Abstract
With the passage of time valuable lessons have been learnt about both effective practices for program and system integration and the sizable barriers, including the challenges in sustaining constructive integration. This paper is a reflection on sustainable integrative practices and is grounded in the direct experience of one of the authors, who held the post of the South Australian Social Inclusion Commissioner. We reflect upon the structure and mechanism of the South Australian Social Inclusion Initiative (2002–2011) as well as using a case study of a successful integrative program of the Social Inclusion Initiative, a program in South Australia’s School Retention Action Plan 2004 Making the Connections (South Australian Social Inclusion Board, 2004) that was implemented to improve school retention. The case study draws out salient factors of clear rationale, coordination, collaboration, communication, team work and trust as skills and ingredients to bring about integration in policy and programs. While the integration literature affirms that these ingredients are primary skills for the development of an integrative framework, we also assert that they are not enough for successful and sustained integration. Absent from much of the literature is a discussion about the use of power and the manner in which horizontal integrative work occurs. We take up this theme to draw out some implications for analysis of sustainable integrative practices.
Highlights
For at least three to four decades, institutions in many countries have implemented variants of policies to integrate systems and programs, using a range of models and nomenclature including ‘social inclusion’, ‘joined up government’ and ‘post national integration’ in reference to the European Union (Lynn, 1998; De Lombaerde & Iapadre, 2008; Eriksen & Fossum, 1999; Mulgan, 2005)
Besides the Education Department needing to work with the Social Inclusion Board and Unit, integrated policy development to respond to school retention rates, required non Education Departments dealing with such issues as housing or juvenile justice to see that they were an integral part of the school retention plan
While an inner tension is well recognised in the relationship between social inclusion and wealth redistribution, social inclusion as a concept and policy method can provide a powerful mode for the enhancement of the lives of citizens in participatory community, the most disadvantaged with complex and multiple needs
Summary
For at least three to four decades, institutions in many countries have implemented variants of policies to integrate systems and programs, using a range of models and nomenclature including ‘social inclusion’, ‘joined up government’ and ‘post national integration’ in reference to the European Union (Lynn, 1998; De Lombaerde & Iapadre, 2008; Eriksen & Fossum, 1999; Mulgan, 2005). A reading of the literature on integrative practices points to the need for clear definitions and case for integration, and one that can be communicated It would seem salient factors are a concerted effort over time to nurture institutional practices where holistic and integrative thinking becomes a cultural habit, and where there is engagement in dialogue and relational exchanges, both within and external to the organization (Corbett & Noyes, 2008; Fine, Pancharatnam, & Thomson, 2000; Ragan, 2003). We begin with a brief overview of the South Australian Social Inclusion Initiative
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
