While public–private partnerships have become increasingly popular for delivering large-scale public infrastructure around the world, a common critique is that the structure of the relationship is typically more akin to contracting out than a truly meaningful collaboration between the partners. In this paper we aim to demonstrate how innovative public–private partnership models can be designed to deepen cooperation and deliver project outcomes that are better than any one partner could achieve on their own. To support our argument, we analyze the case study of a novel partnership between the Toronto District School Board and a condominium developer to redevelop a public high school in Toronto. Our results show that a process management orientation to partnership can build trust between the partners, effectively share project risks, and foster the public support necessary to realize controversial projects.
BedardG JLawionS B (2000) “The struggle for power and control: shifting policy-making models and the Harris Agenda for Education in Ontario”. Canadian Public Administration43: 241–269
2.
BeisheimMCampeS (2012) “Transnational public–private partnerships’ performance in water governance: institutional design matters”. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy30: 627–642
3.
BovairdT (2004) “Public–private partnerships: from contested concepts to prevalent practice”. International Review of Administrative Sciences70: 199–215
4.
EdelenbosJKlijnE-H (2009) “Project versus process management in public–private partnership: relation between management style and outcomes”. International Public Management Journal12: 310–331
5.
EdelenbosJTeismanG R (2008) “Public–private partnership: on the edge of project and process management. Insights from Dutch practice: the Sijtwende spatial development project”. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy26: 614–626
6.
FlyvbjergB (2006) “Five misunderstandings about case-study research”. Qualitative Inquiry12: 219–245
7.
ForrerJKeeJ ENewcomerK EBoyerE (2010) “Public–private partnerships and the public accountability question”. Public Administration Review70: 475–484
8.
GrimseyDLewisM K (2005) “Are public–private partnerships value for money? Evaluating alternative approaches and comparing academic and practitioner views”. Accounting Forum29: 345–378
9.
HealdD (2003) “Value for money tests and accounting treatment in PFI schemes”. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal16: 342–371
10.
HodgeGGreveC (2010) “Public–private partnerships: governance scheme or language game? ”. Australian Journal of Public Administration69: S8–S22
11.
HurstCReevesE (2004) “An economic analysis of Ireland’s first public–private partnership”. International Journal of Public Sector Management17: 379–388
12.
HuxhamCVangenS (2000) “What makes partnerships work?”. In: OsborneS (eds) Public–Private Partnerships: Theory and Practice in International Perspective, London: Routledge, pp. 293–310
13.
KhadarooI (2008) “The actual evaluation of school PFI bids for value for money in the UK public sector”. Critical Perspectives on Accounting19: 1321–1345
MantelS J (2005) Core Concepts of Project Management, 2nd. New York: Wiley
16.
MeredithJ RMantelS J (2000) Project Management: A Managerial Approach, 4th. New York: Wiley
17.
Penny S, 2012, “Building great schools for the 21st century”, presentation given at the Ontario Public School Boards’ Association, Central East Meeting, 24 March; copy available from authors
18.
Public Works Financing (2010) “2010 international survey of public–private partnerships”. Public Works Financing Newsletter253: 1–20
19.
ReevesE (2008) “The practice of contracting in public–private partnerships: transaction costs and relational contracting in the Irish school sector”. Public Administration86: 969–986
20.
ReevesERyanJ (2007) “Piloting public–private partnerships: expensive lessons from Ireland’s schools sector”. Public Money and Management27: 331–337
21.
ReganMSmithJLoveP (2010) “Infrastructure procurement: learning from private–public partnership experiences ‘down under’ ”. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy29: 363–378
22.
ShaoulJStaffordAStapletonP (2010) “Financial black holes: the disclosure and transparency of privately financed roads in the UK”. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal23: 229–255
23.
SiemiatyckiM (2007) “What’s the secret? The application of confidentiality in the planning of infrastructure using private–public partnerships”. Journal of the American Planning Association73: 388–403
