At the National Federation of Community Broadcasters, we have spent the last several years building partnerships across public media, journalism, research, advocacy, arts, and other nonprofit organizations. Some collaborations have flourished. Others have not moved beyond the exploratory stage.
What we have learned is surprisingly simple: the partnerships that last are rarely built on strategy decks alone. They are built on shared values, mutual respect, clarity about capacity, and trust.
The management thinker Peter Drucker is often credited with the phrase, “Culture eats strategy for breakfast.” The longer I work in nonprofit leadership, the more true that feels.
A strategic partnership can look perfect on paper. The goals may align. The funding opportunity may be compelling. The organizational charts may suggest “synergy.” But if the cultures do not align — if there is not a shared understanding of how people work together, communicate, make decisions, and treat one another — the collaboration eventually strains under its own weight.
At NFCB, we have increasingly found ourselves returning to one simple principle:
Work with people who value you and your work.
Or, as I sometimes jokingly tell staff and partners:
“Rima’s rule: don’t work with jerks.”
(Though, to be honest, I usually use spicier language in person.)
It sounds humorous, but there is real leadership practice behind it.
In the nonprofit sector, especially during periods of instability and scarcity, organizations can fall into partnerships driven by urgency rather than alignment. We say yes because we are under-resourced. Because the grant requires collaboration. Because everyone else is doing it. Because we fear missing an opportunity.
But sustainable collaboration requires something deeper than transactional alignment.
One practice I have increasingly tried to lead with is assuming best intentions. That does not mean ignoring problems or avoiding difficult conversations. It means beginning from a place of curiosity instead of defensiveness.
Curiosity changes the conversation.
When we ask questions — genuinely and respectfully — we better understand how and why another person or organization works the way they do. We learn what pressures they are navigating, what values are driving decisions, and what constraints they may be carrying. People are far more likely to open up when they do not feel immediately judged or positioned against.
Leading with curiosity creates space for trust. It lowers defensiveness. And in many cases, it reveals that what initially looked like disagreement is often simply a difference in organizational culture, language, history, or capacity.
Best Practices for Collaboration
Best practice: Start with shared values and cultural fit.
Rosabeth Moss Kanter argues that successful alliances depend on mutual benefit, trust, and compatible ways of working — not simply a good deal on paper (Kanter, 1994).
At NFCB, we have found this to be deeply true. The partnerships that have lasted are the ones where there is shared understanding not only of mission, but also of organizational culture, communication style, and expectations.
Best practice: Create clear shared expectations.
John Kania and Mark Kramer identify common agenda, shared measurement, mutually reinforcing activities, continuous communication, and backbone support as core conditions for successful collaboration (Kania & Kramer, 2011).
Too often, organizations assume they are aligned because everyone broadly agrees on the mission. But successful collaboration requires shared definitions, clarity around decision-making, and honest conversations about accountability and responsibility.
Best practice: Build trust before conflict or crisis.
Victor Tavarez, John Harper, and Fay Hanleybrown emphasize that trust strengthens collaboration and helps partnerships navigate difficult moments and organizational change (Tavarez et al., 2018).
Trust matters especially during moments of stress, transition, or disagreement. Without trust, collaboration becomes brittle.
Best practice: Be honest about capacity.
Heather McLeod Grant, Kate Wilkinson, and Mickey Butts argue that sustained collaboration requires intentional investment in the actual capacity to collaborate, not simply enthusiasm for shared goals (Grant et al., 2019).
As a small but nationally connected organization representing community broadcasters — many operating with very limited staffing and resources — NFCB has learned the importance of being candid about capacity. Many nonprofit collaborations fail not because the mission alignment is wrong, but because organizations overcommit, underestimate labor, or assume invisible work will somehow absorb itself.
Best practice: Address power imbalances directly.
Nonprofit Quarterly warns that partnerships can fail or unintentionally cause harm when power imbalances and local context are ignored (“Shifting the Balance: Centering Local Leadership in Global Nonprofit Partnerships,” 2023).
This dynamic is not limited to international partnerships. It happens across nonprofit ecosystems every day. Smaller organizations often bring deep expertise, community trust, and agility — but may lack institutional scale or resources. Strong partnerships recognize and respect those realities.
Best practice: Share power, respect, and flexibility.
Nonprofit Quarterly highlights equal power sharing, transparency, flexibility, and mutual respect as characteristics of stronger partnership practice (“Blurred Boundaries: A New World for Some Foundation-Grantee Partnerships,” 2020).
Healthy collaboration should expand capacity, not quietly exhaust people. Strong partnerships are not built through control. They are built through mutual respect and adaptability.
Best practice: Lead with curiosity across different organizational cultures.
Jeanne M. Brett and Tyree Mitchell emphasize curiosity, transparency, and explaining organizational priorities as critical tools for building trust across differences (Brett & Mitchell, 2020).
This idea resonates strongly with my own leadership experience.
Assuming best intentions and asking thoughtful questions changes the tone of collaboration. It helps people feel less defensive and more willing to explain why they work the way they do. Often, tension is not about bad intent. It is about differing organizational histories, pressures, vocabularies, or expectations.
Best practice: Put the partnership frame in writing.
Jonathan Hughes and Jeff Weiss recommend establishing formal systems, clear expectations, and operational agreements early in partnerships, including defining communication norms, roles, and shared goals (Hughes & Weiss, 2007).
For nonprofits, that can be as simple as an exploratory Memorandum of Understanding (MOU).
An exploratory MOU is often not legally binding. Instead, it functions as a good-faith document that frames the partnership and helps organizations clarify intentions, boundaries, expectations, and capacity before deeper work begins.
A strong exploratory MOU can include:
- Shared values and guiding principles
- Why the organizations want to work together
- Areas of mutual interest
- Capacity realities and limitations
- Expectations around communication and decision-making
- Boundaries of the collaboration
- Financial expectations or resource commitments
- How visibility, labor, and credit will be shared
- What success would look like
- What would make the partnership no longer workable
The process of discussing these questions is often just as important as the final document itself.
Because healthy collaboration is not built through assumption.
It is built through clarity, curiosity, honesty, and trust.
At NFCB, we remain grateful for the many organizations, stations, researchers, funders, and colleagues who have approached partnership with generosity, openness, curiosity, and shared commitment to community service. Those relationships continue to shape our work and strengthen the broader public media ecosystem.
And increasingly, we have learned that one of the most strategic things an organization can do is pay attention to culture early — before the grant proposal, before the work plan, and before the formal partnership announcement.
Because in the end, culture does not just eat strategy for breakfast.
It determines whether people will still want to sit at the same table a year later.
Sources Cited
Kanter, R. M. (1994). Collaborative advantage: The art of alliances. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/1994/07/collaborative-advantage-the-art-of-alliances
Kania, J., & Kramer, M. (2011). Collective impact. Stanford Social Innovation Review. https://ssir.org/articles/entry/collective_impact
Tavarez, V., Harper, J., & Hanleybrown, F. (2018). How funders of collective impact initiatives can build trust. Stanford Social Innovation Review. https://ssir.org/articles/entry/how_funders_of_collective_impact_initiatives_can_build_trust
Grant, H. M., Wilkinson, K., & Butts, M. (2019). Building capacity for sustained collaboration. Stanford Social Innovation Review. https://ssir.org/articles/entry/building_capacity_for_sustained_collaboration
Nonprofit Quarterly. (2023). Shifting the balance: Centering local leadership in global nonprofit partnerships. https://nonprofitquarterly.org/shifting-the-balance-centering-local-leadership-in-global-nonprofit-partnerships/
Nonprofit Quarterly. (2020). Blurred boundaries: A new world for some foundation-grantee partnerships. https://nonprofitquarterly.org/blurred-boundaries-a-new-world-for-some-foundation-grantee-partnerships/
Brett, J. M., & Mitchell, T. (2020). Research: How to build trust with business partners from other cultures. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2020/01/research-how-to-build-trust-with-business-partners-from-other-cultures
Hughes, J., & Weiss, J. (2007). Simple rules for making alliances work. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2007/11/simple-rules-for-making-alliances-work
