Search results

This chapter focuses on an innovative effort in the Italian context in which a complex web of partnerships was created as the foundation of an alternative model of health care. More specifically, the start-up of a health-care organization – Welfare Italia Servizi (WIS) – is analyzed and discussed with respect to its sustainability.

The process of organizing a sustainable health care is analyzed through the theoretical lenses of multi-stakeholders management and partnership perspectives.

The possibility of developing dense knowledge about the WIS’s case has stemmed from our collaboration with the organization board with regard to a research process intended to monitor the organizational start-up and its sustainability challenges.

The case provides new insights into the dynamic nature of building multi-stakeholder partnership in a complex environment; the developmental life-cycle challenge of multi-stakeholder partnership, and the meaning of sustainability. The case suggests a tapestry of issues such as how sustainability may be “paradoxical,” dynamic, led by different and sometimes conflicting logics, and changeable over time like a growing tree in an intricate forest.

The case can stimulate learning and discussions both within the community of practitioners and the community of academics with respect to which promising conditions could help address the challenge of starting-up a sustainable organization in the health-care field.

This chapter analyses the multiple embeddedness of MNEs, and their participation in solving contemporary societal issues. We aim to increase understanding on the relational processes and network dynamics present in MNEs’ participation in cross-sector partnerships.

Our study addresses the issue of the poor ecological state of the Baltic Sea and illustrates the early developments in cross-sector collaboration. We build on a single exploratory case study of the cooperation of one MNE (IBM) with an environmental NGO (BSAG) in Finland. We analyse how participation in the cross-sector collaboration manifests itself in the external and internal networks of the MNE.

We show that an initiative by the NGO to participate in environmental work was actively adopted within the MNE and led to network changes. These changes concerned both the activation of existing links and the establishment of new links with such actors as authorities and research institutes. The NGO acted as a catalyser and cultural mediator to create a bridge between the MNE and governmental actors.

There is a need to investigate cross-sector collaboration in other contexts – particularly from the perspective of MNEs and (international) business networks. Questions such as how do enduring (business and socio-political) relationships emerge from MNE’s participation in issue networks and how technology that has been developed to solve a specific societal issue may be translated into commercial solutions are especially promising. We also urge scholars to investigate the ties, texture and dynamics (including tensions) of business relationships with those of public actors and civil society.

Participation in cross-sector initiatives may grant an MNE a forerunner position in the creation of new sustainable markets and technologies. It may also create an opportunity to influence policymakers and build new socio-political networks. From the perspective of a subsidiary of an MNE, engagement with cross-sector partnerships may strengthen its voice within the MNE network.

Our study contributes to the understanding of the relationship dynamics between actors in cross-sector collaboration around a societal (environmental) issue. Our analysis illustrates the embeddedness of MNE networks, where actions in the regional and global networks (the representatives of the headquarters) overlap with and strengthen the local actions of the subsidiary.

This chapter investigates the origins of cross-sectoral collaboration by exploring when and why policy networks form within the Turkish health sector – a least likely case for network formation. The analysis presented here draws on information collected from a number of official documents, semi-structured interviews with professional experts, and two multi-stakeholder meetings. Timewise, networks entered the policy jargon during the introduction of the Health Transformation Program in 2003. Yet, the years between 2011 and 2015 were ground-breaking in producing concrete cross-sectoral collaborative instruments of policy making. The findings of the analysis reveal that policy networks form as a result of central government’s choice to devolve responsibility and expand the policy space with new issues and actors. Moreover, policy networks emerge not only during the times of policy change which has a reactionary, abrupt, and nature but also during the times of policy stability and legitimacy. These contextual factors are crucial in maintaining an atmosphere of trust among stakeholders, particularly between state and non-state actors. The refugee crisis and spreading securitization discourse in the post-2015 period explain the shifting policy and political agenda leading to public sector retrenchment from cross-sectoral projects within the field of health. This chapter intends to contribute to the literature of comparative public policy by examining the link between policy networks and policy change in addition to adding to the debates on network governance by exploring the processes of network formation. Finally, this chapter contributes to Turkish studies by examining the process of network formation within the Turkish health sector.

In this chapter, we discuss the case of the Knowledge Network for Applied Education Research (KNAER) to illustrate the context for evidence-informed practice (EIP) in Ontario, Canada. KNAER (www.knaer-recrae.ca) is an initiative to strengthen relationships between research producers, users, and the communities that schools serve to improve outcomes for students in four priority areas: mathematics, equity, well-being, and Indigenous knowledge. As developmental evaluators for KNAER from 2017 to 2019, we reference and integrate two main sources of data: a research model created to inform the network's planning and activities, and semistructured interviews with network leaders (N = 11) and policymakers (N = 3). Reflecting on our findings, we discuss five key lessons for EIP: the need to build reciprocal streets of engagement, the need to shift data use from accountability and compliance to partnership learning, the need to coproduce and identify specific entry points of change, the need to focus on capacity building and leveraging brokers across partnerships, and the need to use communication as a problem-solving tool to assess and adjust innovations and implementation rather than passive reports of activities.

This chapter examines Slovenia’s failed attempt to develop a national corporate social responsibility (CSR) policy via multi-stakeholder partnership. It also discusses the potential reasons for this failure.

This research is grounded in the idea of CSR as a ‘politicised’ concept, acknowledging the importance of the institutional setting and institutional support in diffusing CSR. This empirical research is based on a descriptive case study approach and a qualitative thematic analysis of the data. The data sources are IRDO institute documents, the minutes of the Partnership for National CSR Strategy provided by the Network for Social Responsibility of Slovenia and semi-structured interviews with various actors such as government and local representatives, non-governmental organisations (NGOs), companies and journalists.

Although the multi-stakeholder Partnership for National CSR Strategy, which was initiated by NGOs and other stakeholders, existed from 2011 to 2013, it later fell apart due to various factors, the most important being a complete lack of support on the governmental side, with the government being the actor with the executive power to implement and promote CSR policies at the national level.

The chapter provides an insight into the drawbacks of attempting to set a national CSR policy agenda and discusses the reasons for these drawbacks.

This chapter discusses the importance of the economic, political, and social context in which multi-stakeholder networks can foster the national CSR debate. It recognises the role of CSR in co-regulating public policies and the importance of strong engagement among relevant stakeholders and public authorities.

Co-creation of knowledge offers significant opportunities for innovation. This chapter seeks to gain understanding of the process of co-creation of knowledge for innovation and public relations in multi-stakeholder projects by exploring current insights in academic literature. The research questions look at how co-creation of knowledge for innovation has been investigated in the scholarly literature; the roles of end-users; and the modes and challenges of end-user participation and in collaboration relating to communication.

The method of this chapter is a structured literature review, following a series of rigorous steps: a search of databases, analysis of 33 articles found, summarising relevant content using a data extraction table and a data extraction continuum as analysis tools to show the range of projects discussed in the literature to create a comprehensive overview.

The findings indicate that multi-stakeholder networks can be structured for different aims. In the articles found different types of projects were investigated. Four categories of projects were found: (1) co-creation projects benefiting one company; (2) co-creation projects benefiting business-to-business value chain networks; (3) co-creation projects benefiting public entities; and (4) co-creation projects benefiting innovation network stakeholders.

Complexity is highest for multiple stakeholder co-creation projects benefiting innovation network stakeholders, where the roles between stakeholders are fluid and changing constantly. Solving common issues motivates the stakeholders to collaborate and build trust. Open innovation environments may facilitate communication and interaction.

Co-creation of knowledge requires intensive collaboration. Knowing the main challenges to address will help the functioning of co-creation collaboration networks and their public relations.

The Sustainable Development Goal 12 (SDG 12) that aims at ensuring sustainable consumption and production patterns is dependent on efficient and effective transport infrastructure. But many new transport infrastructure projects are delayed due to complex conflicts between multiple stakeholders with different stakes. This chapter illustrates how a multi-stakeholder participation process based on systems thinking can be used to generate a shared mental model of stakeholders in conflict. Using the systems thinking and modelling methodology, the complex problem situation is first structured by identifying and analysing the stakeholders. Then a participative approach is employed to develop a systems model that captures the underlying structure responsible for the problem situation. Finally, three strategic interventions are formulated by the stakeholders to improve the system behaviour in the long term. In this chapter, both quantitative and qualitative data were collected using structured interviews, focus groups and secondary sources. Using a New Zealand transport infrastructure project, the chapter shows that effective multi-stakeholder participation, capable of leading to some form of multi-stakeholder partnership, can help reduce delays in a transport infrastructure project. Practically, the chapter provides a framework that can reach an accommodation between conflicting stakeholders. Overall, this chapter contributes New Zealand–based empirical research to the literature on multi-stakeholder participation for achieving SDG 12 within the context of Agenda 2030.

We conduct a literature review on forms of organizing that address grand challenges, which are operationalized as the Sustainable Development Goals of the United Nations, as this framework is universal and widely adopted. By analyzing the articles that match our criteria, we identify six differentiable organizational forms: movements, temporary organizations, partnerships, established organizations, multi-stakeholder networks, and supranational organizations. These six forms are differentiated based on the two following categories: organizing segment and communicational technological approach. Our analysis shows that tackling a grand challenge often starts with collectives as a protest culture without any expected goal, besides sending an impulse to others. This impulse is received by criticized institutionalized organizations that have the capacity and resources to address the problem properly. However, new challenges arise as these organizations inadequately resolve these problems, thereby leading to conflict-laden areas of tension, wherein emergent organizations complement institutionalized organizations that have created the first infrastructure. To solve the most complex problems, a trichotomous relationship between different forms of organizations is necessary. Moreover, communicational technological approaches become more sophisticated as grand challenges increase in complexity.