Abstract:
|
This paper draws on the theoretical concepts from Inter-organizational
relations theory, public governance, and public and private partnerships (PPPs), which
are incorporated with the conceptions learned from the two cases of PPPs in technical
vocational education and training in Singapore and the U.S. As a result, an initial
conceptual framework was developed to guide in the understanding of the public and
private partnership phenomenon. The framework includes a broad conceptualization
of public and private partnerships, consisting of the following domains: initial
conditions and motives, structure and governance, the partnership process, and
partnership capabilities.
The objectives of the study include: 1) identifying the motives of the
collaborating actors in initiating public and private partnerships for vocational
education and training; 2) exploring the institutional settings of the PPPs in terms of
governance and structure; 3) identifying the factors critical for sustaining successful
public and private partnerships for vocational education and training; and 4)
developing a conceptual framework in order to understand and assess public and
private partnerships for vocational education and training.
The author has chosen the case study research method, an inductive, caseoriented
process of theory development, to investigate the in-depth phenomenon and
rich context of public and private partnerships, which are regarded as a new topic area
within the organizational theories arena. The unit of analysis for this study is the
partnerships among relevant partners agreeing to implement an initiative in
strengthening vocational education and training. The multiple case study approach was used as the research design. Therefore, the author collected the data and analyzed
them within the cases and compared them across different cases with different
contexts.
In this study, the author selected three cases of leading vocational education
and training implemented in Thailand. They are: 1) the Automotive Human Resource
Development Academy, 2) a Work-Integrated Learning program, and 3) German-Thai
Dual Excellence Education. These three cases are different in terms of the
combination of partnering agencies, sponsoring organization, and key players
contributing to the success of the partnerships. The collected information included
qualitative data derived from documentation, archival records, participant
observation, and in-depth interviews with the 24 key informants selected from the
three cases.
The conceptualization of the public and private partnerships is presented in
two stages, before and during PPP formation. Prior to the PPP formation, vulnerable
strategic conditions existed. The convener of the PPP, who is highly regarded as a
respectable figure with access to resources, assembles potential partners, agreeing that
urgent action is needed to address the issue. They all shared common values in
treating the shared goals of public interests as a high priority. The contingencies of
reciprocity and effectiveness are prompted by these shared benefits. During PPP
formation, the convener or the party with higher political power will influence how
the partnership is structured and governed. The contingency of asymmetry leads to the
formation of partnerships, which is usually influenced by the partner with superior
negotiating power. It is essential that this coordination unit possess cooperative
capabilities, especially regarding relationship management skills, in order to
effectively liaise with the partners to undertake the planned activities successfully.
The author has proposed four strategies to forster successful public and private
partnerships in order to efficienty synergize resources for tackling public issues.
These strategies include: 1) building awareness of public and private partnerships and
a collaborativeon mindset; 2) engagement of the private sector as part of the
governance of public service delivery; 3) promotion of PPPs through a funding and
incentive mechanism with government oversight on the quality control of the awarded
programs; and 4) building government capacity regarding cooperative capabilities.
|
