PARTNERSHIP AND HUMAN RESOURCES by Carlo Bonora

 Partnership is a form of Governance that may result really usefull to manage changing processes determinated by the Globalisation.  It is an operational formality characterised by the construction of shared projects, among not hierarchized partners, that converse and collaborate to face problems or to reach objectifies of development. The advantage is the increasing of the organizational and inter-organizational learning and of the formative processes, over that of the productive strategies that are expounded in solid and profitable networks.

The elective democracy  The Ford model of production was characterized by policies founded primarily, on the mechanisms of the elective democracy and on the development of social movements on specific problems. It was a process that from civil society leads to the politic and institutional one (throughout the representation forms), with potentially welfare and income distribution interventions, and with the affirmation of logics of equity turned above all, to the reduction of the more remarkable unbalances (subordinate workers), on the basis of ideological options.

THE PARTNERSHIP POLICIES  The partnership policies, requiring the involvement of different actors, go beyond the representative democracy, that remains obviously the main point, but that is not to consider the only option on the field.  To the representative democracy we have to add the forms of direct institutional involvement (above all local corporate body and social parts, but not only) to realize politics favouring a participative Welfare, new forms of worth equity and an enhancement of human resources.  The partnership may stimulate an economic development that is both social, and compatible with the demands of the community.

THE FORD MODEL  Representative democracy  Social movements  Potentially benevolent Welfare  Towards a redistributive EQUITY (advantaging the workers)  Towards the ideology

THE PARTNERSHIP THE “PARTNERSHIP” MODEL  Towards an enlarged democracy  Towards a democracy of the public and private institutions  A participative Welfare  Towards new forms of Equity  For a both economic and social development  Towards a concrete resolution of problems

GLOBAL-LOCAL ACTION  The partnership may favour a valid connection between the global and local dimension of the phenomenona  Valorization of the local resources, but even the realization of forms of adjustment to national and/or European integration policies (global)

THE LOCAL CONTEXTS  In the local contexts the Partnership has the priority objective to stimulate the initiative from the low, in a bottom-up logic  It is based on the participation and involvement of the subjects, that are on the territory, and on the inter-institutional dialogue inside the different local contexts

THE GLOBAL DIMENSION OF THE PARTNERSHIP  It faces the global dimension with the implementation formalities of national and European policies, translating them in the different local contexts  The local, but even trans-national, partnership is a tool for the transfer of good practices in the benchmarking optic  It is a recognized occasion to induce the local realities to face themselves with excellence cases. These are essential points of reference for the innovation and action.

THE GAME: GLOCAL-LOCAL  The glocal-local is the fundamental axle around which the problems revolve  The global may favour the institutional isomorphism and the universal character of the choices  The local allows the creative and innovative translation of glocal logics in specific contexts  The glocal is based on a global approach to the local situation: the globalisation projects the local society in a planetary dimension, while the territory becomes a resource to cope with the new challenges

Partnership and social dialogue  The partnership is to consider a political motive of the integration process. This moves from a stretch form of social dialogue, where diversified subjects take part: not only social parts, but any socio-institutional entity, private or public, present in each reality, with the objective to reach the formulation of proposals on the specific themes of development.

NETWORK  The town/suburb relationship is fundamental.  The globalisation has not, and must not have, as consequence, the pulverization in an unlimited myriad of fragmented local realities, but on the contrary, it requires a narrow coordination inside each homogeneous macro-area (for example UE), in order to strengthen the general impact on the international scene.  Optic of Network and of connection among different networks: the Networks are able to develop synergies in particular segments of the market and they are precious to reach a connection among divergent subjects.

THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE PARTNERSHIP Social level  From the centrality of the enterprise to the emergency of the society  Reduction of the complexity  Activation of the environment  Reduction of the borders among the organizations  Development of the Glocal  Valorisation of the Social Capital  Facilitation of the Networks  Enhancement of the human resources  Valorisation of the diffused management

THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE PARTNERSHIP Political level - Auto-consideration of the community - Involvement of the different social and individual subjects - Reduction of the limits of the rationality - New Town/Suburb relationship - Adaptation of the national and European policies in the local contexts (local dimension) - Translation of the national and European policies in the local contexts (global dimension) - Realization of politics of equity - Participative Welfare - Organized arrangements