Skip to main content
Helikon Labs
Sign inStart free

Tools & Assessments · Steward

Partnership Health Check

Scores an active partnership on six dimensions, compares both sides' ratings and flags which dimensions need intervention, for partnership leads on both sides.

$147

Buy now, $147

Have a code, for example from a workshop? Enter it on the checkout page under “Add promotion code”.

Helikon Method phase
Steward
License
Single-organization license, for internal use. Non-refundable once downloaded; see the terms.

Scores an active partnership on six dimensions, compares both sides' ratings, and flags which dimensions need intervention, for partnership leads on both sides.

What it does

Research partnerships rarely fail all at once. Small problems build up, each side notices different ones, and by the time anyone raises them the relationship is already strained. In our experience, annual reviews miss this, because each organization reviews the partnership only from its own side.

The Partnership Health Check gives both partners a structured way to take stock of a partnership that's already running. Each side rates the partnership on 30 plain statements across six dimensions: strategic alignment, relationship quality, operational effectiveness, innovation output, financial performance, and sustainability. A rating guide describes what a low, middle, and high rating means for every statement, so the ratings mean the same thing to both sides.

The workbook turns those ratings into a health score for each dimension and for the partnership overall, places each one in a band from Healthy to Critical, recommends what to do next and how often to check back in, and names the specific statements pulling the score down. When the two sides exchange ratings, it shows where you agree, where you see things differently, and which differences to discuss first. Your annual review can then focus on the few things that matter rather than on status updates, and the Intervention Plan records who owns each fix. If you also use our Escalation and Conflict Resolution Protocol, the recommended responses for the weakest bands line up with its escalation path. Run it every year and you can see whether the partnership is getting healthier.

Who it's for

Partnership leadership on both sides: the university's alliance lead and the corporate partnership manager. Each side completes its own copy, exchanges its 30 ratings, and the debrief starts where the Joint View says the scores diverge.

What's inside, sheet by sheet

  • Cover and Instructions: who should take part, when to run it, and the steps from rating to joint debrief.
  • Rating Guide: what a weak, middling, and strong rating looks like for each of the 30 statements. The same guidance appears on screen as you rate.
  • Assessment: the 30 statements, grouped by dimension, where each side records its ratings and notes. One line lists your ratings in order, ready to send to your partner.
  • Joint View: your ratings beside your partner's, with the differences that matter most highlighted and both profiles on one chart, so the debrief starts in the right place.
  • Dashboard: the one-page result for your side: a score and status for each dimension, the recommended response, the weakest statements and a profile chart.
  • Intervention Plan: the dimensions that need attention, already listed, with space to agree actions, owners, due dates, and progress.
  • History: this year's scores beside the ones you carry over from earlier years, so you can show whether the partnership is improving.
  • Methodology and Sample: the research behind the six dimensions, the limits of the tool, and a worked example with both sides' ratings and results.

What you need to use it

Excel or a compatible spreadsheet app, and a working knowledge of the partnership's governance, outputs, finances and people. There are 30 ratings per assessor plus optional notes, and 30 more if you enter your partner's ratings for the Joint View.

The methodology and the sources it cites

The dimensions extend the four-perspective Balanced Scorecard (Kaplan, Norton and Rugelsjoen, 2010) with two research-partnership layers. The band thresholds and the rule for flagging a disagreement are Helikon Labs practitioner judgment, not statistically validated; the case for acting early draws on Ariño and Doz (2000). The file also cites Kale, Dyer and Singh (2002), De Backer and Rinaudo (2019), Pertuzé, Calder, Greitzer and Lucas (2010), Mora-Valentín, Montoro-Sánchez and Guerras-Martín (2004) and Simons (2000). The bands are fixed thresholds, not a comparison with other partnerships.

Where it sits in the Helikon Method

Steward phase (execution and governance), built from The Helikon Method, Designing Win-Win Collaborations. Run it on the partnership anniversary, and mid-cycle if performance drops sharply.

Not included in a workshop; the related one is our Stewarding the Partnership workshop. It belongs to our Execution and Governance Bundle and our Assessment Suite, rolling out in batches as tools go live.

License

Single-organization internal-use license: your organization may use it internally without seat limits, and may not resell or redistribute it. The licensed organization may give one copy of the workbook to the counterparty organization of the partnership being assessed, for use on that partnership only.

Sources

Related