Download full document (pdf 240kb)A Journey through Kaipara: Telling the story of the Kaipara Community Outcomes Process Steering Group (K-COP)
6. Looking to the future
Many measurable accomplishments have resulted from people working together through K-COP and its project groups. Many intangible benefits have also occurred. These achievements are equally important and both illustrate the value of K-COP.
“Tangible things get done but the intangibles are important for long term work and development.” |
This dual foundation of good process and clear outcomes is a strong base from which K-COP can plan its future direction.
While this report was not intended as a review of K-COP, it has provided an opportunity for those involved to pause on the K-COP journey, reflect on their role in, take stock and think about the next step.
“We need to go back to, and remind people of, the original Terms of Reference.” “We don’t need to spend more time explaining what we do – that just confirms some peoples’ frustrations and view that all we do is talk.” “I think we need to ask how we make each other’s work better. What new work could we be doing? How can we make ‘business as usual’ work together?” |
There has been heightened awareness of the commitment required to keep an inter-sectoral organisation active and responsive, especially over a period of several years.
There are challenges in sustaining a coordinating group, as no one organisation has ownership of it. Each person comes to the group with accountabilities to their own organisation.
The importance of council leadership
The main reason that K-COP has continued for many years is the Council’s active leadership role.
This leadership has given K-COP consistency with a key organisation in the area committed to the group in an ongoing way. The Council CE reflects this:
“I want the agency people to be part of the solution for making Kaipara a better place. I don't have a mortgage on good ideas, so, given the above comment, I like to have the issues identified and let the group come up with the ideas. They should even challenge the issues I raise, and they sometimes do, because it is only by full, committed input from everyone that will we make progress. I see myself facilitating their potential, not driving my ideas into the Steering Group” |
The close association with Council and its senior management has also given K-COP the authority and mana that is often lacking in coordinating bodies.
“The CE does try and make it a real working group – we’re given homework to come back with at the next meeting. We have to be prepared to attend and support. Continuity is an issue of you have a big project on.” |
A ‘strategic broker’ to provide continuity
However, apart from the Council’s CE, K-COP lacks any dedicated human resource, and follow-up between meetings can be limited. The CE described following up K-COP members as akin to “herding butterflies”.
K-COP members also identified a gap in terms of the responsibility to keep a handle on what is happening, be an active point of liaison with the project groups, and, as one person commented, start to lock-down decision-making.
“Between meetings – who drives, connects, who does the continuing follow-up?” “The outcome process needs leadership and once there is engagement, energy and meaningful consultation and plans, there is a need to resource a salary for someone to keep it going and achieve the outcomes.” “Interagency groups like K-COP require ongoing nurturing and leadership.” |
Given that it is neither realistic or appropriate for the CE to take on what is effectively a ‘strategic broker’ role, leadership of K-COP between meetings is an area of importance if the group is to move forward and take on further projects.
