A Preliminary Theory of Interorganizational Network Effectiveness: A Comparative Study of Four Community Mental Health Systems

Leadership, Service Reform, and Public-Service Networks: The Case of Cancer-Genetics Pilots in the English NHS

“…In Derton, in contrast, the pilot was aligned with the managerial agenda of the wider network, indicating that the susceptibility of networks to top-down pressures (Keast and Brown 2006;Addicott et al 2007) is not necessarily an obstacle to collaboration within them (cf. Provan and Milward 1995;Moynihan and Ingraham 2003;Olsen 2006)-provided those concerned know which -mild pressures‖ to exert, as the lead here put it. Rather, there was complementarity between the collegiate, ‗quiet' leadership embodied by the pilot team and the slightly more directive leadership deployed by the network manager, who recognized the synergy between the aims of the network and those of the pilot.…”

“…However, evident from both these studies was the degree to which primary-care actors were sidelined within the networks and in service reform. The marginality of this locus of power was instrumental in Nottley's failure and almost derailed Derton's project too, and in more general terms, the need for policymakers to align incentives and levers, through integration or centralization within the network, is strong (Provan and Milward 1995;Milward and Provan 1998;Provan et al 2004;Keast and Brown 2006). Client-level networking between practitioners (Provan and Sebastian 1998) needs to be supported by organizational integration that supports practitioners' efforts and enables the establishment of change in the face of prevailing institutional pressures.…”

“…The evolution of the approach, exemplified in approaches such as ‗Reinventing Government' and ‗modernization' that aim for a more totalizing, transformative effect on public services, has precipitated an increasing need for new organizational forms and new forms of leadership. As Ferlie et al (1996: 13) have it, this model of New Public Management that emerged from the 1990s onward moves away from hierarchical forms and leadership approaches towards -new management styles, such as management by influence; an increased role for network forms of organization; stress on strategic alliances between organizations as a new organizational form.‖ Collaborative organizational forms and associated new forms of leadership have gained currency among governments of many developed-world countries (Scharpf 1993;Provan and Milward 1995;Rhodes 1997;Agranoff and McGuire 2003;Hall and O'Toole 2004;Meier 2004). In the UK, the publicservice network has been seen as a means of ‗joining up' service provision even as hierarchy and market have remained, and indeed been strengthened, as modes of governance.…”

“…In the UK, the publicservice network has been seen as a means of ‗joining up' service provision even as hierarchy and market have remained, and indeed been strengthened, as modes of governance. Though the notions of the intra-and inter-organizational network are founded in the private sector (see Nohria and Eccles 1992;Reed 1992), there is a growing literature on their role in public-service provision (Provan and Milward 1995;O'Toole 1997;Peters and Pierre 1998;Rashman and Hartley 2002). Private-sector networks are largely explained in terms of reduced transaction costs and interdependence between firms, but for public-service organizations, network-level outcomes for clients are additionally seen as a motivation for integration (Provan and Sebastian 1998).…”

The Network Governance of Crisis Response: Case Studies of Incident Command Systems

“…While almost all previous treatments of the ICS focus on its hierarchical aspects, this article suggests that it is better understood as a means of network governance, designed to coordinate interdependent responders under urgent conditions. Network theorists propose that networks can vary in the distribution of authority between members (Provan and Kenis 2008;Provan and Milward 1995), and the ICS is an example of a highly centralized mode of network governance.…”