Inadequate or unclear communication

Sports clubs received many contacts from the City of Jyväskylä, the GSP consulting company and from the Hippos Developmental Company. For the clubs, it was not always clear who was leading the Hippos2020 project and who invited them into different meetings. In the very beginning, this caused some confusion among the clubs since they were unsure by what motives their opinions were asked. It was unclear whether it was the city’s project or a private project. This was before the clubs really started to understand what the Hippos2020 was about. Since the roles of the City of Jyväskylä, the GSP consulting company and the Hippos Developmental Company were clarified, the confusion among the third sector also disappeared. However, while the project moved forward, the clubs and especially the Central Finland Sport Federation, were invited into more meetings. At that point, the same questions were asked than in earlier meetings and this caused some frustration. (Härkönen 2018.) The frustration emerges as following:

“Musta tuntuu, että mä sanon samoja asioita. Olen sanonut tässä jo pari vuotta. Että mä aina mietin, että kun näitä kysytään uudestaan, niin eikö nämä ole jäänyt talteen nämä kommentit?

Mutta ehkä se on vaan semmoista, että varmistellaan ja katsotaan mihin suuntaan nyt mennään.” (Laura Härkönen, Central Finland Sport Federation.) [I feel like I’m saying the same things. I have said them already for a couple of years. So that I always think, when these are asked again, haven’t these comments been recorded? But maybe it’s just about such a securing and looking into what direction we are going to go now.]

Also the lack of time set some challenges for the communication. Since the third sector in sports is mainly voluntary-based in Jyväskylä and the clubs do not necessarily have fulltime employees, this set some challenges for the communication. The third sector representative named the lack of time as one practical problem in the communication between the public and private sectors. It is essential to mention here that the lack of time did not only appear in the Hippos2020 project but also in other liaisons. For voluntary-based clubs, it may be difficult to find common time to keep in touch with their partners, since the club employees usually work besides their own paid job and thus, do not have a possibility to transact during the normal office hours. On the other hand, those clubs who are already more professionalized, often have better communication relations with other sectors. The Central Finland Sport Federation has encouraged the clubs to first take care of their own businesses, and only after that consider the possibilities to cooperate with external partners. The cooperation is, after all, based on a two-way communication and reciprocity. (Härkönen 2018.)

The third sector agrees with the public and private sectors that the whole Hippos2020 project has been so complex and nontraditional so that it has taken a lot of time to proceed. Since no example or a model from previous projects exists, it is understandable that this kind of pioneer project takes time and resources. However, what has occupied the clubs, and most probably the residents as well is the absence of the plan B. The Central Finland Sport Federation pointed out that one weakness of the Hippos2020 project was that there was no plan B available, or at least it was not disclosed in public. If the project does not take place as it is planned, what happens then? A lot of money has been invested in the development of the Hippos area so this project would be worthwhile to be implemented. Otherwise, all the work has been futile. More information about the alternative options for Hippos2020 project would have been needed. (Härkönen 2018.)

The public sector responded to the question of plan B by reminding that there is always an option to completely renovate the old facilities. The life cycle of the current buildings is coming to its end so something has to be done for sure. If the Hippos2020 project did not happen, and the city loses the private investors, then the only option left would be that the city renovates the old buildings and perhaps builds something new. However, this is not a desirable option for anyone since then the amount of practicing spaces would not increase.

The representative of the city’s Business Development department supposed that the preferred plan B would have been to examine why the Hippos2020 project could not be implemented and what could be changed in order to make that plan work. Was there a possibility to improve the economic model of the project, the structural design of the model, or the terms of final users? If the City Council still showed a red light and nothing could be done, then the project would return back to the starting point where there exist only those old facilities that are under a need of renovation. (Halinen 2018.) The issue of the plan B is no longer a major problem since the City Council showed a green light for the project in May 2018. However, the final decision on the implementation of the project is still undone, so if the private investors decide cancel the deal, a new modified plan is needed.

10 TOWARDS A NEW FORM OF COLLABORATION

This chapter discusses the main results of the study by connecting them to the existing literature and previous researches. In addition, the key results are drawn into figures so that the reader could more easily understand the big picture of the Hippos2020 project. The chapter ends by concluding the unique characteristics of the planning of the Hippos2020 project.