A Community Capitals Approach to
Extension Networks and Partnerships
Resources for leaders to better understanD, develop, and leverage community capitals, university-community networks, and partner relationships
The following information was prepared for the 2025 JCEP Extension Leadership Conference.
Poster
9-page Resource
Introduction
By design, Extension engages with local, state, national, and international partners. These include:
- government agencies
- educational institutions
- businesses
- non-profit and philanthropic organizations
- faith-based entities
- neighborhood groups
- campus colleagues
Strategically investing in these formal and informal university-community relationships benefits individuals, families, businesses, and communities.
Various disciplines conceptualize university–community engagement through overlapping terms such as community partnerships, civic engagement, community outreach, scholarship of engagement, translational science, and participatory action research (Koekkoek, Van Ham & Kleinhans, 2021).
Multi-stakeholder partnerships that leverage diverse perspectives and resources are increasingly popular when addressing complex community challenges (Clarke & MacDonald, 2019). Creative collaboration requires a commitment to a shared vision; contribution of meaningful resources; unified movement toward a common goal; intentional and open communication; accountability (Ludwig, Andrews, & Ciccone, 2008) and operating as interdependent rather than altogether self-determinant (White, 2009).
Community Capitals
The Community Capitals Framework provides perspective on what matters to various stakeholders engaging in a shared approach to community complexities and change. This framework presents opportunities to recognize the interactive assets of social, human, financial, political, natural, built, and cultural capitals that are evident in communities and in the respective groups represented in the partnership (Emery & Flora, 2006). This provides opportunities for clear agreements, mobilizing resources, respectful reporting, and recognition of unique contributions. Institutional relationships with community partners are multilayered, often serving many purposes (Murtadha, 2016). In an increasingly networked society.
Community Capitals Worksheet
Throughout the year, Extension professionals engage in attracting and collaborating with multiple internal and external stakeholders. Each organization and community leader brings unique motivations, experiences, expectations, and resources to shared interests.This worksheet provides an outline for Extension teams to assess community networks, review interrelated stakeholder relationships, develop strategic partnerships, and reflect on network gaps and opportunities. This worksheet can be completed using software that accommodates customization.
Factors to Consider in Multistakeholder Networks
- Diversity
The presence of differences that may include race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, ethnicity, nationality, socioeconomic status, language, (dis) ability, age, religious commitment, political perspective, or other dimensions. - Equity
Unique resources and opportunities needed to reduce or eliminate the barriers that prevent others from fully participating in the network and achieving their desired outcomes. - Inclusion
Development of inclusive governing structures is one bridging strategy that institutions employ to facilitate meaningful exchanges with community partners (Bringle & Hatcher, 2000) - Privilege
Avoid dichotomous relationships in which universities privilege their own interests over those of the other multiple stakeholders in the community (Danley & Christiansen, 2019). - Power
In multi-stakeholder networks and initiatives, each partner, including Extension professionals, are only partly in control of the process as other stakeholders may be equally or even more influential (Roloff, 2008). Consider historical relationships with community partners, power relationships between campus and community, and background experiences of the network representatives (Maurrasse, 2001). - Reciprocity
A symbiotic relationship between the university and communities in a context of partnership and reciprocity (Carnegie, 2010). The focus on reciprocity is to unpack intention and commitment as well as exchanges of support, services, and resources (Murtadha, 2016).
Except from the Leadership in the City professional development program, https://urban-extension.cfaes.ohio-state.edu/leadership
Networking
-Network-Based Research in Entrepreneurship: A Decade in Review (2015)
-Network-Based Research in Entrepreneurship: A Critical Review (2003)
-Relationship-Based Approach to Leadership
-The Network Construct in Entrepreneurship Research: A Review and Critique (2001)
-Network Theory of Organization: A Multilevel Approach
-The Network Structure of Social Capital
-The Only Icebreaker You'll Ever Need
-Social Capital: Maturation of a Field of Research
-Human Capital, Social Capital, and Social Network Analysis: Implications for Strategic -Human Resource Management
-How to Diversify Your Professional Network
-How to Figure Out How Much Influence You Have a Work
-Social Intelligence and the Biology of Leadership (a Harvard Business video)
Partnerships
-A Multidisciplinary Collaborative Approach to a University-Community Partnerships
-Coming to Terms with the Public-Private Partnership
-Successful Partnerships, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
-Dispute Resolution Research Center (negotiation resources)
Collective Impact
-Collective Impact Forum
-Example - Strive Together
-Metropolitan Universities Journal, Vol 28 No 4 (2017): Issue on Collective Impact Strategies
-Executive Summary: When Collective Impact Has an Impact
-When Collective Impact Has an Impact (full report)
-Stanford Article on Second Generation Collective Impact
-Stanford Philanthropy as the Backbone of Collective Impact
-What Went Wrong: A Partnership Analysis Framework (by Campus Compact) Video
-Bringle, R. G., & Hatcher, J. A. (2000). Institutionalization of service learning in higher education. The journal of higher education, 71(3), 273-290.
-Bryson, J. M., & Alston, F. K. (2011). Creating your strategic plan: A workbook for public and nonprofit organizations (Vol. 3). John Wiley & Sons.
-Clarke, A., & MacDonald, A. (2019). Outcomes to partners in multi-stakeholder cross-sector partnerships: A resource-based view. Business & Society, 58(2), 298-332.
-Danley, S., & Christiansen, G. (2019). Conflicting responsibilities: The multi-dimensional ethics of university/community partnerships. Journal of Community Engagement and Scholarship, 11(2), 3.
-Emery, M., & Flora, C. (2006). Spiraling-up: Mapping community transformation with community capitals framework. Community Development, 37(1), 19-35.
-Koekkoek, A., Van Ham, M., & Kleinhans, R. (2021). Unraveling university-community engagement: A literature review. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 25(1).
-Kuenkel, P., & Aitken, A. (2015). Key factors for the successful implementation of stakeholder partnerships: The case of the African cashew initiative. The business of social and environmental innovation: New frontiers in Africa, 183-197.Ludwig, B. G., Andrews, D. W., & Ciccone, J. K. (2008). Engaged partners improve lives. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 12(3), 179–190.
-Ludwig, B. G., Andrews, D. W., & Ciccone, J. K. (2008). Engaged partners improve lives. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 12(3), 179–190.
-Maurrasse, D. J. (2001). Beyond the campus: How colleges and universities form partnerships with their communities. Routledge.
-Murtadha, K. (2016). Urban university community engagement: Questions of commitment to democratic ethics and social change. Journal of Community Engagement & Higher Education, 8(1).
-White, B. P. (2009). Navigating the Power Dynamics between Institutions and Their Communities. Kettering Foundation.