No abstract

Many countries use state‐owned, for‐profit, and third sector organizations to provide public services, generating ‘hybrid’ organizational forms. This article examines how the hybridization of organizations in the public sector is influenced by interaction between regulatory change and professional communities. It presents qualitative data on three areas of the UK public sector that have undergone marketization: healthcare, broadcasting, and postal services. Implementation of market‐based reform in public sector organizations is shaped by sector‐specific differences in professional communities, as these groups interact with reform processes. Sectoral differences in communities include their power to influence reform, their persistence despite reform, and their alignment with the direction of change or innovation. Equally, the dynamics of professional communities can be affected by reform. Policymakers need to take account of the ways that implementation of hybrid forms interacts with professional communities, including risk of disrupting existing relationships based on communities that contribute to learning.

We present two linked, longitudinal case studies of the use of quasi-markets in United Kingdom broadcasting over the past decade: one looks at the regulated outsourcing of programme making to independent producers, the other at the development of an internal market system within the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC). New network forms are shown to have arisen from the interaction of legal regulation, contracts, and property rights. However, these organisational forms are also seen to be associated with increased transaction costs and with signs of deterioration in programme quality and innovation. We suggest that for such networks to be a viable "third way" between markets and hierarchy, closer attention needs to be given to the issue of institutional design.

In UK public service broadcasting, recent regulatory change has increased the role of the private sector in television production, culminating in the BBC"s introduction of "creative competition" between in-house and independent television producers. Using the concept of "cognitive variety", this paper focuses on the increasing role of the independent sector as a source of creativity and innovation in the delivery of programming for the BBC. The paper shows that the intended benefit of introducing new competencies has been thwarted by, on the one hand, a high level of cognitive proximity between in-house and external producers and, on the other, a conflict in values between the BBC and the independent sector, with many of the larger producers responding to a commercial imperative that encourages creativity in profitable genres, but leaves gaps in other areas of provision. Implications for the literature on communities of practice are noted.

This article builds on a legal institutionalist approach to assess market-based regulatory change in British television production over the last three decades. It explores how formal rules governing television production constitute market relations, and whether these rules are likely to be evaded by television producers and commissioners in a context where contracting depends heavily on social norms of cooperation, reciprocity and flexibility. Using qualitative data, this article suggests that changes in law and terms of trade intended to promote a market in television production have not had a straightforward or linear effect: compulsory independent production quotas and licensing models of terms of trade have redrawn organizational boundaries in unexpected ways, disturbed the public service remit and engendered new financial flows. Formal rules were nonetheless central to the trajectory of the television production industry, as they were a constitutive element of changes in the power structure of the sector towards producers’ interests.