This paper attempts to give an overview of the article Strategic Alliances in Action: Toward a Theory of Evolution. Wohlstetter, Smith, and Malloy theorized that the theory of evolution suggests a foundational model of strategic alliance evolution is warranted from past concepts and research. It was identified that some research gap exists with theories on the evolutionary process of strategic alliances. First, this summary will discuss Wohlstetter, Smith, and Malloy’s review of literature on strategic alliances as a springboard in discussing what themes emerged. Secondly, a discussion of why and how an intentional study was conducted towards determining a foundational model of strategic alliance evolution. Finally, conclusions will be drawn with implications for a strengthened solidarity between social workers and the community in which we serve.
Strategic alliances are increasingly becoming popular day by day. Despite the many different reasons of why such alliances occur a central theme have been recognized and noted. Within the corporate sector and public arena the literature review and the study conducted revealed the basic definition of strategic alliance as a problem solving tool that address organizational problems and issues that cannot be solved by itself. This presents an avenue for other organizations to share resources as well as joint decision making towards resolving these problems and issues. It is most commonly utilized amongst “nonprofits, for profit and public organizations” (Wohlstetter, Smith, & Malloy, 2005, p. 419).
Wohlstetter, Smith, and Malloy highlight the fact that the scholarly reviews revealed four basic elements, each theme with its unique concepts. 1. As alliances develop and progress they go through phases 2. Created to address an array of needs. 3. Require certain organizational structures and processes to operate. 4. External and internal factors influence the progress. Based on Wohlstetter, Smith, and Malloy’s combination of ideas three main phases which include: initiation, operations and evaluation occur in most strategic alliances. Noted that the degree and intensity in which collaboration occurs depends on the above noted elements. (Wohlstetter, Smith, & Malloy, 2005, p. 420)
Initiation Phase
Wohlstetter, Smith, and Malloy indicates that during the initiation phase companies conduct informal communications towards determining the purpose and issues one would seek collaboration. The research revealed internal characteristics that smooth the progress of this phase are champions to lead, complementary need and assets, goal compatibility and trust, but not characteristics are deemed necessary to be successful. However, the presence of more characteristics strengthens the likelihood that an alliance will be initiated. (pp. 420-421).
The champion was noted as an organizational member who possess a determined demeanor and resources to see the success of the alliance through. This is the individual that was outlined as the backbone of the strategic alliance. He/she gets the ball rolling and sees the alliance through any pitfalls, or hurdles as they may arise (Wohlstetter, Smith, & Malloy, 2005).
The article highlighted the variety of situations that would warrant an alliance. There are times when similar needs may not be the determining factor for an organization seeking alliance for but they may have complementary assets and needs. Meaning, an organization may have a week area such as staffing and unused office space; whereas, another company may no space to house a funded program with plenty of staff. Therefore, a strategic alliance would be a good fit and mutually beneficial. Yet another type of need would be compatible goals. One where the organization has similar goals and beliefs that once again produces mutually beneficial results to the same issue or problem (Wohlstetter, Smith, & Malloy, 2005).
As noted most alliances are formed come with a level of trust because most are initiated from existing connections. Noted that this pre-established relationship or knowledge of creates a strengthened ‘interorganizational trust” (p. 421).
Operations Phase
The operations phase was outlined as consisting of formal communications, clearly defined governance structure as well as open communication. The authors note that research suggests that alliance effectiveness can be ensured through an accountability plan encompassing the goals, structures and processes. Additionally, Wohlstetter, Smith, and Malloy note that leadership plays a vital role in the collaboration process and will assume three focal roles:(1) architects, creating the day to day task and responsibilities; (2) information broker, ensure information is disseminated all parties equitably; and (3) boundary spanners, is the go between with the external environment as well as de-escalating any miscommunications (p. 422).
Evaluation Phase
Wohlstetter, Smith, and Malloy soundly conveyed this final phase by deducing from research that both positive and negative influences, rather intended or not, will be realized during this phase. Thus, providing an opportunity for all parties to address any areas that may warrant improvement. Some other situations noted may warrant the decision to expand the alliance through an expansion of services and other collaborative partners. This phase may also warrant questions revolving around the pros and cons of the need of the service. “Is there really a need?” thus, no alliance is warrant because the data dictates it would not be advantageous to even seek an alliance (Wohlstetter, Smith, & Malloy, 2005).
The Purposed Study
Wohlstetter, Smith, and Malloy indicated that due to the lack of a model theory on alliance development a study was warranted to develop one. The authors chose to study the alliances between charter schools because the varied policies between States often prompted common alliances. Wohlstetter, Smith, and Malloy used a qualitative method of acquiring their data towards filtering the theory of evolution to a foundational model (2005, p. 436).
The data obtained was in alignment with previously noted research regarding the phases an alliance goes through. The articles findings also brought to surface how external and internal environment can shift the direction of an alliance. For example, during the initiation phase, the champion if not fully competent in their access to resources it could impede the success of establishing a collaborator. The study also brought to surface, despite the need for an accountability plan most of the alliances studied did not have one. This created a lot of internal encounters within the environment. The authors stressed the internal fluidity gained from incorporating memorandums of understanding and accountability plans (Wohlstetter, Smith, & Malloy, 2005).
Conclusion
One has learned from this article that when alliances are effectively managed, the participating organizations can gain several benefits that ultimately solve the problem or address the sought after need. The most important factor gleaned is that mutual trust and interdependency are important for cooperation to achieve a successful alliance. I have come to realize that strategic alliances are vital to sharing assets, building organizational infrastructure, raising visibility, and developing individual and community-level resilience.
Historically we as future and current social workers have worked within communities in a variety of roles serving vulnerable and oppressed populations; this has, created a need to develop partnerships among organizations through the use of the foundational model of strategic alliance evolution. In order to best meet the identified needs of groups of individuals and oppressed communities, we are duty bound to mobilize, sustain, and stabilize various groups in order to accurately meet the warranted need.

References
Wohlstetter, P., Smith, J., & Malloy, C. L. (2005). Strategic Alliances in Action: Toward a Theory of Evolution. The Policy Studies Journal, 33(3), 419-441.