Partnership Lifecycles and the Evolution of Collaborative Relationships

1
Partnership Lifecycles and the Evolution of
Collaborative Relationships

• Robert T. Trotter, II
• Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ
• Society for Applied Anthropology
• March 31-April 4, 2004

2
Project Goals

• Understand the structure and dynamics of RD
  collaborative partnerships and develop models for
  creating, sustaining, transforming, and exiting
  partnerships

• Survey Project Sub-Goals
• Identify the network structure of collaborative
  ventures (integration, action structures,
  barriers)
• Identify the dynamics of collaborative systems
  (roles, key linkages, central players,
  communication processes, changes through time)
• Create a structural and role based model for
  ideal initiation, maintenance, renewal, change or
  exit

3
Acknowledgements The Team

• Elizabeth Briody
• Gulcin Sengir
• Linda Catlin
• Tracy Meerwarth
• Devedatta Kulkarni

4
Basic Methods

• Data collection
• Interviews (N88)
• Focus groups (N10)
• Direct observation
• Document analysis
• Social-network survey (N173)

5
Analysis Overview

• Ethnographic Analysis
• Partnership models, descriptions and trends
• Partnership dynamics
• Partnership profiles
• Sociometric Analysis
• Statistical analysis of network characteristics
• Sociometric analysis of structure, roles,
  positions
• Network visualization and hypotheses generation

6
The Life Cycle of Collaboration Results from the
Ethnography

• Primary Stages Partnership structures and the
  dynamic relationships that drive successful
  collaborations follow a clear lifecycle pattern.
• Initiation Stage
• Courtship Stage
• Start-Up Stage
• Mid-Term Stage
• Mature Stage
• Transition Stage

7
Qualitative Evidence for EvolutionChanges over
Time

• Size and Composition
• Gradual addition of both roles and individual
  expertise on both sides
• Individual roles evolve
• More roles are added
• Increase in complexity of roles
• Specific roles accumulate duties and obligations

8
Qualitative Evidence (cont.)

• Initiation and Courtship
• Ladder model
• Agreeing on technical issues
• Identifying and beginning mutual interests
• Mid-Term
• Developing relationships
• Maturity
• Getting work done
• Transition
• Determining the Future

9
Network Survey Evidence

• The network survey allowed us to explore four of
  the six stages of the partnership life cycle in
  detail
• Sample Information

Table 1. Response Rates and Total Responses to
Network Survey
vey


Partner

E.Coast Univ.

GM-

Mid Atlantic

GM-

Midwest Univ.

GM-

W.Coast Univ.

GM-

Row
MidAtl.
E.Coast

Midwest

W.Coast

T
o
tals

Surveys

15

7

34

14

39

20

32

15

286

Sent

Surveys

10

7

15

7

22

16

22

11

173

Returned

Percent

66.7

100.0

44.1

50.0

56.4

80.0

68.8

73.3

60.5

Returned


10
Network Survey Evidence

• Analysis Process
• Freelisting Salient Positions and Roles
• (Anthropac)
• Edgelists were used to create sociometric
  matrices
• Sociometric Analysis was conducted

11
Evolution through Network Through Statistical
Trends and Visualization

• Statistical Trends
• Network Visualization Processes

12
Statistical Trends

• The statistical trends that support our
  evolutionary hypothesis include
• Changes in size of whole network, average
  personal network, and complexity of network were
  observed. (e.g., increasing in number of
  participants as partnership ages)
• Changes in sociometric measures (overall network
  density, transitivity, number of components,
  etc.) (e.g., newer partnerships have a lower
  average distance and higher density)

13
Network Visualization Hypotheses and Data from
the Survey

• The data was assumed to match with specific
  stages in the partnership cycle
• Hypothetical and real networks were analyzed for
  similar structures

14
Network Visualization Data KineMage Images of
Start Up
15
Network Visualization Data KineMage Images of
Mid-Stage
16
Network Visualization KineMage Image of Mature
Stage
Figure 6 Theoretically
Figure 6 Mature-Stage Constructed Mature Stage
Configuration at 4.5 Years
17
Conclusions

• The qualitative, statistical and visual trends in
  the data support an evolutionary model for
  partnership development and maintenance
• Six stages in the partnership cycle emerge, each
  associated with particular activities, issues,
  and decisions
• These findings have important applied
  implications associated with them
• An ideal model can be set up and used to guide
  new partnerships
• Problems in existing partnerships can be
  diagnosed and addressed, based on structure,
  change, or lack of change from stage to stage

18
Brief Examples of Application

• Recommendations for changes in the timing and
  structure of periodic progress reviews
• Recommendations for changes in the structure of
  roles on both sides of the partnership
• Recommendations on the types and amount of
  communication during the transition phase