mechanisms for access to NSDIs; and research and formulation of improved models for benefit assessment and cost-sharing. These INDS missions are similar to those discussed in the committee`s 1990 report.2 When the managers of Wendy`s International and Tyson Foods met in December 2003 to partner with the supply chain, all parties came to the table with concerns. There were those on wendy`s side who remembered all too well the disagreements they had with Tyson in the past. In fact, a few years earlier, Wendy`s had made the official decision to stop buying from Tyson. On Tyson`s side, some people were suspicious of a client whose demands had prevented the company from achieving its profit goals. The teams are divided into two rooms, and each is invited to discuss and then list what they consider to be compelling reasons for a partnership. It is important that participants feel free to talk openly about whether and how their own business could benefit from such a relationship. What are the potential payments? For some teams, there aren`t many. Other teams fill page by page with flip charts. Each of these elements is important, whether the partnership is simply an agreement between two agencies to carry out an activity in their mutual interest, or whether it is promoted and encouraged as a contribution to the INDS. In the latter case, however, certain other conditions are important. This point was brought to our attention at the beginning of our research with the Global Supply Chain Forum, when its members identified fruitful partnerships for studies. One of them was an agreement between a parcel delivery person and a manufacturer.
The delivery company received the promised revenue and the manufacturer received the agreed costs and service levels. But it was not a partnership; It was a one-stop contract with a guaranteed volume. The fact is that it is often possible to achieve the desired results without partnership. If so, don`t create one. Just write a good contract. You simply don`t have enough staff to build close relationships with a supplier or customer. The state government must work with many federal agencies to launch spatial data collection programs. The federal authorities would also like the state government to give priority to the implementation of national programmes. For example, the creation of advisory committees on state mapping was largely a desire to have a mechanism for states to address their requirements to the USGS NMD for the national mapping program.
State geoinformation councils are now the response of States to provide contact points for the coordination of spatial data needs. The size and diversity of the federal system suggests that, for viable partnerships, steps must be taken to provide focal points within the federal government for the coordination of data production and partnership activities. The range of alternatives to be considered should include regional coordination staff and coordination positions within the organisations responsible for producing spatial data. Like the word “commitment” in a marriage, the term “partnership” can be interpreted very differently by the parties involved. The two teams meet separately to discuss why they are looking for a partnership and to list specific and selfish reasons in four categories: asset and cost efficiency, improved customer service, marketing benefits, and profit growth or stability. Each category is assigned a score indicating the likelihood that the partnership will serve these objectives. A sense of reciprocity – common goal and perspective – is crucial. It helps organizations move beyond a zero-sum mentality and respect the spirit of partnership, even when a partner`s revenue is under pressure. It may extend to the desire to integrate systems or share certain financial information. Symmetry often means a comparable order of magnitude, industry position or brand image. But even if two companies are very different in this regard, they could give themselves a high score in terms of symmetry if they have the same power over each other`s business success – perhaps because the small business provides a unique, rare, or crucial component to the large company`s competitive advantage.
The group consults the matrix of propensity to associate, which gives a recipe based on the scores. The ideal relationship looks like a Type I, II or III partnership or simply an independent connection. This is when the day becomes interesting. The teams meet in a room and introduce each other to their drivers and results. The rules of the game are clarified. If a party does not understand how the other party`s objectives are to be achieved, it must press for clarification. Failure to challenge a driver requires an agreement and obliges the partners to cooperate. For example, drivers listed by a Wendy`s supplier included the prospect of doing more business with Wendy`s Canadian subsidiary, Tim Hortons. The Wendy`s team rejected the pilot, saying the subsidiary`s management had made decisions autonomously. This is exactly the kind of expectation that goes unnoticed in most partnerships and later becomes a source of disappointment. .