Search results

This paper explores the characteristics and organisational attributes of hybrid non‐profit organisation (NPO)/public sector settings to identify the particular challenges presented for performance management and to further explore the extent to which such characteristics and attributes might impinge on a move to “performance governance” as a performance framework ideal type.

A preliminary case study of an Irish NPO/public sector hybrid organisation was used to ground a review of NPO and public sector performance management concepts and theoretical developments. The review focused on the implications of organisational characteristics/attributes of the hybrid case study organisation for performance management.

Five organisational characteristics/attributes are identified as central to the understanding of the challenges for performance management in such settings: inter‐stakeholder relationships; tensions across priority objectives; culture and institutional clashes; power distribution; and interdependent stress. Further, it is suggested that while the adoption of collaborative public sector models suggests a move toward performance governance, the performance challenges identified in the hybrid setting give rise to particular barriers to any substantive movement in that direction.

Performance of NPO/public sector hybrid organisations has only relatively recently attracted the attention of researchers. The paper contributes to this emerging area by identifying certain organisational characteristics/attributes particular to such hybrids that are critical to understanding the challenges for performance management in such settings.

Contemporary organisational landscapes offer opportunities for hybrids to thrive. Public–private partnerships (PPPs) are one thriving hybrid form incorporating the use of resources and/or structures from both public and private sectors. The study examines the impact of such a hybrid structure on governance and accountability mechanisms in a context of institutional complexity.

This study uses an approach that draws on institutional logics and hybridity to examine governance arrangements in the PPP policy created for the delivery of UK schools. Unusually, it employs a comparative case study of how four local governments implemented the policy. It draws on a framework developed by Polzer et al. (2017) to examine the level of engagement between multiple logics and hybrid structures and applies this to the delivery of governance and accountability for public money.

The Polzer et al. framework enables a study of how the nature of hybrids can vary in terms of their governance, ownership and control relations. The findings show how the relationships between levels of engagement of multiple logics and hybrid structures can impact on governance and accountability for public money. Layering and blending combinations led to increased adoption of private sector accountability structures, whilst a hybrid with parallel co-existence of community and market logics delivered a long-term governance structure.

The paper examines the operation of hybrids in a complex education PPP environment in only four local governments and therefore cannot provide representative answers across the population as a whole. However, given the considerable variation found across the four examples, the paper shows there can be significant differentiation in how multiple logics engage at different levels and in varying combinations even in the same hybrid setting. The paper focuses on capital investment implementation and its evaluation, so it is a limitation that the operational stage of PPP projects is not studied.

The findings have political relevance because the two local government bodies with more robust combinations of multiple logics were more successful in getting funds and delivering schools in their geographical areas.

The study extends Polzer et al.'s (2017) research on hybridity by showing that there can be significant differentiation in how multiple logics engage at different levels and in varying combinations even in what was planned to be the same hybrid setting. It shows how in situations of institutional complexity certain combinations of logics lead to differentiation in governance and accountability, creating fragmented focus on the related public accountability structures. This matters because it becomes harder to hold government to account for public spending.

Numerous of today's public sector organisations (PSOs) can be characterised as hybrids. Hybridity is caused by different (at times conflicting) demands that stem from the institutional environment, which is likely to affect performance measurement in these organisations. This paper focuses on the relationship between hybridity and organisational performance, which has so far not been studied in detail.

Based on a literature review (final sample of 56 articles), the authors systematise performance dimensions alongside the pillars “economy”, “efficiency”, “effectiveness” and “(social) equity”. The article summarises results in a framework for measuring performance in hybrid PSOs. The authors outline strategies as to how public managers can tailor frameworks to the requirements and idiosyncrasies of organisations.

Since hybrid PSOs combine logics from different administrative models (Weberian bureaucracy, market-capitalism and democracy), so need their organisational performance measurement systems. Potential synergies from and frictions between the different performance dimensions related to the four pillars are discussed.

This is the first literature review on performance dimensions and their application in hybrid PSOs. The distilled “hybrid performance measurement framework” can be scrutinised and further refined in future research.

This paper reports an investigation of a hybrid ex-state-owned enterprise (ex-SOE) providing ICT (Information and Communication Technology) services in the Italian healthcare sector (in-house provision). The authors aim to offer a framing that reflects the concerns expressed in the interdisciplinary literature on hybrid SOEs from management, public administration and, more recently, accounting.

This study operationalizes Besharov and Smith’s (2014) theoretical model on multiple logics to analyze institutional structures and organizational outcomes at an ICT in-house provider. It builds on extensive textual analysis of regulatory, archival, survey and interview data.

The study results show that the combination of hybridity in the form of layering of multiple logics in the health care sector (Polzer et al., 2016) creates problems for the effectiveness of ICT provision. In particular, the hybrid organization the authors study remained stuck in established competing relationships despite a restructure of regional health care governance. The study findings also reflect on the design of organizational control mechanisms when balancing different logics.

The identified case-study accountability practices and performance system add to the debate on hybrid organizations in the case of ex-SOEs and facilitate the understanding and management of hybrids in the public sector. The authors note policymaking implications.

The authors’ operationalization of Besharov and Smith's (2014) model adds clarity to key elements of their model, notably how to identify evidence in order to disentangle notions of centrality and compatibility. By doing this, the authors’ analysis offers potential insights into both managerial design and policy prescription. The authors provide cautionary tales around institutional reorganization regarding the layered synthesis of logics within these organizations.

This paper aims to systematically review the field of non-financial reporting (NFR) in hybrid organizations, focusing on state-owned enterprises, third-sector organizations and public–private partnerships. This is a timely attempt to identify the state of the art in the literature and outline the future research agenda. The paper answers two research questions: RQ1. What can be learned about NFR in hybrid organizations from the existing literature? RQ2. What are the future avenues for research on the topic?

A systematic literature review method was applied in this paper to summarize evidence from extant literature on NFR in hybrid organizations. The Scopus and Web of Science Core Collection databases were used to locate 92 articles for the review.

Recent years have witnessed a sharp increase in the number of articles on the topic. Regarding the implications of NFR for hybrid characteristics, NFR has some potential to strengthen the influence of non-market (i.e. state, community and social) logics in hybrid organizations. However, this potential may be limited due to the effect of market logics and the tensions that arise between the multiple logics in hybrid organizations. Regarding the implications of hybrid characteristics for NFR, these characteristics can not only affect the extent, the quality, the likelihood and the institutionalization of NFR but also result in the development of new NFR frameworks. The review calls for more research on the implications of NFR for multiple institutional logics and the implications of these logics for NFR in hybrid organizations.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first literature review that mobilizes insights from hybridity research to analyze NFR literature on diverse hybrid organizations.

This paper aims to explore the financial and non-financial accountability disclosure patterns of state-owned enterprises (SOEs), as hybrid organizations.

Adopting the hybridity concept and resorting to stakeholder theory, this paper works on a comparison between the accountability disclosure patterns of hybrid and private organizations operating in the same industry. European national news agencies are selected as units of analysis and an extensive web content analysis is performed on three categories of information.

SOEs are found to disclose a broader spectrum of information than private organizations, and differences between them have been found. Nevertheless, both financial and non-financial disclosures are underdeveloped in the two organizational types.

This paper illustrates how hybridity explains SOEs’ accountability disclosure patterns. Results could not be complemented through information on disclosure through alternative channels. Future studies are encouraged to perform simultaneous comparisons among hybrid, public and private organizations, as well as considering industry specifics.

As web accountability disclosure helps to address the demands of distant stakeholders, efforts are needed to enhance SOEs’ web accountability disclosures and not to undermine democratic accountability relationships.

This paper contributes to the ongoing debate on the accountability mechanisms and style of SOEs. Using a framework for hybrid organizations provides an understanding of how SOEs, as hybrid organizations, disclose information for accountability. In turn, this allows, and then promotes, the investigation of social phenomena by conceiving hybridity as a standalone institutional space.

In addressing policy problems, it is difficult to disentangle public policies from private efforts, business institutions and civic activities. Societies may acknowledge that all these domains have a role in accomplishing social aims, but there are fundamental problems in understanding why, how and with what implications this occurs. Drawing upon the insights from the papers of this special issue, the authors aim to advance the understanding of governance and accountability in different contexts of hybridity, hybrid governance and organizations.

The authors conceptualize common theoretical origins of hybrid organizations and the ways in which they create and enact value by reflecting on the articles of the special issue. Furthermore, the authors propose agendas for future research into hybrid organizations.

Hybrid organizations can be conceptualized through two types of lenses: (1) the dimensions of hybridity (ownership, institutional logics, funding and control) and (2) their approaches to value creation (mixing, compromising and legitimizing).

This article provides more detailed and comprehensive understanding of hybridity. This contribution has also important practical implications for actors, such as politicians, managers, street-level bureaucrats, professionals, auditors and accountants who may be enveloped in various hybrid settings, policy contexts and multi-faceted interfaces between public, private and the civil society sector.

Hybridity lenses reveal novel connections between four types of hybrid institutional contexts: state-owned enterprises (SOEs), non-profit organizations (NPOs), social enterprises (SEs) and municipally owned corporations (MOCs). This paper provides theoretical instruments for doing so.

Drawing upon theoretical insights on value creation perspectives, the authors aim to advance the understanding of performance and accountability in different hybrid organisations.

The authors conceptualise common theoretical origins of hybrid organisations and how they create and enact value, by reflecting on the Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal (AAAJ) special issue articles. Furthermore, the authors propose an agenda for future research into accounting, performance and accountability for hybrid organisations.

Hybrid organisations can be conceptualised through their approaches to value creation (mixing, compromising and legitimising). This article provides a more detailed understanding of accounting, performance and accountability changes in hybrid organisations.

This contribution also has relevant practical implications for actors, such as politicians, managers, professionals, auditors, controllers and accountants, encased in various hybrid organisations, policy contexts and multi-faceted interfaces between public, private and civil society.

Hybridity lenses reveal novel connections between different types of hybrid organisations and how they create and enact multiple values.

This paper aims to make sense of the social enterprise in a frame of social procurement and conceptualise it as a provider of public welfare based on bibliometric material. Comprehensively, it contributes to developments in social procurement, which has received limited attention.

Scoping literature from Web of Science and using bibliometric methods, the paper identifies and qualitatively explores the literary intersections between social enterprise and social procurement.

Of the 183 articles, four literary clusters are revealed illustrating scholarly intersections and a detailed exploration of social enterprise as a public provider. The alignment and themes of the clusters further indicate the application of, and role played by, social enterprise in social procurement. Collectively, they reveal the dominance of social enterprise in this dyadic relationship and a minor undertaking of research in social procurement.

This “sense-making” groundwork forms a foundational step in developing our understanding of procurements through social enterprises. Furthermore, a positioning and conceptualisation of social enterprise accredits their utility and applicability in delivering public benefits. In this way, the paper informs and supports scholarly and practice-based interest into social enterprises for the delivery of public services.

The paper presents the first bibliometric conceptualisation of social enterprise in relation to social procurement and offers detailed insights through the bibliometric clusters. Furthermore, the paper contributes to the underdeveloped social dimension of procurement and bridges the gap between two distinct fields of scholarship: public management and administration and social entrepreneurship.

The article seeks to explain whether and how value-based healthcare principles lead to hybridization. The public management literature has been increasingly interested in hybrid forms of governance and hybrid performance management, but empirical studies are still rare. Further, the article studies the design of performance management and accounting systems as healthcare organizations reorganize their care processes applying value-based healthcare principles.

This article first connects the theoretical discussions on value-based healthcare and performance management for hybrids. The conceptual understanding of performance management in hybrid healthcare uses a case study of a Finnish healthcare organization with documentary data and transcribed interviews with healthcare professionals from both the strategic and operative levels of healthcare.

The article illustrates and analyses how new policy-level objectives and principles of value-based healthcare led to hybridity in healthcare, manifest in mixed ownership of a particular care path and new forms of social and financial control. Further, the article provides empirical evidence of how increased hybridity necessitated new organizational modes and roles, new managerial tools for performance management and created a need to develop the capability to account and measure entire integrated care processes. Important enabling factors for the integration of care and hybrid performance management were commitment created in dialogue, voluntary-based trust and technology to generate factual shared information.

The study is informative for stakeholders, funders and managers of healthcare organizations, namely new knowledge for the discussion of hybrid governance in healthcare, including a critical account of the applicability and impact of a hybrid service model in healthcare management. Moreover, the article illustrates what needs to be reconsidered in performance management and accounting practices when reorganizing care processes according to the principles of value-based healthcare.

The article extends the analysis of performance management in hybrids and sheds new light on hybridization in healthcare. It also provides much-needed empirical evidence on the processes and practices of accounting and performance management after implementing a value-based healthcare strategy.