TAD10: Workshops

Workshop 1 – Metrics and methods in collaborative settings

Co-Chairs: Ileana Steccolini (Bocconi University) and Patria de Lancer Julnes (University of Baltimore)

In recent decades we have witnessed the emergence of a performance measurement movement, accompanied by “NPM – style” reforms in Europe and “reinventing government” reforms in the US, that have infused in the public sector logics of quantification, rationality, competition and managerialisation.

However, the performance measurement movement has often fallen short of expectations as its underlying logics often appear to be at odds with the political and professional ones. Moreover, it is currently challenged by the increased hybridisation in the provision of public services on the one hand and the crisis of modern democratic representation processes on the other. Indeed, public services are increasingly delivered by a diverse and complex bundle of players including public-private partnerships, nongovernmental organizations, and emerging forms of co-production. This requires to better specify who is accountable, for what, and to whom, as well as to investigate who uses performance mesures and for what purposes. Similarly the evolution that modern democracies are undergoing, calling for new forms of representation, poses new challenges for current performance-based accountability systems.

In this context, this workshop welcomes papers that address questions such as: What is the role of metrics and measurement in ensuring accountability and democratic representation? How are professional and political ethos being embodied in performance measurement systems? What is the role of metrics and measurement in ensuring accountability in hybrid settings? How are hybrid forms of provision of public services affecting the development of metrics in the public sector?

Workshop 2 – Institutional relations, network structure and network management: what does it matter?

Co-Chairs: Jacob Torfing (Roskilde Universitet) and Brint Milward (University of Arizona)

Although public bureaucracies are still in place and quasi-markets have been expanding as a part of NPM, we are witnessing a persistent surge in collaborative governance in and through networks, partnerships and alliances. This workshop aims to explore when collaborative forms of governance are reasonable alternatives to markets and hierarchies and how and under what conditions collaborative forms of governance can contribute to making public governance more cost-efficient, more effective, more democratic and perhaps more innovative . It also endeavors to assess the impact of institutional relations and environments, the internal network structures and the exercise of network management on the achievement of these outcomes. The panel welcomes theoretical as well as empirical papers and encourages the use of different theoretical perspectives and methodological strategies


Workshop 3 – Social and cognitive boundaries in collaborative administration

Co-Chairs: Louise Fitzgerald (University of Oxford, UK) and Myrna Mandell (California State University, Northridge (CSUN)

We invite papers to this workshop focusing on the form and role of boundaries in collaborative administration. Here, we adopt a broad definition of ‘boundaries’ to include social, cognitive, professional and even emotional boundaries which may impact on the effective functioning of networks. In this workshop, we hope to build on prior research which has identified many of the issues in effective collaboration created by organizational and geographic boundaries and extend knowledge on the impact of social, cognitive and professional boundaries.

Areas for further exploration include: how can inclusivity of stakeholders be balanced against strategic decision-making? Understanding how individuals from differing disciplinary and professional backgrounds may share knowledge and collaborate effectively?-what is the role of ‘common knowledge’?

Novel approaches to the topic are encouraged.

Workshop 4 – Where is the pivot of networks? The role of the network manager

Co-Chairs: Jörg Raab (Tilburg University) and Chris Koliba (University of Vermont)

The public management research community has produced many conceptual and empirical advances that have demonstrated the importance of networks and collaborative settings to modern governance. However, the bulk of knowledge in this area remains more on the macro level, while our knowledge of micro level roles of individuals within networks remains limited. This workshop critically explores the role of individuals as the potential leverage points of network functionality. We encourage submissions to this workshop that focus on empirical research and conceptual frameworks that shed deeper light on the management in networks and the management of networks (Provan and Milward 2006). Studies that focus on network management activities undertaken at the operational level (e.g. management of day-to-day tasks), at the tactical level (e.g. coordination of tasks on the intermediate time scale), and/or at the strategic level (e.g. management of longer term direction, steering and “metagovernance”) are welcome. We also welcome submissions that focus on the interplay between these different levels and management, and their demonstrated effects on structures, processes or outcomes of networks. Implications for theory, practice and/or education are to be explored.

Workshop 5: Networks in the Social, Welfare, Cultural, and Emergency Fields: Solution or a Symptom of Rising Complexity

Co-Chairs: Joyce Liddle (Aix-Marseilles Université) and Dale Krane (University of Nebraska Omaha)

Traditional public administration was declared dead more than twenty years ago, and a movement away from hierarchical public bureaucracy has prompted a search to understand the growing reliance on public management networks and collaborative governance. Underlying this shift are two simple facts (1) many problems confronting citizens in any country do not stay put in a given locale, and (2) many problems exceed the scope and capacity on any one public agency or jurisdiction. Consequently, solutions to complex societal problems increasingly require multiple organizations working together often across public-private boundaries. Collaborative forms of administration are supplementing and even supplanting “top-down” forms. As a result, the nature of public management is also changing because command-and-control styles are ineffective in multi-organizational and multi-sectorial arrangements. State and non-state actor collaboration in networked governance to create and achieve commonly agreed objectives exposes gaps in institutional coverage and challenges democratic accountability. However, in the move from vertical, hierarchical, state controlled government jurisdictions to matrix governance and in an absence of authoritative co-ordination, network participants can elicit knowledge and preferences of citizens and other interests beyond those of state politicians and officials. Much has been written about the creation and maintenance of networks, the benefits of collaboration, or the superiority of networked forms of governance, but we still lack in depth knowledge on many important aspects of network formation and operation. New assemblages of interests are now part of the shifting state architecture involving many diffuse patterns of interactions, and these coalitions can present new issues, problems and conflicts. We seek theoretical, methodological and empirical papers as contributions to the advancement of knowledge and understanding of complex governance in the fields of cultural, social, welfare, and emergency services. In particular we welcome proposals for papers on the following topics:

  • How can integrated leadership create and maintain networks of shared administration?
  • What types and forms of leadership emerge within matrix arrangements?
  • Are new theoretical and methodological approaches needed to examine collaborative and network governance?
  • Are there distinctive challenges to shared administration in the provision and delivery of social, welfare, cultural, and emergency services?
  • What sectorial variations in collaborative administration occur in social, welfare, cultural and emergency services?

How and why are some networks more successful than others?

How does the build-up of trust help network partners to function better and achieve common goals?

What similarities and differences in collaborative administration can be found in social, welfare, cultural, and emergency services delivery?

How can democratic accountability be ensured in networked governance and shared administration?