• Being connected to central agreements causes the social partners to take joint responsibility for implementing the agreements. These agreements are sometimes diffuse, but the joint responsibility of the Social Partners’ Council works against sub-optimisation by over-reliance on a single partner.
• Sharing responsibility for the organisation, its financing and operations, creates a deepened understanding of the respective social partners’ different rationalities; this might very well contribute to the ability to reach mutual agreements.
• The joint approach is very welcome by central government agencies since the work applies equally well to the local employers as well as the unions.
• The activities and tools delivered by the Social Partners’ Council are very popular and appreciated by local social partners.

But, there are some qualifications worth mentioning:

• The consensus model is time-consuming, which may slow down the tempo in which activities are delivered from new working areas. The need for consensus may also cause social partners with operational responsibilities to delegate their decisions upwards at times.
• The scope of the council’s operations is limited by the fact that these are closely steered by the social partners, which means that council issues may compete with other more traditional priorities.
• Although the financial contribution from the agencies is small, the money collected may grow to a level where opinions are expressed that they should be used for other purposes.