Formal and informal public participation processes in the United States favour those that are willing to take more public and visible stances. Government will react, either positively or negatively, to those that speak up. Depending on the manner community leaders emerge, their strategies may accurately or inaccurately reflect the views and priorities of their constituency. These leaders manage the process of selecting issues, articulating positions and defining strategies and tactics on behalf of their constituents. However, these leaders sometimes are not accountable, and their constituents lack the means to reclaim the agenda.
True collaboration requires some shared values, philosophies or approaches.
Typically, elected officials and community organizations that share basic philosophies and approaches can work in a collegial, collaborative environment to set priorities and negotiate trade-offs. As the case studies illustrated, the Washington administration worked with certain volunteer groups that shared similar approaches and philosophies. Yet the same administration, because of competing interests and institutional constraints, could not completely support the agenda, and even acted against the interests of the constituency in certain cases. The current administration may philosophically agree with the needs of different constituencies. Its policies may be carried out through different approaches or based on differing priorities with which some of these groups disagree.