Search results

This book chapter uses structuration theory and aims to study cross-sectoral collaborations for co-creating public value and their implications in terms of the role and the relationships of the public sector with the private and third sector.

Our research is exploratory and our main research question is: What are the modalities of structuration of cross-sectoral collaborations for co-creating public value? Our analysis is based on a multiple case study analyses conducted in the region of Trentino – South Tyrol (Italy), and it draws on primary and secondary data collected through six extensive semi-structured interviews and documentary analysis on about fifty organizations participating in six cross-sectoral collaborations. We found that the co-creation of public value led public organizations to structure cross-sectoral collaborations involving private and third-sector organizations, but preexistent structures of signification, domination, and legitimation hampered the public sector as a whole to fully democratically meta-govern the modalities of structuration.

The chapter provides insights for practice by highlighting the elements of structuration theory as a useful framework of analysis for decision-making of public managers involved in cross-sectoral collaborations. Research implications deal with using structuration theory and critical approaches at a macrolevel (e.g., the role of the public sector as a whole) within public management studies.

This article considers a series of ways in which hierarchy is ontologically and politically opposed to flatness, particularly in the work of the artist Takashi Murakami and the cultural critic Dick Hebdige. It explores the attractions and problems of flatness as an alternative to hierarchy, but concludes that both are equally two-dimensional representations of organizing. Instead, alternative organizers with a commitment to anti-hierarchical practices would be better learning from the three-dimensional practical examples of anarchism, feminism, socialism and environmentalism.

Herbert A. Simon and Alan Newell won the Turing Award jointly in Computer Science for foundational work on Artificial Intelligence. Simon also won the Nobel Prize in Economics for the concept of “bounded rationality.” In both cases, the same heuristic was deemed fundamental: “Search till a satisfactory solution is found.” We argue that behavioral strategy can learn a great deal from the Theory of Computational Complexity and Artificial Intelligence. These fields can provide a sounder theoretical grounding for bounded rationality and for the necessity and usefulness of heuristics. Finally, a concept of “organizational intractability” based roughly on the metaphor provided by the Theory of Computational Complexity may be useful in determining what analytical decision technologies are actually intractable in real organizations with constraints on time and managerial attention.

Recent neuroscience research shows that two large-scale cortical networks are involved in organizational behavior. These two networks are naturally antagonistic – when one is active the other tends to be suppressed. The focus of the chapter is to apply the opposing-domains hypothesis to problems associated with: (1) trying to balance creative thinking and global processing with analytic reasoning and focused attention; (2) avoiding ethical dangers associated with an imbalance in task positive network (TPN) and default mode network (DMN) thinking; and (3) properly motivating and incentivizing employees so as not to lead to an imbalance between the TPN and DMN. We contend that the opposing-domains hypothesis can inform organizational and leadership theory in areas where single-dimensional dual-process models are inadequate.

Donald Stokes’ approach to map the names of prominent scientists onto adiagram showing their impact on fundamental science and applied science is adopted and expanded to illustrate the dynamic interactions of the four nodes of the Cyclic Innovation Model (CIM). Tagging names of prototypical role models onto the four nodes and cycles of CIM increases the meta-level understanding of the fundamental concepts depicted by this innovation model. It also serves as a tool to validate the completeness of the model.

This chapter seeks to classify condominium crime, explain its neglect in light of the growth of condo living in cities and closely consider the prospects for greater visibility and legal regulation of these acts. We deploy traditional dichotomies of white-collar/street crime and insiders/outsiders to construct a two-dimensional typology of condo crime and illustrate each type using empirically grounded examples from extensive qualitative research in Ontario and New York State entailing analysis of media accounts, condo owner association and corporation websites, and numerous interviews with owners, board directors and industry actors. We argue that the condo form retains peculiar characteristics that tend to prevent public reporting of condo crimes and leaves the ‘usual suspects’ (i.e. street criminals) in the spotlight while other, potentially more damaging, acts are neglected. We conclude by discussing barriers to knowing the extent of condo crime and their relationship to legal regulation.