to solve common problems. The two with the greatest appeal were “multi-sector collaboration” and “multi-sector partnerships.”

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Cross-sector cooperation

Multi-sector cooperation

Cross-sector collaboration

Cross-sector partnerships

Multi-sector partnerships

Name Preference for Sectors Working Together

Multi-sector collaboration


Because these six phrases included all possible combinations of three different nouns (partnership, collaboration, and cooperation) with two descriptors (multi-sector and cross-sector), we can further analyze citizens’ preference within each category. In terms of the noun, phrases including “partnership” and “collaboration” each received about the same overall support — Both were appealing to citizens.

Interestingly, there was a much more negative reaction to the word “cooperation.” Many citizens felt that cooperation is something that people and organizations are forced to do by outside parties. By contrast, collaboration and partnership were perceived to imply voluntary participation by all parties, a key element in successful initiatives.

Turning to the descriptors, citizens responded most positively to “multi-sector,” followed by “cross-sector.” Both of these seem to clearly communicate the idea that multiple sectors are participating and convey the “teamwork” idea that people find so appealing. (See a full presentation of these results on p. 28.)

Findings

MAKING THE CASE FOR CROSS-SECTOR COLLABORATION

Stories of successful collaboration tended to resonate with citizens when they explained how the collaboration succeeded where past efforts had not, clarified that all three sectors contributed to the partnership, and focused on concrete community outcomes.

In each session, citizens had the opportunity to read and evaluate case studies developed by The Intersector Project. Although these were designed for practitioners of cross-sector collaboration rather than a general audience, they proved useful in giving citizens a more concrete understanding of what cross-sector collaboration is and what it can achieve. Citizens had varying reactions to the cases, which point toward three elements that seem important for a case study to be maximally effective:

Explain clearly how the collaboration succeeded where past efforts had not. Whether it was through using a new strategy, raising additional resources, or removing political barriers (or all of the above), explain how the involvement of multiple sectors made a difference.

Clarify that all three sectors made a genuine contribution to the effort. In cases where the role of one or two sectors appears relatively trivial, citizens focus on that element, and it undercuts their appreciation for the initiative.

Focus on concrete community outcomes that improved. In some case studies, the positive result is made very clear. In others, readers learn a lot about changes in process, but not actual outcomes. These latter case studies are much less compelling.


Conclusion

From the six focus groups across three cities convened on behalf of The Intersector Project, we discovered that the public is generally supportive of cross-sector approaches to solving the complex challenges they observe in their communities. Citizens recognize that the business, government, and non-profit sectors have distinct strengths and weaknesses, and respond well to the concept that cross-sector collaboration can result in solutions that accomplish more than any one sector could alone.

While we were able to learn a great deal from the focus groups, there are several questions that could benefit from further study. How do perceptions of the three sectors differ when

citizens are asked to consider the sectors in more nuanced ways? For instance, are there differences between how citizens perceive local community businesses and large multinational corporations or local, state, and national government?

For what public problems are citizens most likely to support a cross-sector approach? Are citizens more likely to support cross-sector collaboration to improve a park than to construct or improve transportation infrastructure, for example?

Does the scope of a problem affect citizens’ support for cross-sector approaches? Are there differences between how citizens perceive cross-sector collaboration in their communities versus at a national level?

Are there particular types of collaboration that citizens are more comfortable with, particularly with regard to the role of government? For example, are citizens more comfortable with collaboration between government and a non-profit organization than with collaboration between government and a for-profit corporation?

While our focus groups found that citizens had some awareness and generally approved of cross-sector collaboration when they were presented with the concept, it’s clear that cross-sector collaboration is not yet an issue in which the public is deeply invested. But, although there is no comprehensive data source tracking the incidence of cross-sector collaboration in the United States, evidence is mounting that cross-sector collaboration is on the

rise, with more public problems being solved with the resources, expertise, and authority of the government, business, and non-profit sectors, from park governance to building and maintaining infrastructure to improving STEM education. For instance, collective impact initiatives for education emerged in 145 communities as of 20151, and 37 states have passed legislation enabling infrastructure public-private partnerships as of January 20173, up from 22 in 2007.4 At a local level, mayors report an increase in “highly cooperative relationships with a range of actors,” with relationships with the business community ranking at the top of that list, well above federal and state government agencies. Mayors reference both non-profits and businesses as frequent partners in a range of issue areas, noting the business community as the most likely partner in economic development initiatives and non-profits as the most likely partner in education.5 In a survey of sustainability experts, multi-sectoral partnerships ranked as the third response to the question, “Who should lead the sustainable development agenda over the next 20 years?” — ranking higher than the United Nations, NGOs, city and local governments, and others.6

Cross-sector partnerships increasingly influence how citizens’ tax dollars are spent, public policies are shaped, public services are delivered, and public assets are built and maintained.

Perhaps if citizens were more aware of how cross-sector collaboration influences their lives and tax dollars, they’d be more invested in how it’s being used in their communities.

There is a need for increased public education on cross-sector collaboration. Practitioners themselves have an important role to play through active efforts to leverage the collective capacity of all partners to effectively tell the stories of their cross-sector collaborations — both successes and failures — to key community influencers, members of the press, and the general public. Organizations that support practitioners in this work

2. Harvard Business School. (2015). Business aligning for students: The promise of collective impact. Grossman, A. & Lombard, A. 3. State Legislation. (2017). The National Council for Public-Private Partnerships. Retrieved from http://www.ncppp.org/resources/research-information/

state-legislation/4. Office of Policy and Governmental Affairs. (2007). User guidebook on implementing public-private partnerships for transportation infrastructure

projects in the United States.5. Boston University. (2014). Mayoral policy making: Results from the 21st Century Mayors Leadership survey. Boston, MA: Levine Einstein, C., Glick, D.M.

& Lusk K.6. Globescan. (2016). The 2016 sustainability leaders: A Globescan | SustainAbility survey.


Conclusion

should also consider the importance of resources and assistance to enable practitioners to share their work and results with individuals not actively engaged in or aware of cross-sector collaboration. Not only can these organizations help practitioners do this work, they can also take on this role themselves, sharing their insights on cross-sector collaboration to a broad audience. We also believe there is an opportunity here for media to more effectively cover cross-sector collaboration, both to hold public agencies and officials accountable for their work in these collaborations and to increase the public’s knowledge of this approach as a potential solution to complex problems.

If citizens were more aware of and invested in cross-sector collaboration — if cross-sector collaboration were a public issue — we could expect ripple effects in public policy.

A more robust and fully-formed public opinion on the costs and benefits of cross-sector collaboration could influence public officials to initiate new collaborations or lead public agencies and officials to undertake a more careful assessment of undertaking this work.

The net result of this would be improved cross-sector collaborations, and thus public problem solving, in communities across the United States.


Appendix

New York - Business Sector Affordable housing (3) Crime (2) Homelessness (2) School overcrowding (2) Public transportation (2) Education (2) Quality education Healthcare Community/police relations Gun control Noise Construction in the city Overcrowding Rent is too high Vermin Too much noise from bars and

clubs Old one-family houses being

torn down and three-or-four- family homes being built in place of them

Socioeconomic inequality Gentrification Lack of outreach to

disenfranchised social groups Illegal parking Taxes Rising costs of everything Government bureaucracy Local taxes The neighborhood needs to be

rebuilt after Hurricane Sandy Trash dumping

Focus Group InformationChicago, Illinois(1) Mixed Sector Experience(1) Public Sector November 5, 2015

New York, New York(1) Business Sector (1) Non-profit SectorOctober 29, 2015

Raleigh, North Carolina (1) Highly Informed Democrats (1) Highly Informed Republicans November 10, 2015

Responses to “What problems need to be solved in your community?”New York - Non-profit Sector Lack of affordable housing (2) Income inequality (2) Rising housing costs (2) Homelessness (2) Gentrification (2) Economic growth Stabilize rent Homeless people in shelters, not

the sidewalks Universal schooling

opportunities Pollution No private school vouchers, lack

of education choice High cost of food in

neighborhoods like the Bronx High cost of travel to get to and

from New Jersey High cost of transportation with

Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA)

Better schools Racial profiling Low wages Junior high and high schools

need to be improved especially We need to expect a lot from

students and treat them like they are smart

We need more playgrounds/ sports fields

Garbage Interracial issues Common Core/education

Lack of political leadership MTS Businesses are closing Poverty Cost of health care, co-pays, co-

insurance

Chicago - Public Sector Property taxes (3) Affordable housing (2) Taxes (2) Traffic Cost of local government Class sizes/education Safety/gangs Schools Maintaining high quality public

services Embracing diversity Affordability Transportation, access to good

jobs Increase in poor populations Gangs Better schools Park district More inter-family interaction

versus intra-family interaction Maintaining roads and services

in town Money for the village School funding

In fall 2015, Hart Research Associates convened six focus groups on behalf of The Intersector Project to explore citizens’ views toward the business, government, and non-profit sectors and toward cross-sector collaboration. These sessions were held with citizens working in each of the three sectors, with one group composed of business-sector workers, one of non-profit-sector workers, one of public-sector workers, and one of individuals with experience working in at least two sectors. Because levels of trust in the different sectors may vary by political partisanship, Hart Research Associates also conducted a group with informed Democratic voters and one with informed Republican voters; these groups were composed of citizens working in all three sectors. Two groups were held in each of three locations: New York, Chicago, and Raleigh, North Carolina. Participants in these focus groups represented rank-and-file voters, blue-collar workers, managers, and leaders.


Chicago - Mixed Sector Business development Promoting local manufacturing Local politics Taxes Road construction that is not

necessary Overweight trucks Social media among kids I am fairly satisfied with

conditions in my neighborhood I am concerned with some

violent crimes that happened not too far from me The breakdown of the family unit The loss of personal

accountability Disrespect of authority Traffic Property taxes Horrible street conditions One of the important issues in

my community is parking. For over twenty years, Oak Park has been known as No Park, Oak Park. Oak Park has an ordinance that does not allow overnight parking. This is an extreme headache for the community and visitors on a daily basis.

Non-violent crime Lack of choice when voting Lack of business in the business

district Funding for education State budget, pensions Health care Advanced education Immigration because there

is a high population of low income residents who have greater educational needs

Construction all the time Immigration/legalization Equal opportunity housing Educational buildings

Raleigh - Democrats Student debt is out of control (2) Denying science Crime rate School loan repayment issues

because they create huge pressure for young adults

Economic disparity Unemployment and the working

poor Economic/job growth and

stability Shootings and murder Gun control Immigration reform Low and stagnant wages Worker protections Parks need improvement, and we

need more of them. We need better facilities and

fewer of the same stores.

Raleigh - Republicans Safety (3) Improve education (2) Traffic in the area is very

congested. (2) Employment (2) Economy (2) Social and moral issues Immigration School stability, no more

rezoning Balance school budgets and stay

within those budgets Jobs Landfill disposal Environment School assignment Taxes Property values Land disappearing We have recently moved from

Apex to Garner, where public safety has become an issue for us. Crime in our area seems at a higher rate than where we were

so crime prevention is paramount to me and my family.

The safety of children getting on and off school buses

Teenage driving and accidents due to cell phone use

An open border is a bad thing.

Appendix

Responses to “What problems need to be solved in your community?” (continued)


Appendix

Responses to “What groups, people, or institutions do you feel are most likely to play a role in addressing the issues you’ve identified?”New York - Business Sector Local governments (3) Police can help with crime (2) NYC mayor My governor Grassroots Federal government Government can help rebuild after Hurricane Sandy. City and private sector can play a role in the cost of

living relative to salaries. I do not think any institution or person can help with

our situation. I once went to my assemblywoman and she did not help me or address my concern. I lost my faith in her.

Community-based programs like the Neighborhood Housing Services

No one. All politicians are full of it and are a bunch of liars.

No State senators

New York - Non-profit Sector Mayor de Blasio NYC Police Department Ruben Diaz in the Bronx seems to have a grasp on

necessities for higher education, cost/quality of teachers, etc.

Private donors or organizations More moderate politicians like Cory Booker The Neediest Cases Fund finds five to eight

organizations to help. Community action groups, the “beautification

committee” in my neighborhood There are two community organizations from a local

church who are championing these issues. We Love Whitestone and Whitestone Civic

Association Non-profits: Robin Hood Foundation Governor Cuomo Senator Schumer Pledge 2 Protect Religious leaders Corporations/businesses and politicians

Raleigh - Democrats Federal government can make a difference (3) Teachers (2) Local government (2) People not controlled by special interests People who make decisions based on facts not faith

or beliefs Housing and student loans Controlled and planned development Government officials and community activists

who are like-minded Schools Doctors Black Lives Matter City Council and us as the people Government officials Voters Civic organizations Unions/worker organizations

Raleigh - Republicans Individuals (2) Church groups (2) Government (2) Governor (2) Neighborhoods Small businesses Boy Scouts of America Local groups that can help manage their own

communities Educated, non-partisan organizations helping school

system to see what works well in other parts of the country

Grassroots organizations and involvement Smaller school districts, not whole counties because

they are too large I think that local citizens and community members

that attend relevant gatherings to get their collective voices heard are somewhat helping to keep

leadership in check, plus it would be nice to get politicians in office that have a refreshing perspective and can make change without playing the political game.

Town council John Locke Foundation Americans for Prosperity


New York - Business Sector It keeps the city running. It contributes the most to

the city’s finances, creates jobs, and makes the economy grow.

Supports all aspects of the community Brings money to the community, provides goods and

services locally Adds value and jobs to the community Jobs, contributes to community beautification Increased economics; small businesses help the

community and large businesses bring jobs. Affordable housing and recovery after Hurricane

Sandy The business sector attracts people and money to

the area. Economic value Jobs, boosts economy

Chicago - Public Sector Increased tax revenues for schools, libraries, and first

responders; increased jobs Carries a large tax burden, employs residents Employment; goods and services Low costs, community events, friendly; businesses

know you by name. Sales tax money, jobs, support charities Goods and services, employment opportunities,

entrepreneurial spirit/innovation Drives growth from spending, provides income from

taxes, jobs Supports the community, drives the economic engine Brings tourism, excellent libraries/large companies Employment, internationally known

The Impact of the Business Sector on Your Community: Ratings(-5 = Very negative, 5 = Very positive)

-5 to -4 -3 to -1 Zero 1 to 3 4 to 5 AverageBusiness Sector - - 1 4 5 3.1

Non-profit Sector - 1 - 8 1 2.2

Public Sector - - 1 5 4 3.1

Mixed Sector - - - 6 4 3.3

Democrats - - 1 5 3 2.8

Republicans - - - 3 6 4.0

All Participants - 1 3 31 23 3.1

Strengths of the Business SectorNew York - Non-profit Sector Employment Employment opportunities, leadership in the

community, meeting the community’s needs A brighter neighborhood that offers more to the

community with various new businesses and provides new jobs as well

Large money from corporations leads to non-profits, professionalization of non-profits, economic neutralization

Access and availability Provide jobs Variety of merchandise, price competition, small

business and personal relationships Size and scope of financial resources, contributes to

economy and provides jobs Variety, beautification

Chicago - Mixed Sector Stronger economy for locals, good benefits for

consumers, greater flow of people into the area It supplies jobs, goods, and pays taxes. Diversity; it reaches out specifically to the

demographics of the community. The private business sector has just recently grown

over the last year. New businesses have moved into the community, such as a food co-op and Pete’s

Market. Brings jobs, entertainment, and community

participation; sponsorships of Halloween, sidewalk sales, etc.

Job opportunities, brings people to the community Jobs, development, tax base/revenue Giving back to the community with financial

resources, live in the community, jobs Provides a need or service to the community, provides

a tax base for the community Traffic, centralized

Appendix


Raleigh - Republicans Jobs, security, and happy families Wide variety of jobs, property values; people want to

shop and visit the community. Employment, money, and spending money Provides jobs and careers, stimulates local economy It creates jobs and promotes wellness in the

community. Jobs, tax base, economy, and charity Brings in revenue for our state and local families;

brings in donations to charities; restaurants often help bring communities because they create jobs and everyone loves food.

Drives more people to new areas when businesses are attractive, provides jobs to local communities

Provide jobs and opportunities; money comes into the community through taxes and spending.

New York - Business Sector Too many regulations and they try to get around the

regulations and rules When too successful, they can run away and get out

of control, leaving consequences and impacts, which affect the community in the long term, potentially with negative consequences.

Causes noise, extra traffic, pollution, smoking at restaurants

Try to cut corners Pollution Tax benefits and direct public policy Coming together The money is not going back into the community. Lack of social accountability Profit-oriented, cutting corners

Chicago - Public Sector Congestion, large corporations causing small

business failure May use just as much resources as paying taxes; jobs

are low paying. Too many, same restaurants Increase in traffic Exporting jobs, limited loyalty to community

employees Its goals are not always aligned with what the

community wants. Different things go wrong and can then be a drain on

the community. Taxes Community relations, fundraising

Weaknesses of the Business SectorNew York - Non-profit Sector Overcharging of goods if there is not enough

competition Determining prices in a community Many people cannot afford to live in a growing

neighborhood so they have to relocate. Huge income inequality, “Carry forward” Crowding, congestion The “big guy” does not care about the “little guy” in

the long term; capitalism. More turn over, constant job changes There is a lack of personal relationships with big

businesses. Capitalism, greed, disingenuous interest in

community; driven by profits Price inflation on products, rent inflation in

neighborhoods

Chicago - Mixed Sector They can vanish with no way to track them. Food store losing profits, too many hair salons Some present poor value or poor services. Lack of commitment to partnering with schools,

leaving due to taxes Self-righteous, closed-minded hiring of people Entitlement, community responsibility They often go to other areas to seek tax breaks.

Large businesses can sway politics to their own good. There are not enough of them.

Appendix

Raleigh - Democrats Employment opportunities, more competition and

higher salaries, can influence community to attract more talent, more tax revenue means more funds for the state and local government

Employment and economic funds Jobs, taxes, and boosts the economy Job creation Growth means more jobs and competition can also

lead to higher salaries. Economy and job growth Employment and development Flexibility, speed of change, creativity; potential to

hopefully move society forward Some businesses have great impact on people with

jobs and money. Without business there would not be any jobs.

Strengths of the Business Sector (continued)


Raleigh - Democrats Can influence the community with lobbying and

money The type of business; increase in traffic and

commuting, how the properties are acquired The same four stores are in every shopping center.

Many stores are closing and leaving empty shopping centers behind.

They do not invest enough in community. The community needs schools. It will reduce employees

for higher profits. They do not pay enough taxes. Salaries are too high. Where is the interest in the community?

Can be overly influential in some areas that hurt the community

Crowding and pollution Self-interested; decisions are made based solely on

money, abuse. Often exploitive, rarely ever stops to ask if they are

serving the world in a positive way; they are driven by the wrong ends.

Too much power

Raleigh - Republicans They cause problems with people around them; cause

people to move. Traffic Illegal hiring, layoffs, and jobs get sent overseas. Traffic, layoffs Sizeable firms can be devastating to community in

the case of large layoffs. Possible environmental issues; companies tend to

leave depressed areas. Can sometimes wield too much influence in

community decisions and defining a community

The Impact of the Non-profit Sector on Your Community: Ratings(-5 = Very negative, 5 = Very positive)

-5 to -4 -3 to -1 Zero 1 to 3 4 to 5 AverageBusiness Sector - - - 4 6 3.5

Non-profit Sector - - - 3 6 4.2

Public Sector - - - 7 3 2.8

Mixed Sector - - - 8 2 2.6

Democrats - - - 6 3 2.9


All Participants - - - 31 26 3.3

Appendix

Weaknesses of the Business Sector (continued)


New York - Business Sector Helps children and the local community, brings

outside people to help locally, educates and raises awareness, John Doe Fund

The impact is very positive however, alone its contribution is minimal.

For the people/community, supportive Proactive presence Aids the community with food, shelter, helps with

disasters There to help and support jobs and the community Advocacy for the community; organized community

support leads to gentrification. Helps those in need Supports, cleans up, provides information Helps the community with certain issues

Strengths of the Non-profit SectorNew York - Non-profit Sector Provides individuals and families with support, less of

a tax drain Services for residents, cohesiveness of community,

meeting community needs Community outreach, genuine care Help the less fortunate Allowing children to see shows who would not

otherwise be able to see them Same as a for-profit Many services for the underserved People feel like they belong. They live and work with the people they serve. They

only exist to serve.

Chicago - Public Sector Builds community, provides needed services Helps low income earners, assists with the homeless,

cares for the unwanted Provides services to those in need, keeps

communities healthy Protects the most vulnerable community Clubs Lots of schools Integrity Allows for niche areas, like churches caring for poor,

to find funding Fills in a lot of society’s gaps, not advertised well

Chicago - Mixed Sector Motivated by a cause, outlets for change Provide support to a community or specific group of

people who have a need that cannot be fulfilled on their own

Helping those in need, creates jobs, helps to have a positive outlook

Diversification They are generally trying to do a good thing. Helps the community with social interaction like at

the YMCA or with health causes like the American Lung Association

Provide opportunities for assistance, particularly the food bank

Amazing services for all people, open to the community, volunteering/training opportunities

Offer benefits for those needing them and with low incomes

It helps the homeless and less fortunate immensely when the state funding is provided.

Raleigh - Democrats Focused on people and the community, serves the

best interests and/or greatest needs, typically without exploiting people

Gives causes that would not get much attention a voice and are in it to help certain groups and causes without personal gain, usually

Goals are set, helps the economically disadvantaged, community awareness

Offers help to the needy, hold events all the time, raise awareness

They care for people. They voice opinions for those who cannot.

Can influence leaders on social issues and raise awareness of issues; they assist others in times of need.

Advocates for issues, passionate Altruistic goals They help better people with programs for people

without having to pay a fee.

Raleigh - Republicans Helps the needy, affordable goods Helps those in need, gives opportunities to those in

need Good church relations, food banks Bridges gaps for community needs Helps the needy Helps people to help others, people may volunteer

more Provide necessary services for those in need Provides assistance and resources to communities to

attract more residents Helps people that may not receive help otherwise

Appendix


New York - Business Sector Not enough to make permanent changes Alone its contribution is minimal. Do not get enough funding Not enough economic standing to provide long term

change Too many scams; Kars 4 Kids stands out. Not much influence, dependent on donations Not enough funding or support, more community

participation It can be a problem if run by the wrong person. They

are not able to help everyone. There is not enough money to help everyone.

Weaknesses of the Non-profit SectorNew York - Non-profit Sector Employees are not well paid. May create dependency May divide specific groups within the community Lack of resources, small impact Poor leadership, financial misconduct Do not last long, low wages/revolving door effect Limited resources Tax revenue shelter Inconsistent resources/challenge to attract talent to

grow to scale

Chicago - Public Sector Underfunded, duplication of efforts, inefficient There is little support. Can have too much lobbying influence, costs

residents, overlap of residents Is not always sustainable Community interest Lack of extracurricular activities; zoning is bad. Not enough resources taken in then put back out Does not always have much application in the

community

Chicago - Mixed Sector Underfunded, under-utilized, and the leadership is

overpaid. There are too many various non-profits always

looking for money or goods or volunteers. Do not pay taxes, may keep people from helping

themselves No funding Many non-profits make a killing from donations, and

the heads of the organizations make a lot of money. They perhaps need more support. They are constantly fundraising, and there is a

constant change in leadership. I am not very familiar with non-profits in my

neighborhood. In the past the non-profit organizations were doing

really well because of the state funding. With the new governor, things have taken a turn for the worse.

Raleigh - Democrats Sometimes inflexible, not focused on accomplishing

its objectives Not as much pull or influence as other sectors Is cost effective and financially independent Hidden agendas Lack of funding, restricted funding Can influence leaders on social issues They have a hard time being heard; singular issues at

times. There is competition for funding, and they have the

appearance of being neutral. But there are hidden agendas that are deceptive.

Some do not uphold the mission of their organization.

Raleigh - Republicans Fewer resources Free education support network Fraud Usually located in poor neighborhoods, fraud They can only help so many people. They have a very

limited reach without a lot of overhead.

Appendix


New York - Business Sector Realizes a community’s concerns, unites people They are in the community; perceived as being there

for the community. Informative, local, can help to move to higher level It gets the word or message out and has good

intentions. Idealism is pervasive here. Have resources, reallocates resources to

communities with needs Put voices to issues in communities Protects with the fire and police departments, cleans

with sanitation department, transportation, teachers Eventually gets things done; can hear the concerns

of the public, builds infrastructure, attempts to create order

Chicago - Public Sector Schools, police, fire are excellent; safe, low crime. The public sector in Northbrook in particular meets

needs of its citizens with schools, libraries, and services.

Meets important needs Provides much needed services, umbrella protection

of its citizens Good services, good jobs Support community; they are the community, the

face of community/aid residents. Local community improvement, nothing at the state

level Local is closest to the people, state addresses

statewide issues, excellent crime prevention in suburbs

The Impact of the Public Sector on Your Community: Ratings(-5 = Very negative, 5 = Very positive)

-5 to -4 -3 to -1 Zero 1 to 3 4 to 5 AverageBusiness Sector - 1 2 6 - 0.8

Non-profit Sector - - 3 6 1 1.9

Public Sector - 1 1 4 2 2.1

Mixed Sector - 2 1 6 1 1.2

Democrats - 3 2 2 2 0.7


All Participants - 7 9 29 10 1.7

Strengths of the Public SectorNew York - Non-profit Sector Many programs are raising more money. The library offers great free programs for kids to

senior citizens. Provides much needed services for community Goodwill in the community Operating the municipality Trying to address community issues and needs Library: community outreach and children’s programs At mercy of public opinion, resources can match the

scale, libraries and parks State leadership

Chicago - Mixed Sector Stores, community, security, action The private sector has a positive impact when

everyone comes together on one accord. Allows feedback from locals, provides forum for

complaints and suggestions Public services are provided well and on a timely

basis. We have good water, decent roads, and a great sewer system. There has been a new influx of opinions and

people with fresh ideas. It is supportive of schools and businesses.

Unites people as a community, creates laws, supplies much needed services to people (basic needs)

The local side is better, very caring. It has the community in mind.

Established They provide the rules and regulations for

communities/states.

Appendix


Raleigh - Democrats Economic balance, equal rights; schools and

government are primary influencers and decision makers.

Can promote changes with funding, can create laws to affect social change, tax incentives

City Council meeting, everyone can be heard Decisions Status quo is maintained. Society is generally

likeable. Capable of the greatest good? One level is

sometimes able to balance the negative impact of the other.

They were elected, so they represent someone. It has the power to make decisions.

Raleigh - Republicans Clean and orderly areas such as libraries and parks Libraries, law enforcement Provides a service for the community, hopefully

provides legislation in the interest of the community Decent schools; there are nice buildings, nice library

and public community centers. Provides backbone and infrastructure for what

becomes the community, leadership and guidance Community access Helps people move forward, education, helps

people better themselves School libraries Safety and education

New York - Business Sector Not all are united; different groups do not get along. They are not addressing issues/concerns people

have; no trust. Not interested in your problems Do not allocate reserves appropriately, disorganized Not enough participation to make a difference Crime is bad, but so is enforcing laws (police). Easily swayed Too many employees, lifetime jobs, often have

tenure; it takes 10 people to do the job of two; freeloaders who cannot get fired.

They only think of what is in it for them; wrong person in the job will be an issue.

Dependent on local government, mostly not focused on the needs of the community

Chicago - Public Sector The town mayor appropriates funds to parks; no

specific tax for park districts, not enough services for kids and teens, no access to public

transportation, water supply. The cost of providing many services leads to higher

taxes. Escalating costs, political gridlock, corrosive

influence of money in politics, inefficiency, too robust in some areas

Misuse of funds, too much manpower There are not enough personnel to handle call

volume during the summer months. Lowering pensions and funds Untrustworthy The Illinois government. Need I say more? Almost

bankrupt, too many special taxing districts and overlap of services

Criminally self-centered

Weaknesses of the Public SectorNew York - Non-profit Sector Lack of leadership No cooperation, laziness, lower quality of service,

subway versus Metro-North, P.S. 24 Relies on the apathetic citizen body Ignores some of the important issues of the

community Lack of education at schools Lack of visibility At mercy of public opinion, bureaucratic, moves too

slowly City leadership since [Mayor Bill] de Blasio, lack of

oversight

Chicago - Mixed Sector The weakness comes when everyone does not work

together. There is much nepotism and corruption among

employees and elected officials. Many of my neighbors are unaware of these offices. Poor choices, community improvements all at once Bureaucratic red tape, inefficient Too many taxes, no accountability, and a lack of trying

to work anything out; the middle class is left in the dust but put squarely on our shoulders.

Self-involved, only thinking of those with money, too political

Too controlling, mismanaged, lack of focus, wasteful Politicians abuse their roles. Lobbyists sway the

government.

Appendix

Strengths of the Public Sector (continued)


Raleigh - Democrats Financially strong Too many politics and not all issues are for the public

interest Strongly influenced by money and constituent base,

create laws that stifle competition and discrimination The public figures are not helping out. They do not

help the lower/middle class people. People are making a lot of noise but nothing is being heard.

Nothing really seems to change or if things do, they are relatively insignificant.

You cannot believe everything you are told. They are only really present during campaign season.

Poor delivery of most important functions; they are afraid of the consequences of the best/needed

choices. Disenfranchising so many people, lack of concern for

most vulnerable of the population Corruption, self-interest, and agendas based on

profit; there is a misrepresentation of people’s interests.

Raleigh - Republicans Our town is well run, but there have been many

layoffs. More library services Legislation cannot always be in your favor. Kids are not going to their closest school for political

or diversity reasons, and some are on the bus for far too long.

Bad leadership can have catastrophic results when left unchecked. It can negatively affect growth and interest in moving to communities when services and leadership are below expectations.

Bussing is a major issue. Teachers are not paid well. Schools are too political, and do not focus on the

issues at hand. Lower income areas are hit harder thus requiring

more public funds. Lack of value for money, way too backdated

Statement A on Different Sectors Working Together to Solve Community Issues: Ratings(0=Not Convincing at All, 10=Extremely Convincing)

0 to 4 5 to 7 8 to 10 AveragePublic Sector 4 6 - 5.1

Mixed Sector 4 5 1 4.1

Democrats 1 7 1 5.4

Republicans 1 4 4 6.7

All Participants 10 22 6 5.3

Statement B on Different Sectors Working Together to Solve Community Issues: Ratings(0=Not Convincing at All, 10=Extremely Convincing)

0 to 4 5 to 7 8 to 10 AverageDemocrats 2 5 2 6.3

Republicans 1 3 5 7.3

All Participants 3 8 7 6.8

Appendix

Weaknesses of the Public Sector (continued)


0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Cross-sector cooperation

Multi-sector cooperation

Cross-sector collaboration

Cross-sector partnerships

Multi-sector partnerships

Name Preference for Sectors Working Together

Multi-sector collaboration

Name Preference for Three Sectors Working Together

Responses to “What did you take away from this discussion?”New York - Business SectorBusiness, non-profit (also a business), and government must try to work together. They are often too separate and face different issues. Their ultimate concern is to support the community so they must find ways to work together.

I think the most important things would be accountability. Everyone must do their part and take responsibility if something is going to work.

A discussion of if and how public, private, and non-profit sectors can work together in addition to whether or not it would be a good decision to have the sectors collaborate on particular goals

The collaboration of government, business, and non-profits for the people, bringing these three approaches together to managing and approaching funding problems in our community

Government, business, and non-profits are important to any community. They intertwine with one another. Each one may have their agenda but will be meeting the same goal.

For progressive socioeconomic to occur, it requires all three sectors to work together despite who tackles what issue.

No discussion or interaction between the three main areas of a diverse city (government, private, and non-profit sectors); we saw case studies on how they tried to work together and tried to relate it to issues or concerns that we had about our own community or city. I came away with the feeling that it would not work too well. Once our bloated government gets involved, watch out.

Should government, business, and non-profits be involved together in addressing the government’s problems? The government is supposed to help non-profits and business with their problems and make them more successful.

I do not think the three sectors will ever collaborate together successfully. Too many cooks in the kitchen spoil the meal. It would be a contest to see who is in charge and what is in it for everyone.

It would be a good thing for the sectors to work together in a small town, village, or community. It would be a disaster to implement this pattern in a large city such as New York.

New York - Non-profit SectorI believe a partnership between the three different sectors is a great idea. This is our city, and we all are responsible for securing its future. We must work together to ensure that there will be jobs, housing,

Appendix


education, and a positive livelihood for all New Yorkers. Financial gain should be put aside.

As they say in my son’s favorite cartoon, “teamwork makes the dream work.” Let us all help one another for a greater, long-term benefit.

No matter your political affiliation, we are all in this together. There is an important role for government as well as private corporations to be as successful as possible and ultimately to form a cohesive partnership to benefit the community.

The various sectors of our communities can work together to benefit the community and the economy and have long term positive results. It is imperative that the government, non-profit, and business sector all share a similar view and wish for the same outcome.

I believe that cooperation among all sectors would be very beneficial to communities everywhere. They can use their separate expertise to move projects along faster.

The most valuable topic today was cooperation between government, non-profit, and business. The examples provided showed excellent ideas and implementation that provides assistant to many.

The most important collaboration in key problems that are too big, affecting too many people is that any one sector cannot be responsible or effective. “Intersector collaboration” is the only way to move the needle.

Political leadership is essential. It takes the right circumstances to get this very important partnership between business, government, and non-profits.

Collaboration between government, private sector, and non-profit has its upside but without the right management and focus, it can have negative effects.

Non-profits relieve the burden on government in general terms. The missions vary, but the theme is consistent.

Chicago - Public SectorThis focus group left me feeling more hopeful about our ability to resolve many of the pressing issues facing our communities, state, and country. I found the exercises very effective at getting me to focus and articulate my thoughts. Grey is one of the best facilitators that I have ever worked with.

If all three sectors work together for one common good, that collaboration will exceed any success each one could have if it were on its own.

I feel like all communities are different, and they all require different needs. It may be that involving each of these communities with the business sector, non-profit, and government sectors might make these communities stronger and safer.

Public servants feel a dedication and transparency in service their communities. Business, non-profit, and government each have an important role to play in our society. Each has certain expertise and function, but opportunities to partner among these sectors could bring fresh ideas to addressing societal problems.

I am thinking that someone out there is thinking on how to maximize public, business, and non-profit sectors as a whole and using each section to help the other and not duplicate services or miss services.

It is not a good idea for the three sectors to work together. They have different interests. Private sector will only look out for itself. Government has to do what it is being told.

I was enlightened to the business sector’s contributions more than I had previously realized. It was encouraging to read about examples where collaborative efforts benefited not only each sector but the greater good.

Appendix


It is interesting that every person has different ideas about how different sectors interact and work. Given that, it is important to have these discussion groups to try to get to a good consensus on how we can all work together on certain issues.

Community involvement is necessary to overcome important issues that are affecting the lives of its citizens. Depending on the importance of the issue and the severity of the issue, government, businesses, and non-profit organizations could solve these issues.

The State of Illinois is a mess. Illinois is not making an impact on the lives of those within the state. Local government is accountable and works best for the community. Only through collaboration with the community can positive change occur.

Chicago - Mixed SectorPublic, private, non-profit partnerships allow all sectors to bring their skill sets and resources to address issues or problems. The group made it clear that it cannot be completed by just one, nor should it.

Business, non-profit, and government can collaborate when there are goals and equality. They can come together for the common good. However, one entity can undo all goals swiftly if the objectives are not clear. The missing element in this dialogue is the community involvement.

I had not thought much about the lack of cooperation/collaboration between the different sectors. More than before, I feel that there should be more interaction in our communities. Government needs to realize that business is the lifeblood of our society and work to ensure fairness to the community, not try and run the businesses.

Issues and problems in our communities are best dealt with by our government, businesses, and non-profits working together to address the issues. Citizens will benefit greatly when this can occur. The strengths of each sector bring benefits to the problems.

I found that each sector (public, government, and business) could possibly work together for a better good if each one could not be independent and see they are all looking to meet a common goal.

We talked about the way public, private, and non-profit sectors can come together and bring positive outcomes for the community. While it would be ideal to have all parties have an equal say so in the partnership, it does not seem like that always happens.

What I take away from this discussion tonight is that if we as a people, regardless of ethnicity, financial status, or otherwise would pool our resources together and help the less fortunate, the world would be a better place. We can begin with the government, the non-profit organizations, and the business sector coming together to make a difference like we saw in Detroit.

We can work together and accomplish great things for the betterment of ourselves and our fellow man. It is possible. We just have to want it bad enough and be willing to take some responsibility towards making good things happen.

Discussing the collaboration of the three sectors and considering the opportunities for change and positive outcomes form a commitment to working together toward a common, not individual, goal

The idea of partnerships with three areas that I often think are separate (government, non-profit, public business); we do this in education by bringing together the parent, teacher, and student; money, money, money — seems different from each sector.

Raleigh - DemocratsCollaboration between multiple types of people and groups can lead to positive outcomes. It depends on driver of goal and proper management. For business it depends on the level of honesty and greed within the company. For non-profits it depends on the cause, and for the government it depends on its efficiency; too many “depends.”

The collaboration of different sectors; we learned how each sector is viewed. Business is viewed as

Appendix


profit driven. We learned how to combine sectors as a good way to solve issues, etc.

The possibility of increased collaboration between the three sectors; ask more questions about what business sector could do to work with non-profits; thinking about which sector is “driving” an effect.

I am more positive toward the ability to enact change. Heightened awareness of other issues that are important to the general public; what I value can be completely different than what other people value. We learned the idea of three sectors; together will be greater than the sum of its parts.

I have learned that it is important for multiple groups to come together and work on a solution with proper communication and processes and that the results can be a greater achievement than if just one or two of the sectors worked together.

The important thing that I would take away is how to get the government, non-profit, and business sectors to work together to resolve some of the issues that are going on in the world.

Working together, finding the common ground amongst non-profits, business sector, and government

My important takeaways are that people are skeptical. Many people are more concerned about an individual group’s motives than they are about total positive impact, and many viewpoints are unlikely to expand beyond their perspective.

Non-profits are the power behind getting things done. Businesses contribute more than I realized. Local governments and non-profits can do great things when they work together. It is very interesting to hear other people’s thoughts and ideas on all of these topics.

Raleigh - RepublicansThe need for all of us to step up and make changes that we want to see happen — Start local. Changes can be made. There will be obstacles but they can be overcome through the cooperation of everyone.

Need collaboration across different groups to accomplish goals, not so bipartisan; there are shades of grey that need to be looked at and analyzed.

We need to work with all sectors to get something done and put differences aside to reach a goal for the community.

Identifying areas and issues that can benefit from multi-sector collaboration and then finding out how I or my business can help contribute to the solution in some way

There is effort being made to get different agencies involved, and we will see if it succeeds. Multi-sector collaboration will be viable and can succeed.

The most important part of this focus group was about how three sectors can truly work together for a common goal. It was a good reminder to stay involved, informed, and active in my own community. Thanks for allowing me to be a part of this group.

Need to convince more people to get involved in local communities, state, and national governmental decisions; louder voices for the average citizen will only come by being included.

Went away with thoughts on government, business, and non-profit working together toward a common goal and overcoming problems and how they might come together

How government, non-profit, and business sectors can work to achieve a common goal, some of the problems in certain sectors that might hinder progress, how local communities can solve things more effectively than the federal government

Appendix

how the public thinks about cross-sector …intersector.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/how-the...how...

Documents