Search results

Critical infrastructure (CI) sectors and their resilience are vital for societies to function. In many countries, vital societal functions (VSFs) and CIs depend on inter-organizational and international supply chains (SCs) which combine public and private actors with often competing interests and unclear responsibilities that create discontents. While collaborative supply chain risk management (SCRM) can increase the robustness and resilience of VSF&CIs, their inherent characteristics complicate SCRM. To understand this, supply chain risk governance (SCRG) has conceptually been introduced, suggesting collaborative mechanisms that facilitate inter-organizational SCRM. The purpose of this study is to elaborate on and substantiate the theoretical and practical relevance of an existing SCRG framework, by empirically exploring governance of collaborative SCRM and suggesting future research.

An abductive case study was performed in a VSF&CI, the Swedish food system, to contextualize top-level governance of collaborative SCRM and elaborate on the conceptual SCRG framework. Archival data supplemented expert interviews with public and private actors representing direct and indirect SC actors.

Current discourse and interventions in the Swedish food system’s SCRM confirmed discontent in governance and the importance of SCRG mechanisms and supported further conceptualization, e.g. of legal mechanisms vs economic incentives, the importance of government inquiries and the understanding of the influence of indirect public SC actors.

Considering the geographical scope of the study, transferability is limited but invites comparisons with both other countries and the SCRG of other VSF&CIs. Proposed research avenues guide future conceptualization and contextualization of SCRG.

The framework can support CI actors to jointly find and reduce discontents related to inter-organizational SCRM and support policymakers to increase public–private collaboration.

The novelty lies in empirically studying SCRG in critical infrastructures by combining SCRM and risk governance lenses.

This paper aims to illustrate how service ecosystem governance may provide a suitable ground to pursue holistic resilience to “wicked” socio-economic and ecological problems, for enhancing “place-based” sustainable performance outcomes through an organizational, interorganizational and context setting.

This work suggests the use of “place-based” collaborative ecosystem platforms driven by a dynamic performance governance approach as a setting where facilitated performance dialogue is carried out among networked stakeholders. This fosters a holistic view of performance sustainability where intangibles, inertial, cultural and behavioral factors play a key role in policy analysis.

The paper illustrates how different research streams framing stakeholder relationships under a business, hybrid organization and public sector perspective converge toward the “service ecosystem” construct, as a common field for sustainable “place-based” value creation. This performance governance perspective frames accountability for achieving sustainable outcomes through interconnected viewpoints, i.e. (1) time (short vs long-term), (2) subject (single organization, “theme-focused” service ecosystem and “place-based” service ecosystem) and (3) field (socio-economic, cultural and ecological).

This work has an interdisciplinary track. It recommends feedback and “stock-and-flow” modeling to enhance framing counterintuitive patterns of behavior of dynamic complex socio-economic, cultural and ecological subsystems within “place-based” collaborative ecosystem platforms. Combining an inside-out with an outside-in view triggers sustainable outcome-based dynamic performance governance through an organizational, interorganizational and context setting.

To fill the gap, this article examines the inter-governmental collaboration mechanisms behind the platform curtain.

Behind the curtain is to look at what makes things happen backstage. For collaborative e-governance platforms, scholars have assumed that technological factors and user characteristics are the determinants for platform success. Little attention has been paid to the issue of how multiple governments, acting as platform co-builders and co-operators, interact and collaborate backstage to provide integrated e-services.

Based on data from survey questionnaires sent to government employees, the results show that governments’ information processing capacities cannot directly affect collaboration; however, these capacities can impact collaboration via the mediating variable of horizontal relations. In addition, we found that higher-ranking authorities are better suited to intervene once horizontal relations have been established and that more adaptable organizations are better at forming horizontal relations with peers. For governments participating in collaborative e-governance platforms, our findings are practically applicable.

The research question reads as: How do various government departments acting as platform co-builders and co-operators judge their collaboration performance, and what collaboration mechanisms contribute to it? We study this research question by constructing a conceptual model based on the Organizational Information Processing Theory (OIPT) and the Collaborative Governance Theory (CGT), both suggesting information processing capacities, organizational flexibility, horizontal relations and vertical intervention as indispensable factors influencing collaboration performance in ICT-supported groupwork. We propose and test four hypotheses on the relationships among these four factors to reveal the inter-governmental collaboration mechanisms for cross-government platformisation projects.

This article conceptualizes and constructs a comprehensive framework that can better help to answer that question – Who is accountable for social and public problems? – theoretically and practically.

Tracing the drivers behind two phenomena “accountability hole” and “accountability black hole”, stemming from “pushing power game” and “pulling power game”, respectively, this study considers (1) the three actors of society: citizens (civil society), corporations (market) and civil servants (government), and (2) the principal-agent relationship between the three actors in the face of social and public problems. As a result, the 4CAs framework that contains the three actors’ collaborative accountabilities to one another is presented.

The 4CAs model emphasizes (1) all three actors function as agents that are accountable to one another, (2) collaborative accountability beyond collaborative governance and (3) repowering citizens and corporations beyond just empowering them, i.e. returning their inherent rights and obligations to serve one another.

The 4CAs model may function as a descriptive and prescriptive lens through which the trilemma between market failure, government failure and citizen failure can be re-assessed and balanced. The model can also be used as a set of indicators for assessing and helping a society to better resolve the social and public problems collectively.

In this article, we outline our views on the appropriateness and utility of Return on Investment (ROI) for the evaluation of the value of healthcare quality improvement (QI) programmes.

Our recent research explored the ROI concept and became the genesis of our viewpoint. We reflect on our findings from an extensive research project on the concept of ROI, involving a multidisciplinary global systematic literature review, a qualitative and Delphi study with mental healthcare leaders from the United Kingdom National Health Service. Research participants included board members, clinical directors and QI leaders. Our findings led to our conclusions and interpretation of ROI against the broad QI governance. We discuss our views against the predominant governance frameworks and wider literature.

ROI is in-line with top-down control governance frameworks based in politics and economics. However, there is evidence that to be of better utility, a tool for the assessment of the value of QI benefits must include comprehensive benefits that reflect broad monetary and non-monetary benefits. This is in-line with bottom-up and collaborative governance approaches. ROI has several challenges that may limit it as a QI governance tool. This is supported by wider literature on ROI, QI as well as modern governance theories and models. As such, we question whether ROI is the appropriate tool for QI governance. A more pragmatic governance framework that accommodates various healthcare objectives is advised.

This article highlights some of the challenges in adopting ROI as a QI governance tool. We signal a need for the exploration of a suitable QI governance approach. Particularly, are healthcare leaders to be perceived as “agents”, “stewards” or both. The evidence from our research and wider literature indicates that both are crucial. Better QI governance through an appropriate value assessment tool could improve clarity on QI value, and thus investment allocation decision-making. Constructive discussion about the utility and appropriateness of ROI in the evaluation of healthcare QI programmes may help safeguard investment in effective and efficient health systems.

The article raises awareness of QI governance and encourages discussions about the challenges of using ROI as a tool for healthcare QI governance.

Organizations are increasingly joining inter-organizational networks to foster sustainable employability for their employees. The purpose of this study is to identify the factors and mechanisms central to their success as experienced by key stakeholders.

An explorative, qualitative approach was adopted, using four focus groups with network coordinators (N = 18) and HR professionals (N = 14). Fourteen Dutch inter-organizational networks were represented. Respondents were recruited through purposive and snowballing sampling techniques. Thematic analysis was applied using open coding to generate themes.

The results of this study outline environmental, structural, and inter-personal factors and mechanisms that contribute to the success of inter-organizational networks that aim to foster sustainable employability for their employees. The environmental factors and mechanisms consist of challenges stemming from the labor market. The structural factors and mechanisms include: a network’s flat structure, flat fee, lack of informal rules, the allocation of roles and expectations for stakeholders and shared network activities. Lastly, the inter-personal factors and mechanisms are: communication among stakeholders, establishing reciprocity, interaction and collaboration between stakeholders, the valuation of trust, a convivial culture and shared vision among stakeholders. The dynamics between these factors and mechanisms are compared to other forms of inter-organizational networks. Furthermore, several recommendations for network coordinators and practitioners regarding the development of networks are presented.

This study provides insights into the factors and mechanisms that are regarded by stakeholders as influencing the success of inter-organizational networks in their ability to foster sustainable employability for workers. We have identified a unique model that captures this new way of inter-organizational collaboration and builds on insights from literature on collaborative governance regimes, institutional fields and entrepreneurial ecosystems. Specifically, the model provides a framework that consists of environmental, structural and interpersonal factors and mechanisms for network success. This study increases our understanding of how collaborative efforts can be fostered beyond organizational boundaries and existing Human Resource Management practices.

The purpose of this paper is to present the educational computer emergency response team (EduCERT) framework, an integrated response mechanism to bolster national cybersecurity through collaborative efforts in the higher education sector. The EduCERT framework addresses this gap by enhancing cyber security and mitigating cybercrime through collaborative incident management, knowledge sharing and university awareness campaigns.

The authors propose an EduCERT framework following the design science methodology. The framework is developed based on literature and input from focus group experts. Moreover, it is grounded in the principles of the technology-organization-environment framework, organizational learning and diffusion of innovations theory.

The EduCERT has eight components: infrastructure, governance, knowledge development, awareness, incident management, evaluation and continuous improvement. The framework reinforces national cybersecurity through cooperation between universities and the National Computer Emergency Response Team. The framework has been implemented in Jordan to generate a cybersecurity foundation for higher education. Evaluating the EduCERT framework’s influence on national cybersecurity highlights the importance of adopting comprehensive cyber-security policies and controls. The framework application shows its relevance, effectiveness, adaptability and alignment with best practices.

Despite the impact of applying the framework in the Jordanian context, it is essential to acknowledge that the proposed EduCERT framework’s practical implementation may encounter challenges specific to diverse international educational environment sectors. However, framework customization for global applicability could address varied educational institutions in other countries.

Furthermore, the proposed EduCERT framework is designed with universal applicability that extends beyond the specific country’s context. The principles and components presented in the framework can serve as valuable design advice for establishing collaborative and resilient cybersecurity frameworks in educational settings worldwide. Therefore, the research enhances the proposed framework’s practical utility and positions it as an invaluable contribution to the broader discourse on global cybersecurity in academia.

This paper enhances national cybersecurity in the higher education sector, addressing the need for a more integrated response mechanism. The EduCERT framework demonstrates its effectiveness, adaptability and alignment with best practices, offering valuable guidance for global educational institutions.

Wicked problems require collaborative innovation approaches. Understanding the problem from the users' perspective is essential. Based on a complex and ill-defined case, the purpose of the current paper is to identify some critical success factors in defining the “right problem” to be addressed.

An empirical research study was carried out in a low-density municipality (case study). Extensive data were collected from official databases, individual semi-structured interviews and a focus group involving citizens, local authorities, civil servants and other relevant stakeholders.

As defined by the central government, the problem to be addressed by the research team was to identify which justice services should be made available locally to a small- and low-density community. The problem was initially formulated using top-down reasoning. In-depth contact with citizens and key local players revealed that the lack of justice services was not “the issue” for that community. Mobility constraints and the shortage of economic opportunities had a considerable impact on the lack of demand for justice services. By using a bottom-up perspective, it was possible to reframe the problem to be addressed and suggest a new concept to be tested at later stages.

The approach followed called attention to the importance of listening to citizens and local organisations with a profound knowledge of the territory to effectively identify and circumscribe a local problem in the justice field.

The paper highlights the limitations of traditional rational problem-solving approaches and contributes to expanding the voice-of-the-customer principle showing how it can lead to a substantially new definition of the problem to be addressed.

The purpose of this paper is to model a process for moving toward sustainable ecosystem service decisions in a Coastal Biodiversity and discuss the directions of the process for decision-makers to apply in ocean ecosystem services.

After the development of theoretical approaches to understand their prospects for the future development of ecosystem services, the authors worked on a process for developing factors for sustainable decision-making. It uses the Delphi method to develop all the factors supported by six dimensions in two specific moments: deductive-inductive and inductive-deductive.

This process of modeling the factors expands the possibility of adaptive governance to make prior and subsequent decisions using factors related to dimensions, stakeholders and benefits, risks, opportunities and costs.

Considering the limitations, future studies could use another database to widen the view in terms of the studies, factors, dimensions and other additional information to maintain the evolution of this process in ocean ecosystem services decision-making. Another limitation arose in the number of projects and experts defining the factors. This may prevent the opportunity to have more impact in terms of future decisions if more sources are used in the market. In addition, time and the access to experts during this modeling process demonstrate a limitation, as does the time for feedback.

This set of factors developed for adaptive governance decision-making can be applied to develop a prior alignment of stakeholder interests with sustainable practices.

This set of factors developed with the intervention of experts reinforces the importance of sustainable collective decisions on ocean ecosystem services. This is a joint approach with participants in the NextOcean project, sponsored by the European Commissions (EC)’s Horizon 2020 program. An Earth Observation-based Consortia aims to create sustainable value for Space, Land and Oceans.

This modeling process generated dimensions and factors to support adaptive governance stakeholders in making sustainable decisions in a coastal biodiversity zone.

This paper aims to extend insights about the relationship between inter-organizational collaboration and approaches to control from the perspective of decision-makers. We investigate the relationship between approaches to control and intended forms of integration between actors responsible for solving the complex problem of integrated person-centered care for elderly with diverse and significant needs.

The empirical study is based on a content analysis of contractual agreements. We have analyzed a total of 118 collaboration agreements and associative documents between all Swedish regions and municipalities.

The study shows that intended integration is subject to remarkable variation in intended forms of inter-organizational collaboration in this Swedish case. The paper illustrates that decision-makers’ intentions with proposed collaboration in each given context are important for the chosen approach to control. Regardless of intended forms of integration, our study suggests that an imminent soft approach to control is expressed alongside limited signs of hard control. Various forms of intended integration can be managed by the two approaches simultaneously insofar as the agreements appear to have a two-sided purpose.

Our paper proposes an empirically driven taxonomy of intended forms of integration initiatives. The taxonomy provides resources for studies about how collaboration can be managed when it is stipulated by national legislation but local self-governance gives actors considerable freedom to decide on how to organize and manage services. By presenting the taxonomy and relating this to approaches of control, our iterative study builds on and adds to a recent stream of research arguing that the relationship between collaboration and approaches to control may by fuzzier and more complex than originally thought.