Evaluating the Role of Government Collaboration in the Perceived Performance of Community-Based Nonprofits: Three Propositions

The topic of government–nonprofit collaboration continues to be much-discussed in the literature. However, there has been little consensus on whether and how collaborating with government is beneficial for the performance of community-based nonprofits. This article examines three dominant theoretical interpretations of the relationship between collaboration and performance: collaboration is necessary for the performance of nonprofits; the absence of collaboration is necessary for the performance of nonprofits; and the effect of collaboration is contingent on the nonprofits’ bridging and bonding network ties. Building on the ideas of governance, nonprofit, and social capital in their respective literature, this article uses set-theoretic methods (fsQCA) to conceptualize and test their relationship. Results show the pivotal role of the nonprofit’s network ties in mitigating the effects of either collaborating or abstaining from collaborating with government. Particularly, the political network ties of nonprofits are crucial to explaining the relationship between collaboration and performance. The evidence demonstrates the value of studying collaboration processes in context

Self-organization and the role of government: how and why does self-organization evolves in the shadow of hierarchy?

The public sector in general and the role of government in particular has been recently subject of a fundamental discussion. This discussion is fueled by four developments. 1) We observe that in many European countries, the government is forced to follow a regime of austerity which leads to major cutbacks. 2) As a result the idea is embraced that communities and networks would be an interesting alternative, to fill in these gasps. 3) Important in the creation and functioning of these communities is that new governance arrangements are being pursued that are based on the idea of self-organization, which turn existing playing rules upside down, thereby by establishing new positions, relations and playing rules. 4) At the same time our empirical understanding about how self-organization take place in the public sector is relatively scarce. However, when looking at the concept of self-organization it is interesting to see what self-organization processes implies for the position of government organizations and other actors that are involved, as well as the relationships that are been established between them in this process of self-organization. This issue is even more interesting in policy areas in which government organizations have traditionally played an important role, like welfare services. Compared to, for instance other actors like citizens, interest groups, companies or even professional organizations (like welfare organizations), government organizations are not an ordinary actor, given the knowledge and expertise that they have, the legal competences that they often possess as well as the funds that they have at their disposal. That is why we want to understand under which conditions processes of self-organization take place in especially the welfare sector, and how this process of self-organization affects the position of governmental organizations. In doing so we want to understand how self-organization processes shape the relationship between government and especially citizens that are engaged in processes of collective action. This is important because self-organization may not always imply that the role of government will become obsolete. Some years ago and in relation to the discussion about the emergence of the so-called ‘hollow state’, some scholars talked about ‘networks in the shadow of hierarchies’ (Scharp, 1994; Milward & Provan , 2000). However , perhaps we are witnessing another development that turns this idea upside down: how do the state organizations or hierarchies evolve in the shadow of self-organizing networks? This leads to the following research question: How do processes of self-organization influence the role and position of government organizations in the community-based production of locale welfare services and how can this role be explained? In order to explore this research question we first address the concept of self-organization and the conditions that favor self-organization. Furthermore, we also address how self-organizations affect the role of government vis à vis other actors, thereby also looking at theories that explore the notion of meta-governance as well as notions that try to explain what relationships are between networks and hierarchies. Based on this theoretical exploration, we will develop a research strategy that helps us to investigate our research question. We will conduct a comparative and nested case study. The case study is focused on the establishment and functioning of so-called community enterprises that emerged in the Netherlands during the last years. These enterprises are based on the idea of self-organization in order to produce welfare services in neighborhoods that replace services that were formally produced by professional welfare organizations, which were funded by local governments. Two neighborhood enterp

What makes public-private partnerships work? Survey research into the outcomes and the quality of cooperation in PPPs

Public–private partnerships (PPPs) are often regarded as the solution for time and budget overruns in large infrastructural projects, but not all are successful. This raises the question of what really makes PPPs work. Focusing on the role of relational aspects, this article examines the degree to which trust and managerial activities correlate to the perceived performance and cooperation process in PPP projects. A multilevel analysis of survey data from 144 respondents involved in Dutch PPP projects shows that both trust and management correlate significantly to the perceived performance of these projects. Moreover, trust is associated with a good cooperation process

Pathways to collaborative performance: examining the different combinations of conditions under which collaborations are successful

The literature on collaborative governance has generated several comprehensive models detailing the conditions which collaborations must meet to achieve collaborative performance. The importance of each separate condition – such as the presence of incentives to participate, appropriate institutional designs, or facilitative leadership – has been validated in various studies. How all of these conditions interact with each other, and whether all of the conditions need to be present to achieve performance, is less well understood. Leveraging the rich resource of the newly created Collaborative Governance Case Database, this article explores the different pathways to performance used by 26 local collaborations. The analysis shows that the presence of strong incentives for partners to collaborate is a crucial condition for success; almost all performing cases shared this starting point. Performance was then achieved by combining strong incentives with either clear institutional design (e.g. explicit rules, transparent decision-making) or with intensive collaborative processes (e.g. face-to-face dialogue, knowledge sharing). This analysis shows that the current models for collaborative governance can serve as roadmaps, laying out all of the different conditions than may be important, but that collaborations can follow different routes to reach their objectives

Boundary-spanning strategies for aligning institutional logics

This article critically examines strategies used by boundary spanners to align the institutional logics of bureaucracy, management and networks in citizenstate interactions. In-depth interviews conducted within the Dutch municipality of Rotterdam reveal that boundary spanners use entrepreneurial, mediation, and hierarchical strategies to align institutional logics. By providing insight into the strategic toolbox of boundary spanners and the perceived effectiveness of these tools, this article enhances empirical understanding of how the interplay between older and newer institutional logics within public organisations takes shape and how boundary spanners make strategic use of hierarchy to overcome institutional barriers

Slimme sturing van publiek-private samenwerking bij publieke infrastructuur

Bij de aanleg en het beheer van publieke infrastructuur heeft het Rijk de laatste jaren voor publiek-private samenwerking, en met name voor het DBFM(O)-contract, als slim arrangement gekozen: langlopende contracten waarbij het ontwerp (D), de bouw (B), de financiering (F), het onderhoud (M) en vaak ook de exploitatie (O) integraal worden uitbesteed aan een privaat consortium. Met deze slimme DBFM(O)-contracten wordt getracht de sterke punten van overheid en de markt te combineren om de steeds grotere en complexere publieke opgaven aan te kunnen. De praktijk blijkt echter weerbarstig: recent hebben Rijkswaterstaat en een aantal private partijen het initiatief genomen tot wat zij noemden ‘een nieuwe marktvisie

The governance of self-organization: Which governance strategy do policy officials and citizens prefer?

This article compares views of policy officials and members of community-based collectives on the ideal role of government in processes of community self-organization. By using Q methodology, we presented statements on four different governance perspectives: traditional public administration, New Public Management, network governance, and self-governance. Perceptions differ about how government should respond to the trend of community self-organization and, in particular, about the primacy of the relationship. Whereas some public servants and collectives favor hands-off involvement of policy officials, others show a preference for a more direct and interactive relation between government and community-based collectives. In general, neither of the two groups have much appreciation for policy instruments based on performance indicators, connected to the New Public Management perspective or strong involvement of politicians, connected the traditional public administration perspective. This article contributes to the discussion of how practitioners see and combine governance perspectives and serve to enable dialogs between practitioners