We all know the childhood story of the race between the tortoise and the hare, which the latter lost.
In a reinterpretation of the story, the hare challenged the tortoise to another race. This time the hare won.
The story has been adapted again. It continues with the tortoise setting a course to its advantage — the trail now required the contestants to swim across a river — and dared the hare to another race.
As the hare could not swim, the tortoise won. Both then realised that if they had cooperated, they could have been joint winners.
So this time the hare started the race by carrying the tortoise on its back. When they came to the river bank, the hare rode piggyback on the tortoise and both finished the race together.
That is the power of collaboration: harnessing players' strengths for mutual gain.
In this spirit, Economy Minister Rafizi Ramli announced recently that the 13th Malaysia Plan (2026-2030) preparation would forge a deeper collaboration between the federal and state governments.
By this, Rafizi has given a rare flash of colour to federal-state relations.
This move, too, resonates with the remark by Helen Keller, a blind and deaf American author: "Alone, we can do so little; together, we can do so much."
This partnership will allow the sharing of resources while tearing down silos.
It will empower the states to contribute while promoting congeniality among them.
And it will greatly lighten the federal government's burden in developing and implementing the plan.
Having a goal is important. A collaboration with an ill-defined purpose will not engender trust among stakeholders and will lead to ineffective policy implementation.
It is good that the stakeholders have agreed on the noble purpose for their collaboration: to expand regional development and, thereby, reduce income inequality across states.
Forming this mission-led collaboration is the easier part. Managing it is hard.
For the new-found partnership to work well, the ministry and the states should focus on the following three areas.
FIRST, the collaboration should not blunt the ministry's leadership. The ministry has the duty to foster trust among the parties.
Greater transparency and regular communication during the planning process would ensure alignment of the interests of parties and that all views are integrated as best as possible.
However, when conflicts of opinion arise, the federal government must mediate.
This is crucial to ensure the collaboration stays on track.
Just because it holds the purse strings does not mean the federal government should be overbearing.
The traditional arrangements in developing plans would work better when the ministry fosters the involvement of the states on a collegiate basis.
This is because states can offer a better picture of the situation on the ground.
Their perspectives should shape the contours and content of the plan.
That will guarantee their buy-in and make the implementation promising.
SECOND, the initial round of engagements should be the start of discussions to put flesh on the bones of the proposals generated there.
The collaboration must be resilient enough to respond to feedback from the parties.
THIRD, political theory suggests that institutions, like individuals, seek to maximise their self-interest, believing it would also benefit the nation.
Such an argument harks back to Adam Smith. Considered the father of modern economics, Smith propounded that every man, motivated by self-interest, will activate the 'invisible hand' to promote the common good.
There is some truth to this assertion. However, having a seat at the table obliges states to transcend parochial interests.
Their interests should be subordinated to the larger interests of the nation.
By focusing on these critical areas, Rafizi's collaboration would certainly be sustainable. It should lead to a better plan and better outcomes.
And by putting federal-state collaboration on a firmer footing, other areas of cooperation, such as tackling climate change and deforestation, can be profitably pursued.
The writer is an adjunct professor at Perdana University
The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect those of the New Straits Times