public administration government and interagency relationships

Interagency partnerships have become embedded in procedure, policy, and organizational structure. Many interagency partnerships have become mandatory either formally as in law, or informally, as through executive decisions within agencies. Mandating interagency partnerships seems restrictive, but does present major advantages including the establishment of concrete protocols used for information sharing and communication. Rather than rely on tacit, ambiguous, or circumstantial partnerships, mandatory relationships enable the division of tasks and responsibilities in ways that promotes role clarity and overall effectiveness.

Policymakers do need to ensure that the interagency partnerships are operable and feasible, and that there are systems in place for managing those relationships and mandating accountability. The most notable example of mandatory interagency partnerships is in the realm of homeland security. Prior to the creation of the Department of Homeland Security, interagency partnerships existed but tended to be loose and often ineffective (Hagen, 2006).

The Department of Homeland Security created a new model of interagency partnership that enhanced the effectiveness and scope of the homeland security enterprise, taking into account multiple disparate stakeholders (Marcella, 2004). Interagency partnerships also flourish in law enforcement and criminal justice, as with the Organized Crime and Drug Enforcement Task Forces (United States Department of Justice, 2017).

Rescue, relief, and emergency management also highlights the benefits of interagency partnerships in accounting for the various strengths and jurisdictions of local, state, and federal agencies as well as external entities like non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and the private sector (Hagen, 2006). The success of many interagency partnerships does not obscure the fact that there are potential problems with formalizing such relationships. Problems include unnecessary redundancy, inefficiency, and potential security breaches. The risks with mandatory interagency collaboration can be managed and mitigated through effective leadership and management.

Failures in interagency partnerships have highlighted the primary areas of concern, which include role clarity and control over programs and services (Byles, 1985). Poor communication, lack of genuine collaboration, and power struggles emerge when the interagency partnerships are poorly designed, or when there are no clear guidelines for project and task management (Byles, 1985). Learning from mistakes in past interagency partnership failures has helped policymakers and leaders to construct more effective means of designing and maintaining these relationships.

Interagency partnerships do benefit from being ensconced in law because of the ways formal guidelines and oversight ensure compliance, regulation, and standardization. Mandatory compliance implies the means by which to conduct regular assessments and to make changes where necessary, such as when organizations underperform or fail to achieve their goals. However, the interagency collaboration needs to be managed formally, with task forces and special committees that serve specific needs. Interagency partnerships cannot be nebulous, or built only on high ideals.

Leaders need to regularly manage the partnerships, monitor and mediate communications, and ensure that security protocols are in place. Interagency partnerships help to create human resources standards that can improve the way employees respond to crises, and also improve training and.