Search results

Communities are best able to tackle complex social problems when solutions are achieved collaboratively. Inter-organizational partnerships are strongest and provide the greatest benefit to communities when the relationships are mutually compatible. The purpose of this paper is to introduce an evidence-informed approach to identifying and forming mutually compatible collaborations among organizations responsible for promoting community well-being and carrying out community-level interventions.

A three-stage case study examines the utility of a novel measurement tool for identifying opportunities for strategic collaboration. The strategic compatibility assessment (SCA) was designed to identify inter-organizational collaborative capacities within and across sectors as a means to motivate collaborative behaviors that are essential to community change initiatives that advance the collective impact.

The findings of this paper indicate the SCA is an effective tool for fostering mutually beneficial collaborative partnerships. A high degree of content, face and practical validity was evidenced in two independent studies of SCA, and organizations using the SCA tool reported a moderate-to-high degree of collaborative behavior in a post-intervention assessment of SCA outcomes. These findings provide field-based support for the SCA to promote cross-sector collaboration for community-level interventions.

The SCA tool describes the degree of collaboration among organizations that operate within a neighborhood; identifies potential points of mutual compatibility within the network; and creates pathways for leveraging collaborative behavior to promote community capitals. The aim of this research is to examine the potential of the SCA tool to shift the non-profit sector climate away from one characterized by competition toward one rich with collaboration.

This article seeks to characterize and assess a new type of resilient, socially conscious and competitive enterprise that simultaneously encompasses open and social innovation – aligning both business and social outcomes – and which will gain increasing importance in post-pandemic competitiveness.

A mixed method approach based on sequential deductive triangulation analysis (QUAN/qual) is used. First, data gathered from the Chilean innovation survey is used to quantify the percentage of firms implementing open and social innovation simultaneously, and to assess their relative performance in relation to other types of innovative firms. Second, a qualitative multiple-case study analysis reveals the perceptions of senior managers regarding the applicability of this approach in terms of building resilience and strengthening future competitiveness in line with sustainable development goals.

Social innovation is a relatively rare event (7.2% of firms in the sample). While social innovation occurs equally in monopolistic and perfectly competitive industries, the authors’ findings suggest that in order to adopt social and open innovation effectively, firms need to set entry barriers such as economies of scale. On the other hand, open innovation is a more common event (15.4% of firms in the sample), which correlates closely with absolute and relative performance indicators. Moreover, the results suggest that open innovation enables a greater understanding of societal needs, thus making social innovation more effective.

Theoretical developments coupled with descriptive and qualitative evidence reveal the innovative capabilities that up-and-coming enterprises may possess. The findings suggest that at times of far-reaching technological, social and political change, enterprises should share some of their knowledge and resources with wider society. Only then will more equal, resilient and cohesive societies be built.

This article combines two seemingly unrelated literature streams (open and social innovation) in order to elucidate the enterprise of tomorrow, which will be capable of achieving sustainable development whilst reaching high levels of competitiveness.

The increasing risk of natural disasters is challenging humanitarian actors to create resilient disaster management systems. However, the role of the private sector in disaster management operations (DMOs) is not as prominent as the role played by (inter)governmental agencies. This article aims to investigate the relationship of collaboration and resilience in disaster management supply networks (DMSNs).

Supply network resilience criteria were defined as robustness, flexibility, velocity and visibility based on the literature review. DMSN capabilities were identified characterising each resilience criterion through the development of the Collaboration–Resilience (COLRES) Analysis Framework for DMSNs. This theoretical model was then applied to an empirical case study in the Philippines using semi-structured interviews for data gathering.

A total of 46 cross-sector collaboration activities were identified across four disaster management phases and linked to the resilience criteria. A causal analysis of each collaboration activity and its outcome was conducted to identify relationships between collaboration types and resilience constructs. Based on these results, patterns were identified, and dependencies between collaboration and resilience were defined. Collective DMSN resilience (DMSNRES) enabled by existing cross-sector collaboration activities was evaluated against a future disaster scenario to identify resilience gaps. These gaps were used to recognise new cross-sector collaboration opportunities, thereby illustrating the continuous process of resilience building.

This research provides new insights on how private sector is involved within a DMOs through collaboration with the government and other NGOs. It augments existing literature on private sector involvement in DMOs where common perception is that the sector is only involved in short-term response and recovery activities. This study finds that the private sector can be operationally involved not just in post-disaster activities, but also in mitigation and preparation phases as well. This then sets a new baseline for further research on private sector involvement within DMOs. As this study provided a novel framework to analyse collaboration activities and its impact to DMSN resilience, future work could be done by applying the model to further cases such as other countries'. DMSNs, or to more specific contexts such as inter-organisational collaborations rather than big sectors. A more detailed assessment method against a future disaster will prove relevance for the model in providing practical insights on how resilience can be built in DMSNs.

This research proposed a novel DMSN collaboration-resilience (COLRES) model (Figure 11) to analyse existing processes in preparation for specific disasters. Practitioners may be able to use this model with the goal of identifying resilience gaps to fill and continuously improve their processes. The model also provides practitioners the lens to improve processes with the perspective on collaboration to complement government and NGO efforts and expertise with those of the private sector. For the private sector perspective, this research provides new insights on how they can be more involved with the community to provide more sustainable and long-term contributions to the society.

With disasters becoming more complex and frequent by the day and as humanitarian actors focus on improving their expertise, the need for every piece of the society to contribute to disaster risk reduction is continuously intensified. This research shows that each sector of the society can take part in disaster management operations to reduce unpredictability, lives impacted and increase speed of response and recovery. Each sector of the society can be of great contribution not only during post-disaster response and recovery but also during pre-disaster mitigation and preparedness phase. As such, this research echoes the call for everyone to be involved in disaster risk reduction and mitigation as a way of life.

This research ultimately finds that cross-sector collaboration builds resilience in DMSNs through capacity building, redundancy sourcing, information reliability and logistics responsiveness. This study shows that the private sector is able to go beyond existing short-term partnerships by participating in the 46 collaboration activities identified across four disaster management phases in order to build resilience in DMSNs.

The purpose of this paper is to examine critically private (for profit), public and not‐for‐profit sector management strategies with a focus to assess and enhance organizational capacity building through cross‐sector collaboration. This topic is considered from both a contemporary and an evolutionary perspective.

This paper is based on research from secondary sources.

This paper identifies barriers to collaboration and measures for effectively creating organizational change to build cross‐sector capacity.

While considerable literature exists on organizational change, none includes the need for cross‐sector collaboration to increase management capability to move beyond current economic, social and market development capacity. This study addresses this gap.

The adoption of management practices to understand values across sectors will improve effectiveness of organizations across sectors. These recommendations will also facilitate economic development reform efforts of policy makers.

The paper, based on original research, makes a significant contribution to the ability to understand managing in a cross‐sector collaborative manner.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the institutional and social forces that influence collaborative data sharing practices in cross-sector interorganizational networks. The analysis focusses on the data sharing practices between professionals in the transportation and public health sectors, areas prioritized for collaborative action to improve public health.

A mixed methods design is utilized. Electronic surveys were sent to 57 public health and 157 transportation professionals in a large major metropolitan area in the USA (response rate 39.7 percent). Focus groups were held with 12 organizational leaders representing professionals in both sectors.

The application of the institutional-social capital framework suggests that professional specialization and organizational forces make it challenging for professionals to develop the cross-sector relationships necessary for cross-sector collaborative data sharing.

The findings suggest that developing the social relationships necessary for cross-sector collaboration may be resource intensive. Investments are necessary at the organizational level to overcome the professional divides that limit the development of cross-sector relationships critical for collaborative data sharing. The results are limited to the data sharing practices of professionals in one metropolitan area.

Despite mandates and calls for increased cross-sector collaboration to improve public health, such efforts often fail to produce true collaboration. The study’s value is that it adds to the theoretical conceptualization of collaboration and provides a deeper understanding as to why collaborative action remains difficult to achieve. Future study of collaboration must consider the interaction between professional specialization and the social relationships necessary for success.

The authors propose a conceptual model that explains how interorganizational relations in public-private IT outsourcing (ITO) may enhance public value in public administrations through process improvement.

The research design is based on the development of a theoretical framework based on the integration of transaction cost theory (TCT) and the resource-based view (RBV), and empirical interview data from IT managers in state and local governments in Mexico.

First, public-private ITO does produce specific process improvements in Mexico's public administration given its specific institutional context. Second, public value depends on the alignment between the characteristics of IT project activities and the attributes of outsourcing as a mode of governance. Third, process improvements moderate this relation. Fourth, relevant process improvements are identified on an empirical basis, showing the importance of institutional conditions in the determination of public value through interorganizational relationships in the public sector.

The authors suggest new roles for public managers as orchestrators of interorganizational relations, and specify the orientation relevant process improvements could take in a specific institutional context.

Through this study, it is possible to gain both theoretical and practical understanding of process improvements in public administrations to enhance public value.

This paper aims to propose a framework to map partnerships as practiced in higher education institutions (HEIs) and trace the current mode of engagement between HEIs and their partners. This paper reflects on the alignment between current practices and what is understood in the literature as “true” partnerships. We are interested in the different modes of engagement that are labeled by the HEIs as partnerships and consider the plasticity of the term. The interest is in how the term is operationalized by HEIs and how variations in approach can be accounted for while still maintaining some stability and common understanding of the term partnership.

Drawing on extant literature in the field of cross-sector partnerships, a three-dimensional framework is proposed to map partnerships as practiced in HEIs. Furthermore, this paper draws on insights gained from the partnership stories of 13 leading principles of responsible management education (PRME) signatories to evidence examples of how this framework can help us to categorize the different types of engagement that the HEIs call partnerships. These case stories were gathered in the fall of 2019, based on a brief inquiry form sent to the 39 PRME signatories who were part of the PRME Champions Cycle 2018–2019.

This paper sees cases where faculty drive interaction on sustainable development goal-related issues with external stakeholders, but where the impact of these interactions seems to reside within the main business of the HEI (teaching and research). In contrast, much partnering work addresses broader social impacts. Of particular, interest in partnerships that seek to address a specific local issue, first and foremost and doing so in such a way as to apply the unique resources of the HEI working in multi-stakeholder networks. This paper also notes important variation between individual faculty-driven initiatives and initiatives where the school provides a strategic framework to support these efforts.

By focusing on the academic sector and its stakeholder partnerships, this paper contributes to the literature on cross-sector partnerships. In particular, the specifics of this context and the importance of, for example, academic freedom have been under-researched in this field. Furthermore, the framework presented is novel in that it helps us to grasp the nuances of external university partnerships that can form out of individual, programmatic and other institutional levels.

From a practice perspective, the framework offers a useable tool for HEI partnership managers to position themselves and their activities and reflect more on how they organize external partnerships. Further, this tool offers a more precise framework for the discussion on partnerships within the PRME to sharpen the partnership instrument and bring more clarity about what is meant by the partnership for the goals.

The paper offers a novel partnership portfolio framework that contributes both to theory and practice. The framework aids in mapping the locus of benefits/outcomes and the material and affective commitments made by the HEI to bring these collaborations about. In dimensionalizing partnerships in this way, this paper can conceptualize a balanced portfolio in an HEI’s partnerships for the goals.

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.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the formation of a cross-sector partnership in which a collaborative response addressed the issue of affordable housing and homelessness in Melbourne, Australia. Factors leading to the formation and evolution of the relationship reveal how social partnerships in the housing/construction industry can be formulated.

Semi-structured interviews were held with representatives of the three sectors involved in an innovative social housing model, the Elizabeth Street Common Ground project. Supported with background documentation, interviews were coded and the results contrasted against theories pertaining to cross-sector collaboration.

Several factors contributed to the formation of this partnership, most notably the strong social imperative found within the organisational ethos of the participating organisations. The opportunity to replicate a well-trialled and successful model coincided with the desire among all partners to be part of the solution.

The results provide an insight into the ingredients pivotal to the formation of a successful multi-sector partnership. It highlights the value in sharing the best practice and the importance of networks when tackling major global problems such as affordable housing and homelessness.

This article aims to explore the role of organisational legitimacy in understanding the emergence and development of “cross‐sector collaboration” between social enterprises and corporations.

An in‐depth case study of a long‐standing but fragile partnership between a UK‐based Fair Trade social enterprise and a large corporate retailer provides exploratory findings on the role of legitimacy at different stages of the collaboration process.

The findings highlight how pragmatic and moral legitimacy are mobilised by the social enterprise to justify collaboration throughout three major stages: the very decision of cross‐sector collaboration; the choice of the partner and the framing of the partnership; and the evolution of the collaboration.

While Fair Trade is not the only sector in which social enterprise‐corporate partnerships take place, it has been a pioneering domain revealing the potential as well as the challenges of such partnerships. Taking into account the role of legitimacy throughout the collaborative process is crucial both for comprehensive research and for informed practice.

Although it is documented by a single case study, this paper opens new research avenues to examine social enterprise‐corporate collaborations by developing a “non‐functionalist” view of such collaborations and showing the importance of legitimacy in understanding why and how they emerge, develop and sometimes fail.