Table 3.

Facilitating and Hindering Factors, Definitions, and Frequencies

Factor	Definition	Frequency (%)
Facilitating Factors (n = 12)
Trust between partners	Partners have faith in the honesty, integrity, reliability, and/or competence of one another. Partners are comfortable sharing because they believe that the sensitive information that they provide in the collaboration will remain in the group.	16 (29.6%)
Respect among partners	Partners honor and value one another's opinions. Partners are careful to ensure that each member is able to share his or her beliefs.	16 (29.6%)
Shared vision, goals, and/or mission	Partners share the same identified vision or values. Partners identify the same goals or mission for CAP.	14 (25.9%)
Good relationship between partners	Partners work well together, form a cohesive group and strong reciprocal relationship, get along well, or like one another.	13 (24.1%)
Effective and/or frequent communication	Partners engage in ongoing communication that is open and respectful. Communication encompasses personal and professional matters.	13 (24.1%)
Well‐structured meetings	Meetings are held with satisfactory or effective frequency. The logistics of the meetings facilitate productivity, satisfaction, effectiveness, partnership, opportunities to interact, etc. (eg, food available, formality/lack of formality at meetings). The style of the meeting is satisfactory (eg, face‐to‐face, telephone, web‐based).	10 (18.5%)
Clearly differentiated roles/functions of partners	Each partner has a specific role in the group that contributes to its progress. CAP has a specific group structure with different roles for different partners.	8 (14.8%)
Good quality of leadership	The leader is a person with strong and experienced leadership skills. The leader is open, listens, and takes suggestions into consideration. The leader cares about members of the group.	6 (11.1%)
Effective conflict resolution	Conflicts are discussed and resolved openly by partners. The team develops as it deals with problems, tensions, and frustrations.	5 (9.3%)
Good selection of partners	The “right” people are selected to be a part of the collaborative group. The personality characteristics of partners contribute to the CAP's success.	3 (5.6%)
Positive community impact	Partners perceive the group as having/will have a positive impact on the community.	3 (5.6%)
Mutual benefit for all partners	All partners benefit from the group's progress. Benefit may be different, but all receive some benefit.	2 (3.7%)
Hindering Factors (n = 11)
Excessive time commitment	Partners leave the group, want to leave the group, or the CAP does not function well because the time the partners have to spend collaborating is too long.	12 (22.2%)
Excessive funding pressures or control struggles	Partners struggle over control of funding. CAP experiences external pressures from funding sources related to decisions, CAP outcomes, or its progress.	9 (16.7%)
Unclear roles and/or functions of partners	Many or all of the partners do not know what their role in the group is supposed to be. Partners are not assigned any roles and therefore do not know how they can best contribute to the CAP.	8 (14.8%)
Poor communication among partners	CAP has limited or unclear methods of communication. Partners experience difficulty maintaining communication.	7 (13%)
Inconsistent partner participation or membership	Partners attend meetings inconsistently. CAP membership is inconsistent, with attrition or turnover in partnering agencies/organizations or individuals.	6 (11.1%)
High burden of activities/ tasks	Some, many, or all members are dissatisfied with the amount of work they have to do in order to sustain the CAP. Partners are dissatisfied because the tasks they have to complete are boring, expensive, not meaningful, or otherwise upsetting.	5 (9.3%)
Lack of shared vision, goals, and/or mission	The CAP has an unclear or undefined vision, goals, values, or mission. Partners have different agendas/vision for the CAP.	5 (9.3%)
Differing expectations of partners	Struggles emerge because not all members expect the same structure, procedures, and/or outcomes.	4 (7.4%)
Mistrust among partners	Partners do not have faith in one another's honesty, integrity, reliability, and/or competence. Partners are uncomfortable sharing because they believe that the sensitive information that they provide in the CAP will not remain in the group.	4 (7.4%)
Lack of common language or shared terms among partners	Partners lack common terms or definitions related to the topic of interest or work of the CAP. Partners lack a shared understanding of the terms used.	4 (7.4%)
Bad relationship	Partners do not value one another's opinions. Partners make no effort to ensure that each member is able to share his or her beliefs.	2 (3.7%)