Search results

Collaborations and partnerships that span economic sectors heighten the complexity of decision-making processes and introduce challenges for structuring collective action. As hybrid organizations designed for cooperation, multi-sector partnerships involving firms from the private, public, and nonprofit industries are more likely to utilize a platform of open strategy than their single-sector counterparts. Through studying the decision-making process of multi-sector partnerships, the purpose of this paper is to suggest that the formative extra-organizational boundary conditions of these partnerships create fertile ground for a platform of open strategy.

This manuscript presents a thorough analysis of the literature regarding multi-sector partnerships and the construct of open strategy to consider the importance of goal interdependence and strategic openness in the strategic decision-making process. The combination of these research streams results in a theoretical model of open strategy to be validated in the multi-sector partnership context.

Partnerships that span multiple market sectors (multi-sector partnerships (MSPs)) are often founded on cooperation as opposed to competition and this fundamental distinction impacts organizational strategy and, more specifically, the manner in which strategic decisions are made. As proposed, the open strategy process model outlined in this work relies on goal interdependence, stakeholder legitimacy, participatory decision making, transparency, and inclusiveness as core components.

Future research that considers the implications of open strategy on performance and other organizational outcomes in the MSP context is warranted. Similarly, future research could ascertain the effects of open strategy on individual-level outcomes such as job satisfaction, organizational commitment, turnover, and related constructs. Additionally, later scholarship in the context of MSPs could serve to illuminate the possible effects of strategic openness on the social structures of partner organizations as well as highlight possible unintended consequences of its implementation.

In practical terms, this research provides direction for managers of MSPs, particularly during the formative phases of collaboration. Establishing a clear recognition of interdependence toward partnership goals is demonstrated to be a valuable first step for establishing the preconditions for a platform of strategic openness. Subsequently, implementing techniques and disciplines to enhance the inclusiveness and transparency of information, to foster participation in decision making, and to recognize all stakeholders with a claim on outcomes during the strategic decision-making process combine to achieve the outcomes demonstrated by early adopters of open strategy.

This research has the potential to further the understanding of several questions arising from collaboration scholarship such as: what are the strategies and capabilities required to succeed in managing organizational forms that fuse and cross well-established public and private sector boundaries? How can public and private actors mutually learn and develop such capabilities? The authors hope that by putting forth this new model of open strategy in multi-sector social partnerships, the authors can stimulate both practice and empirical study to separate the general principles from the contingencies. The weighty social issues of the day can benefit from these efforts.

This work links, both theoretically and conceptually, heretofore disparate streams of literature to outline a process by which strategic decisions are made in multi-sector collaborations. Traditional notions of competitive strategy have been demonstrated to be inadequate to guide theory and practice regarding the decision-making process within multi-sector collaborations. This work attempts to resolve that deficiency by considering goal interdependence and various dimensions of strategic openness (inclusiveness, transparency, stakeholder legitimacy, and participatory decision making) as aspects of cooperative strategy. The resulting model contributes to the instrumental view of stakeholder theory, the conceptual richness of the open strategy construct, and suggests a normative governance platform for multi-sector partnerships.

Business‐to‐business technology development firms face a unique set of challenges when participating in the opportunities made possible by emerging multi‐sector innovations. The greatest challenge involves the firm’s efforts to influence and shape the market in its favor. This requires strategies for dealing with numerous stakeholders – many with which the firm has had little experience. Because both the risks and pay‐offs are great, the firm needs an analytical and systematic process for stakeholder analysis to provide the basis for stakeholder management strategies. The case of one significant multi‐sector innovation – wireless technologies for integrated traffic management and emergency response – provides an illustrative context for demonstrating a five‐step process for stakeholder analysis.

This article critically examines the multiple rationales for telecom, IT, media convergence regulation, on the one hand, and multisector utility regulation, on the other, and the practical questions of implementation they pose, with a view to contributing to informed policy and regulatory decisions. Both options involve substantive as well as procedural issues, not necessarily separable. The conditions that may affect the creation of convergence and multi‐sector regulation, ranging from underlying commonality of inputs and the behaviour of regulated firms to considerations that are specific to the regulatory process such as scarcity of regulatory resources and safeguards for regulatory independence, are examined. It is concluded that ICT and media convergence issues are primarily about improving the efficiency of market economies, and how changes in regulation can facilitate this process. Multi‐sector regulation issues are primarily about establishing the efficiency and effectiveness of regulation, so it can be a catalyst for network and economic development. They arise from an initial diagnosis of different problems, and represent different priorities and pathways to achieving a very similar set of development objectives.

The study examines Asia Pacific (APAC) non-listed non-core real estate funds' capital calls (investor equity drawdowns) sequence for varying vehicle strategies.

Analysis starts with a cursory data interpretation that extracts a typical investors' equity drawdowns schedule. Thousands of simulations are then computed for each vehicle strategy for each year to further interpretation.

Data and methodological limitations notwithstanding, overall estimates suggest that funds exhibit a contrasting capital calls sequence. As a group, APAC non-core non-listed real estate funds call circa 76.3% of investors' committed capital during the first four years of the fund life. Single sector, single country and value added vehicles have a greater capital calls velocity compared to their multi sector, multi country and opportunity peers. However, the two fund groups exhibit a notable standard deviation heterogeneity of drawdowns.

Investors should therefore budget accordingly when choosing either of vehicle strategies to invest in.

The study adds additional evidence on the topic of capital calls velocity. Results should assist LPs with their non-listed APAC real estate funds investment programme further.

Studies of multi-sector collaborations have increased in recent years. However, the topic is still complex and lacks synthesis. Toward that end, the purpose of this paper is to investigate how collaboration is addressed in the public administration and nonprofit sector journals, and applies well-established strategic decision-making theories to shed light on possible research directions that would provide rigor to the field of collaboration.

The authors conduct a literature review of the top nonprofit and public administration journals, believing these most likely to contain articles on the topic of multi-sector collaboration.

The authors identify a number of themes, including need for clarity, temporality, call to collaborate, funding, partnering issues and processes, benefits of collaboration across three different collaborative types.

The authors embed well-known strategic decision-making theories into the themes emergent from this review and offer suggestions as to how future researchers may test strategic decision-making processes within multi-sector collaborations.

This study seeks to survey the current convergence of broadcasting and telecommunication, examine the policy questions that arise in Korea and present a review of current regulation in this field.

From a technical perspective, the convergence between telecommunications and broadcasting is emerging as both industries move towards digital standards. Yet, from a policy‐making perspective, convergence seems premature and may not be desirable. This study focuses in particular on the digital media broadcasting (DMB) service, which is currently being developed in Korea.

The paper suggests perspectives on forthcoming satellite DMB service developments, and the implications of this emerging technological breakthrough. The study indicates that current broadcasting‐based regulatory frameworks may tend to deter technological convergence and thus delay service introduction in the market.

The paper concludes with a new regulatory model with more consideration of service providers and users.

At the beginning of the 21st century, multiple and diverse social entities, including the public (consumers), private and nonprofit healthcare institutions, government (public health) and other industry sectors, began to recognize the limitations of the current fragmented healthcare system paradigm. Primary stakeholders, including employers, insurance companies, and healthcare professional organizations, also voiced dissatisfaction with unacceptable health outcomes and rising costs. Grand challenges and wicked problems threatened the viability of the health sector. American health systems responded with innovations and advances in healthcare delivery frameworks that encouraged shifts from intra- and inter-sector arrangements to multi-sector, lasting relationships that emphasized patient centrality along with long-term commitments to sustainability and accountability. This pathway, leading to a population health approach, also generated the need for transformative business models. The coproduction of health framework, with its emphasis on cross-sector alignments, nontraditional partner relationships, sustainable missions, and accountability capable of yielding return on investments, has emerged as a unique strategy for facing disruptive threats and challenges from nonhealth sector corporations. This chapter presents a coproduction of health framework, goals and criteria, examples of boundary spanning network alliance models, and operational (integrator, convener, aggregator) strategies. A comparison of important organizational science theories, including institutional theory, network/network analysis theory, and resource dependency theory, provides suggestions for future research directions necessary to validate the utility of the coproduction of health framework as a precursor for paradigm change.

The purpose of this paper is to synthesize multi-sector, cross-sector, and other interorganizational alliance structures and processes with particular focus on their saliency in partnership/alliance decision making.

This is a conceptual paper focusing primarily on management and public administration literature that examines decision making in multi-sector, cross-sector, and other interorganizational alliances.

The paper identified that decision making takes place at every stage of the partnership process, with complexity being dependent on organizational structure and design, i.e. dyad or network. Organization structures and key processes including coordination, cooperation, and trust are critical elements that impact decision making. Trust is foundational for the development and sustainability of collaborative alliances. Many of these same characteristics are also found in strategic alliance structures and processes.

This analysis of selected literature on decision making and trust has the capacity to enhance awareness and expectation-setting for those entering a collaborative partnership. Trust is an integral and enduring component at every stage.

This study crosses the boundary between sectoral partnerships and other interorganizational alliances in the analysis of decision-making structures and processes.

Benchmarking in FM practice although understood and applied globally, little is known about the practice in Nigeria. The purpose of this paper is to develop a framework to guide the use of benchmarking.

The research adopts a cross-sectional survey design. Data were collected using self-administered questionnaires on FM organizations in Lagos metropolis, Abuja and Port Harcourt. The results of the survey were supplemented with interviews with FM unit heads in the study areas. The framework was validated using a focus group discussion with ten FM industry experts.

A framework which serves as a guide for the use of best practice benchmarking was developed. It showed that there is a relationship between best practice benchmarking and location.

The evaluation of the framework was limited by the number of participants involved and being that it has not been put to use.

This study develops a multi-sector framework to guide the use of best practice benchmarking in facilities management (FM). The framework explains the relationship between organizational characteristics and best practice benchmarking. In addition, there are limited empirical benchmarking frameworks in FM literature.

The purpose of this paper is to provide sector-specific empirical evidence on the comparative evaluation of total productive maintenance (TPM) and total quality management (TQM) approaches, implemented exclusively and collectively on improving manufacturing business performance.

This paper develops a multi-sector analysis framework to comparatively assess the synergistic and standalone effect of TPM and TQM improvement approaches. A total of 231 manufacturing organizations from food and beverages, textiles and electrical and electronics sectors have been extensively surveyed. These firms were further clustered into TPM focus, TQM focus and integrated TPM×TQM on the basis of their primary manufacturing strategy. Comparative assessment of these three manufacturing approaches has been evaluated using t-test statistics.

This paper highlights that adoption of integrated TPM×TQM approach is beneficial for food and beverages and electrical and electronics sectors. However, this supposition is rejected for firms operating in the textile sector.

The findings of this research are still exploratory. Future research using countrywide and cross-country approach can be undertaken to statistically generalize the findings of the present research. In-depth case studies are needed to further validate the findings of the study empirically.

The result of this study help managers and practitioners to make manufacturing strategic decision based on the nature of their operating business sector regarding adoption of TPM and TQM practices, which will further revive their firm’s competitiveness.

Every operating sector embraces a diversity of manufacturing activities based upon their competing priorities. This paper makes an attempt to present a multi-sectoral evaluation of joint implementation and effect of manufacturing programs.