Search results

Governance network managers are charged with triggering and sustaining collaborative dynamics, but often struggle to do so because they come from and interact with hierarchical and competitive organizations and systems. Thus, an important step toward effectively managing governance networks is to clarify collaborative dynamics. While the recently proposed collaborative governance regime (CGR) model provides a good start, it lacks both the conceptual clarity and parsimony needed in a useful analytical tool. This theoretical chapter uses the logic model framework to assess and reorganize the CGR model and then amends it using Follett’s theory of integrative process to provide a parsimonious understanding of collaborative dynamics, as opposed to authoritative coordination or negotiated cooperation. Uniquely, Follett draws from political and organizational theory practically grounded in the study of civic and business groups to frame the manner in which integrative process permeates collaboration. We argue that the disposition, style of relating, and mode of association in her integrative method foster collaborative dynamics while avoiding the counterproductive characteristics of hierarchy and competition. We develop an alternative logic model for studying collaborative dynamics that clarifies and defines these dynamics for future operationalization and empirical study.

Evidence suggests that networking can be beneficial to enhance learning in challenging contexts, when there is a shared purpose, trustful relationships, and the development of meaningful collaborative practices. In Chile, the adoption of collaborative network practices has faced some challenges due to the long history of neoliberal policies characterised by hierarchical and market governance that promotes competition over collaboration among schools. Using Hood’s (1998) cohesion/regulation matrix, the Chilean education system can be characterized as fatalist, where cooperation among peers is mandated solely to meet external requirements to regulate schools’ and practitioners’ practice. However, in recent years, collaborative projects have been implemented that are framed and supported in an egalitarian culture, highlighting the importance and value of collaboration and support among peers to develop effective teaching practice. By analysing three experiences of networking in Chile, we identify two barriers for networking, distrust and isolation, and analyze the ways in which these networks attempted to overcome them to sustain effective collaboration. The first experience describes the implementation of the collaborative inquiry networks (CIN) methodology. This programme was designed to facilitate the development of networked leadership capacities of principals and curriculum coordinators to support teachers’ practices during COVID-19 in one municipality (Pino-Yancovic & Ahumada, 2020). In the second, we report on a group of principals who developed focussed interventions in their network of urban primary public schools to enhance the exchange of knowledge and practices among network participants. The third centres on the development of a model to enhance teacher leadership and professional learning in Initial Teacher Education through collaboration in a university–school partnership. Finally, we present some lessons to be considered in similar social and policy environments to successfully introduce a collaborative networked approach.

This study aims to understand the extent to which scholarly networks are connected both in person and through information and communication technologies, and in particular, how distance, disciplines, and motivations for participating in these networks interplay with the clusters they form. The focal point for our analysis is the Graphics, Animation and New Media Network of Centres of Excellence (GRAND NCE), a Canadian scholarly network in which scholars collaborate across disciplinary, institutional, and geographical boundaries in one or multiple projects with the aid of information and communication technologies. To understand the complexity in such networks, we first identified scholars’ clusters within the work, want-to-meet, and help networks of GRAND and examined the correlation between these clusters as well as with disciplines and geographic locations. We then identified three types of motivation that drove scholars to join GRAND: practical issues, novelty-exploration, and networking. Our findings indicate that (1) scholars’ interests in the networking opportunities provided by GRAND may not easily translate into actual interactions. Although scholars express interests in boundary-spanning collaborations, these mostly occur within the same discipline and geographic area. (2) Some motivations are reflected in the structural characteristics of the clusters we identify, while others are irrelevant to the establishment of collaborative ties. We argue that institutional intervention may be used to enhance geographically dispersed, multidisciplinary collaboration.

This chapter provides a comprehensive, yet, concise overview of the existing debates on policy networks. The aim of the chapter is to identify those mechanisms that encourage network collaboration among several stakeholders with different motivations, interests, and preferences throughout different stages of policy making from agenda setting to policy evaluation. A systematic review of previous studies on policy networks across various countries highlights the achievements and missing links in the literature, and at the same time, reveals three sets of causal mechanisms, which are crucial to understand Network Collaborative Capacity (NCC) along the structural, relational, and institutional dimensions. Structural and relational mechanisms explain the internal dynamics of a policy network; whereas institutional mechanisms consist of all those external factors in the broader political and economic environment within which the network is embedded. Structural, relational, and institutional mechanisms are further classified into constituting elements that serve as a blueprint for organizing and managing collaborative efforts at the network level. Ultimately this chapter contributes to the existing governance debates by offering an integrated framework for the study of NCC across country cases and policy sectors. Turkish health sector represents a case study to assess the applicability of this framework beyond the context of advanced industrialized economies and democracies with a tradition in collaborative policy making. Finally, the added value of comparative network analysis at the national and sub-national levels will be discussed.

This chapter examines factors that maximize collaboration among various stakeholders with the purpose of health policy making in Turkey. The field research reveals that policy networks have been formed in the sub-areas of public health, healthcare construction, and health tourism in the years between 2011 and 2015. Content analysis of 24 semi-structured interviews with policy and professional experts is conducted to assess Network Collaborative Capacity, built upon three dimensions, namely, structural, relational, and institutional. The findings reveal that networks differ in their capacity to collaborate as well as their impact on policy making resulting in three distinct models of network policy making. In the cases under investigation, network impact takes the form of (a) policy innovation through expertise sharing and evidence-based policy making associated with particularly high levels of relational capacity; (b) policy effectiveness through contract enforcement within a clear legal framework associated with particularly high levels of institutional capacity; and (c) policy coherence through organizational-knowledge-sharing and actor coordination. Findings also suggest that institutionalization in the form of network embeddedness in the surrounding political and economic environment is crucial for maintaining a collaborative momentum as well as achieving policy effectiveness at the stage of policy implementation. Based on these findings, further studies should focus on the institutionalization of policy networks, particularly in those middle-income countries such as Turkey that aim and often fail to address various policy challenges through short-lived practices of multi-stakeholder action. Finally, this study emphasizes the importance of incorporating neo-institutional approaches to network analysis.

Purpose: Provide insights on how social entrepreneurship (SE) knowledge can be more effectively generated by universities through the entrepreneurial creation and effective management of a knowledge network centered on international collaborative research; illuminate how one such network has enabled Latin American researchers to advance the knowledge and practice frontiers in the hemisphere and globally. Methodology/Approach: Retrospective analysis of the two-decade evolution of the Social Enterprise Knowledge Network, a pioneering international research collaboration (IRC) of Ibero-American management schools. Findings: Documents factors and dynamics enabling the successful creation and operation of international knowledge networks. Analyzes the key mechanisms for capturing synergies in collaborative research. Identifies specific effectiveness determinants for successfully operating an international social enterprise knowledge generation network. Identifies multiple impacts of a knowledge generation network. Research Implications: Advances understanding of IRCs. Provides a model for assessing knowledge network multiple impacts. Identifies a series of future research opportunities and needs. Practical Implications: Provides operational guidance for researchers developing or operating collaborative international knowledge networks. Social Implications: Reveals the value of collaboration in international research and factors that contribute to effective collaboration. Originality/Value: Provides unique retrospective study of an IRC network operated by developing country schools of management. Expands the scope of recent comparative research on SE education to include a set of countries in Ibero-America. Documents an approach to assessing the impacts of a knowledge network. Identifies important areas for advancing future social enterprise research and teaching.

Chapter 6 focuses on cultures of collaboration and explains how collaborative cultures are essential to developing networked intelligence in any organization. The authors explain how collaborative cultures relate to three critical business processes: trust, risk, and critical thinking. The chapter addresses how important collaborative cultures are to developing these capabilities in knowledge organizations and the knowledge economy. How collaborative cultures help organizations to become more resilient and adaptable to the hyperdynamic change at the core of the knowledge economy is also explained. And how collaborative cultures help organizations to maintain and sustain their business performance in chaotic environments is also addressed.

This chapter provides an overview of the value and management of collaborative innovation in the development of library services. Open or collaborative innovation is innovation that bridges organizational boundaries. It discusses key aspects of interorganizational innovation and its application in libraries, namely the essence of innovation, the imperative for collaborative innovation, choosing partners and innovation networks, successful management of collaborative innovation, and the barriers to collaborative innovation and their management. It is argued that innovation is pivotal to survival and success in dynamic and complex organizational environments. Increasingly organizations are seeking to pool resources and enter into collaborative alliances in order to achieve large-scale, radical, paradigm innovations. However, the success of such alliances is not guaranteed, and is dependent not only on choosing the right partners but also on the leadership and management of innovation teams, having an understanding of the challenges of collaborative knowledge creation, and negotiating organizational and interorganizational barriers to innovation. While library and information literature has seen much discussion of innovations in terms of the outputs of innovation processes, there has been little discussion of the innovation processes needed to achieve new service developments, and other innovations. This chapter encourages information professionals to think strategically about innovation activities, specifically the management of the performance of collaborative or open innovation.

This study is an attempt to (a) introduce Turkey as a country case with statist policy tradition and authoritarian political culture, yet, a growing importance of cross-sectoral collaboration in various policy areas, as an opportunity to conduct network research beyond advanced democracies (Chapter 1); (b) develop an integrated framework for the study of policy networks across country cases and policy settings at the sub-national level through the utilization of Network Collaborative Capacity Index (Chapter 2); (c) trace the contextual conditions that led to the formation of policy networks within the health sector from 2011 to 2015 in Turkey (Chapter 3); (d) examine those mechanisms that maximize collaboration along the structural, relational, and institutional dimensions of networks (Chapter 4); and (d) assess the cultural and structural impediments that inhibit cross-sectoral arrangements from becoming collaborative and influencing policy processes and outcomes (Chapter 5). This concluding chapter focuses on the theoretical significance as well as the practical effectiveness of the policy networks under consideration in an attempt to link the local practice of network collaboration with more general theories of governance.