Case B partnership implementation

The second partnership to be analysed is between Case B, a youth based social enterprise, and their BP, an Australian owned construction company. At the time of data collection, the partnership had been in operation for approximately two years, and was primarily philanthropic in nature. Data relating to each of the key themes within the partnership implementation stage, that being the resources contributed by partner organisations and the power dynamics that exist in the relationship, will be presented below.

5.4.2.1 Relationship dynamics

A number of resources were contributed within this partnership, and are outlined in Error! Reference source not found.. Examples of key resources are highlighted in bold text.

-143-

Table 12 - Resource contributions within Case B's partnership

Resources contributed by BP

Resource contributions supporting positive commercial outcomes for social enterprise

Financial support (via funding and discounted

products/services)

The house move we thought may have cost up to $25k, and they’re charging us $8k. So that’s huge. And we probably wouldn’t have had that house moved if we had to wait until we had the $25k to move it (B1)

Access to operational equipment and resources

They’re now providing fill. We’ve got a very oddly shaped block that finishes in a waterway, so that needs to be built up and filled. So they’re bringing in at the moment rock-fill and they’ll bring boulder- fill in soon. And again all that just saves so much money (B1)

Resource contributions supporting positive social outcomes for social enterprise

Work experience placements We haven’t asked them too many times, but I think that every time we’d _{want somebody to go there they’d be able to accommodate it. We’d be} asking for max three placements a year – so it’s not many (B1)

Enhanced publicity regarding enterprises beneficiaries

We did a workplace visit recently with a group and they actually put us in the newsletter – the whole group that went through (B1)

Resources contributed by social enterprise

Resources supporting positive social outcomes for BP

Use of enterprise resources to develop positive publicity for business

The housing project down at Bounty Street we’ve got a huge big sign with their logo on there. That’s just really a bit of a thank you more than it’s a partnership of advertising (B1)

As illustrated in this table, the resources contributed by Case B’s partner were directed towards supporting the activities undertaken by the enterprise as a result of their social benefit and commercial logics. Financial support was provided in the form of the discounted haulage of a house gifted to the enterprise. According to participant B1, the enterprise received a discount of $17,000 on the haulage service provided by their BP, which not only saved the enterprise money, but also enabled the house to be moved more quickly than would have been possible had the enterprise been required to pay for the services in full. Further savings were also provided by Case B’s BP in the form of free rock fill, which was being delivered to the enterprise’s construction site, thus generating further savings for the enterprise and contributing to a property that would be sold by the enterprise to generate revenue.

The resources discussed above illustrate the exchange value of Case B’s partner in relation to their capacity to provide resources to support social enterprise needs associated with their commercial logic. However, the exchange value of the BP was also demonstrated to

-144-

be associated with their ability to support the activities associated with the enterprise’s social benefit logic. For example, participant B1 described situations in which Case B’s students had undertaken work experience placements with their BP. These placements supported the training goals of the social enterprise, and were perceived to enhance future job prospects for its students within the industry. In addition to work experience

placements, Case B’s BP also supported the enterprise by contributing opportunities for publicity within business communication. This involved the inclusion of the social enterprise within their BP’s internal newsletter, which was perceived to help develop awareness of the activities undertaken and beneficiaries supported by the social enterprise. As noted above, Case B’s relationship was primarily of a philanthropic nature, whereby the contribution of resources generally originated from the BP. Having noted this however, Case B included their BP’s logo upon social enterprise’s marketing at their house

renovation site. Whilst not perceived by the social enterprise to generate significant value for their BP, advertising their BP’s involvement was considered to be important, as the expression of gratitude for support provided was an underpinning social value held by the social enterprise.

5.4.2.2 Relationship dynamics

According to participant B1, Case B’s key partnership had developed over time to incorporate greater levels of familiarity and positive rapport between partners. Whilst the interactions between partners were positive, the dependency of the social enterprise upon the resource strengths of their BP was highlighted. This dependency had led to the social enterprise frequently requesting support:

‘I think that they can sometimes feel a bit nagged as we’ll continue to ring up and remind them and ask them things and we’re not a paying customer – well we’re not paying commercial rates like other people are. So I think sometimes they might feel like “sigh…not them again” (laughing). But they come to the party and they

wouldn’t do that if they weren’t interested in contributing’ (B1).

The commitment of the BP to the social enterprise was illustrated by the contribution of free rock-fill, which was perceived to be a spontaneous initiative by the BP, and not

-145-

initiated by individuals within the social enterprise (see Error! Reference source not found.). Instead, it was initiated by truck drivers within the BP who had developed strong relationships with Case B employees, and wished to support the social enterprise by providing resources that the BP did not need. In this instance, it was the identification of the truck drivers with the values underpinning the social enterprise’s social benefit logic that had led to partnership adaptations.

Table 13 - Business partner adaptations (Case B)

BP adaptations

Financial alignment

I hope I’m not saying anything out of school here – but the drivers now know that when they’re at a job and they need to get rid of fill which they’d normally take to the tip and pay to dispose of, they’ll come to our block now. So again they’ve saved us $10,000’s of fill. That’s not an arrangement that has been set with the senior hierarchy, but that’s just with the drivers as they’ve got to know us (B1)

In summary, Case B’s partnership was philanthropic in nature, and therefore characterised by resource contributions primarily stemming from the BP. Although the social enterprise demonstrated a limited exchange value in the relationship, relationships with front-line employees within their BP led to an adjustment in business activities which provided additional financial support for Case B.