Competition and Collaboration in the Contracting of Family Relationship Centres

John Butcher, Benoit Freyens

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    6 Citations (Scopus)
    22 Downloads (Pure)

    Abstract

    In 2005–06 the Australian government announced the establishment of 65 Family Relationship Centres (FRCs) – a ‘gateway’ service assisting separating couples to reach agreement about child custodial arrangements without recourse to courts. The use of a multi-round competitive contracting regime for the purpose of selecting service providers gave rise to a number of tensions amongst not-for-profit organisations (NFPOs) which, to a degree, compromised the full realisation of stated public policy aims. Reporting on fieldwork conducted with a sample of FRC operators, industry representatives and key government officials this article evaluates the extent to which the case of FRCs conforms to critiques commonly aired in the social policy literature that attribute various forms of policy failure and/or social capital depletion to the competitive contracting of human services within quasi-markets. Although the competitive selection process imposed significant costs on the NFPOs involved, the program also exhibited substantial collaborative and collegial behaviours between government and NFPOs, thus diverging from the critique usually portrayed in the literature.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)15-33
    Number of pages19
    JournalAustralian Journal of Public Administration
    Volume70
    Issue number1
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2011

    Fingerprint

    profit
    recourse
    service provider
    social capital
    public policy
    regime
    industry
    market
    costs
    literature
    Social Policy

    Cite this

    @article{63f23b9b7a3948fd8656755734f0c977,
    title = "Competition and Collaboration in the Contracting of Family Relationship Centres",
    abstract = "In 2005–06 the Australian government announced the establishment of 65 Family Relationship Centres (FRCs) – a ‘gateway’ service assisting separating couples to reach agreement about child custodial arrangements without recourse to courts. The use of a multi-round competitive contracting regime for the purpose of selecting service providers gave rise to a number of tensions amongst not-for-profit organisations (NFPOs) which, to a degree, compromised the full realisation of stated public policy aims. Reporting on fieldwork conducted with a sample of FRC operators, industry representatives and key government officials this article evaluates the extent to which the case of FRCs conforms to critiques commonly aired in the social policy literature that attribute various forms of policy failure and/or social capital depletion to the competitive contracting of human services within quasi-markets. Although the competitive selection process imposed significant costs on the NFPOs involved, the program also exhibited substantial collaborative and collegial behaviours between government and NFPOs, thus diverging from the critique usually portrayed in the literature.",
    keywords = "Family Relationships Policy, Competition, Social Capital",
    author = "John Butcher and Benoit Freyens",
    year = "2011",
    doi = "10.1111/j.1467-8500.2010.00708.x",
    language = "English",
    volume = "70",
    pages = "15--33",
    journal = "Australian Journal of Public Administration",
    issn = "0313-6647",
    publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
    number = "1",

    }

    Competition and Collaboration in the Contracting of Family Relationship Centres. / Butcher, John; Freyens, Benoit.

    In: Australian Journal of Public Administration, Vol. 70, No. 1, 2011, p. 15-33.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Competition and Collaboration in the Contracting of Family Relationship Centres

    AU - Butcher, John

    AU - Freyens, Benoit

    PY - 2011

    Y1 - 2011

    N2 - In 2005–06 the Australian government announced the establishment of 65 Family Relationship Centres (FRCs) – a ‘gateway’ service assisting separating couples to reach agreement about child custodial arrangements without recourse to courts. The use of a multi-round competitive contracting regime for the purpose of selecting service providers gave rise to a number of tensions amongst not-for-profit organisations (NFPOs) which, to a degree, compromised the full realisation of stated public policy aims. Reporting on fieldwork conducted with a sample of FRC operators, industry representatives and key government officials this article evaluates the extent to which the case of FRCs conforms to critiques commonly aired in the social policy literature that attribute various forms of policy failure and/or social capital depletion to the competitive contracting of human services within quasi-markets. Although the competitive selection process imposed significant costs on the NFPOs involved, the program also exhibited substantial collaborative and collegial behaviours between government and NFPOs, thus diverging from the critique usually portrayed in the literature.

    AB - In 2005–06 the Australian government announced the establishment of 65 Family Relationship Centres (FRCs) – a ‘gateway’ service assisting separating couples to reach agreement about child custodial arrangements without recourse to courts. The use of a multi-round competitive contracting regime for the purpose of selecting service providers gave rise to a number of tensions amongst not-for-profit organisations (NFPOs) which, to a degree, compromised the full realisation of stated public policy aims. Reporting on fieldwork conducted with a sample of FRC operators, industry representatives and key government officials this article evaluates the extent to which the case of FRCs conforms to critiques commonly aired in the social policy literature that attribute various forms of policy failure and/or social capital depletion to the competitive contracting of human services within quasi-markets. Although the competitive selection process imposed significant costs on the NFPOs involved, the program also exhibited substantial collaborative and collegial behaviours between government and NFPOs, thus diverging from the critique usually portrayed in the literature.

    KW - Family Relationships Policy

    KW - Competition

    KW - Social Capital

    U2 - 10.1111/j.1467-8500.2010.00708.x

    DO - 10.1111/j.1467-8500.2010.00708.x

    M3 - Article

    VL - 70

    SP - 15

    EP - 33

    JO - Australian Journal of Public Administration

    JF - Australian Journal of Public Administration

    SN - 0313-6647

    IS - 1

    ER -