Mobilising strategic alliances with community organisations to address work-related mental injury: a qualitative study guided by collaboration theory

BackgroundA critical policy issue in Australia and worldwide is the escalating rates of work-related mental injury that have been linked to the lack of help-seeking behaviours of at-risk workers. Strategic alliances between community organisations, statutory bodies, and mental health service providers could expand the efficacy and reach of mental health literacy and peer support initiatives that can encourage help-seeking, however, there is limited evidence to support the development of such approaches. This study used a qualitative design based on collaboration theory to explore the factors influencing community organisation leaders' decisions to provide such initiatives through collaboration with relevant third parties.MethodsRepositories of submissions into mental health reviews and publicly available registers in Australia were used to identify twenty-two participant organisations (n = 22), which were categorised according to the International Classification of Non-Profit Organisations (Culture & Recreation, Social Services, and Development & Housing). Eleven of these organisations demonstrated an interest in collaborating with third parties and extending efforts to deliver work-related mental health initiatives through contributions to mental health reviews. Leaders were interviewed to understand differences in perspectives on potential collaborations.ResultsOrganisations that did not make submissions were reluctant to engage in such efforts due to limitations in expertise/capacity, and perceived mission misalignment. Third-party support from statutory bodies and mental health service providers addressing these perceived limitations may improve their confidence, and willingness to engage. Regardless of their category, all considered the benefit of such collaboration included improving the acceptability, approachability, availability, and efficacy of work-related mental health initiatives. Equity was seen as supporting decision-making/leadership, while power imbalance was a barrier. Third-party contributions that could facilitate collaboration included expert support/credibility, administration, formal structures, supportive policy, and joining networks, however, red tape was a challenge. Shared values, vision, practice, and networking were identified as supporting positive communication and interpersonal relations.ConclusionThe study establishes that, adequately supported and resourced, community organisations are willing to align strategically with statutory bodies and mental health service providers to use their unique position in the community to deliver work-related mental health literacy and peer support programmes for at-risk workers to improve help-seeking behaviours. This is the first study that used a qualitative approach guided by collaboration theory to explore the motivations influencing Community Organisation (CO) leaders' decisions to work with statutory bodies and mental health service providers and deliver programmes aimed to improve workers' access to mental health literacy resources and peer support.Understanding the beliefs that differentiate COs that provided submissions into mental health reviews from those that did not is imperative in the design of effective strategies to facilitate future engagement.The use of a theory-based decision-making model (the Strategic Alliances Framework) was critical in determining the scale, and types of initiatives that different categories of COs may be able to provide, and potential levels of engagement with relevant third parties.COs must be adequately guided, resourced, and supported by statutory bodies/regulators and organisations with mental health expertise if they are to meet the contemporary needs of their communities and achieve impact beyond work-related mental health awareness raising.