Introduction and context
The leading preventable causes of death worldwide (chronic diseases) are usually induced by a lack of regular physical activity, which leads to significant health and financial challenges for the individuals and communities they afflict. In this regard, many municipalities are committed to create and maintain healthy environments for everyone. This often requires the public authority to establish collaboration, partnership agreement and coordination mechanisms with a diversity of organizations.
The doctoral research project Bougez-vous? aims to better understand how public recreational and sports infrastructures are planned, designed, and managed in the province of Quebec. One of its components explores more specifically the way in which coordination agreements are operationalized between the City of Montreal and seven organizations (public, educational and community organizations). This exploratory research takes the form of a case study carried out according to an interdisciplinary approach which results could inspire sport administrators and organizations, public organizations, and municipal government departments to make people physically more active.
Methods
This research focuses on seven inter-organizational partnerships established between the City of Montreal, its boroughs, or services (partner of the research) and a civil, community, or educational authority concerning the management and use of recreational sports infrastructures. For the benefit of the research, an agreement content analysis was first applied to understand which elements dictate the relationship. Then thirteen interviews were conducted with the managers in charge of each agreement (from the City of Montreal and the partners). Finally, a discourses content analysis was conducted to identify the factors which determine the success and limits of the partnership and its application.
Key findings and implications
The data analysis performed allows to identify multiple factors determining the success of the management and use of partnerships studied, as well as the limits observed and other elements to consider.
Driving factors
- The complementarity of the partners orientations (regarding public service and users).
- The adequacy and respect of missions, needs and audiences of both partners (result of openness, mutual understanding, shared vision, collaborative approach).
- The willing to work with the local community, to answer the needs.
- The commitment of the actors and their vision of the partnership, the service they offer and their main purpose.
- The quality of the relationship and it’s application (between actors and between organizations) based on trust, respect, reciprocity, the search for win-win solutions, proximity, frequency of communications.
- The agreement (detailed, simple, clear, and temporally defined: 3 to 5 years).
- The informal adjustments (essential to functioning).
Limiting factors
- The lack of control on sport fields and buildings.
- The lack of availability of sport fields and the scheduling conflicts especially on prime times.
- The adjustments concerning cleaning, maintenance, breakdowns, and renovations.
- The public administration which implies heavy requirements, slow processing, multiplication of agreements.
- The coordination between municipal and scholar organizations (missions, audiences, shared spaces…).
- The agreement (clumsy standardization, loss of meaning and efficiency).
Complementary factors
- The context of establishment/renewal of the agreement (determining).
- The demand from groups, citizens, and community (determining).
- The nature of the agreement (questionable: from partnership to “partnership mandate” or contract).
- The discourse on healthy environments (integrated).
- The desire to align with municipal guidelines (affirmed).
- The social responsibility of organizations (affirmed).
First, these results bring interesting avenues of thinking and action to researchers who are now better tooled to study partnerships between organizations. Secondly, practitioners are better armed to design effective partnerships between organizations. Indeed, by considering the previous factors, sport managers can maximize the way they establish their partnership with other organizations. Therefore, they can integrate the principles that lead to a winning application of the partnership and especially to promote health by physical activity. In consequence, the planning and management of public recreational and sport infrastructures can be more effective and lead to the creation of active and healthy communities which provide access to physical activity for all, regardless of economic, physical, social, and cultural conditions.
Strengths and limitations
Strengths:
- The multiplicity and variety of the partnerships studied.
- The opportunity to access internal documentation and managers from multiple organizations.
- The cross analysis of the documents and the managers discourses.
- The exploratory, interdisciplinary, and qualitative approach which led to a better understanding.
Limitations:
- The data collection (proceeded during Covid-19) may have been disturbed due to effects on the partnership between some organizations.
- The field, limited to Montreal’s organizations.
- The type of the partnership, between a municipal government and civil, community or educational organizations.
- The sample which includes only a manager from each organization and the fact that an interviewer declined to participate (due to workload) and one had only few months of experience with the agreement at the time of the interview.
- Only the administrative sector was interviewed.
Conclusions and next steps
Improving health by promoting physical activity needs stakeholders engaged to make people physically more active. To this end, policies and programs must be designed and resources allocated to create opportunities to move. Therefore, different organizations are led to be partners in building and use of sport fields and sport infrastructures. However, the partnership, and its success can’t be restricted to the official document which define the engagement of the partners. It needs to overpass this and give more attention to the relation between the organizations themselves and the humans which manage them, aspects which seem more structuring on the long run. Also, the coordination between the partners needs to consider the adequacy between their visions and their actors to articulate better their actions and resources.