Roles for unilateral action in networks

Abstract

Purpose

Decision making in networks is multilateral and interaction‐based and is often contrasted with unilateral decision making in a hierarchy. The purpose of this paper is to examine whether unilateral interventions can nevertheless be functional in networks.

Design/methodology/approach

A large number of empirical studies into decision making in networks were consulted to examine whether they featured unilateral interventions and, if so, what the roles of these interventions were. Prior to this, the author outlines theories on decision making in networks and the dysfunctions of unilateral interventions.

Findings

Six strategies were found in which unilateral interventions proved effective in network‐like decision making. Unilateral action may be used to influence other actors' perceptions of the win‐win game, to change the pattern of interdependencies, as a follow‐up to failed interaction, if room is offered simultaneously, if there is a critical mass of winners and to de‐hierarchize decision making. These unilateral strategies were found to be embedded in interaction‐based, network‐like decision making. In some cases, they stimulated a process of interaction; in other cases, they resulted from a process of interaction.

Practical implications

The strategies show that decision making in networks benefits from the intelligent use of unilateral action.

Originality/value

The paper goes beyond the dichotomy between network and hierarchy and demonstrates that, on the interface of networks and hierarchies, there are many possibilities of developing strategies that – although unilateral – are network‐contingent.

Citation

de Bruijn, H. (2005), "Roles for unilateral action in networks", International Journal of Public Sector Management, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 318-329. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513550510599247