Bridging the accountability gap in hybrid organizations: the case of Copenhagen Malmö Port

Abstract

Previous research on hybrid organizations has drawn attention to the accountability gap that is believed to emerge when the provision of public services is transferred to a hybrid organization. In this article we take our point of departure in that research and use a case study method to explore whether this gap can be bridged by existing corporate governance systems or if governance systems specially tailored to hybrid forms need to be developed. The result of the study shows that the process is equally important as the system in place. That is, it is not only the actual system but also how the system is implemented and used that affects the ability to bridge the accountability gap. Points for practitioners This article provides insight into how the hybrid form alters the relationship between citizens, elected politicians and organizations performing public services and, consequently, how the ability to secure accountability in public services changes. The results presented in the article provide politicians and managers in the public sector with knowledge regarding how, by focusing on organizational processes, relationships between stakeholders and performance evaluation can work with improving accountability in hybrid organizations. Further, the article stresses the need for performance evaluation to encompass not only financial aspects, but also the societal values of the public services performed by the hybrid organization.

Editorial

“…Denis et al (2015) proposed, for instance, four dimensions of hybridity: structures, institutional dynamics, Theme: Performance measurement of hybrid organizations-emerging issues and future research perspectives practices, and identities. Others have differentiated between hybrid organizations and hybrid modes or mechanisms (for example Seibel, 2015), as well as between governance modes, as for example, dimensions of accountability (Grossi and Thomasson, 2015).…”

Reducing Risk in Public-Private Partnership Contracts

“…The perspectives of different stakeholders are important in considering 3Ps, since 3Ps are generally long-term partnership between two stakeholder groups -the public agency and the private firm -with implications for a third category of stakeholders -users and the general public (Forrer, Kee, Newcomer, & Boyer, 2010;Grossi & Thomasson, 2015;Liyanage & Villalba-Romero, 2015).…”

Devlet Bütçesi̇ Açisindan Kamu Özel İşbi̇rli̇ği̇ Projeleri̇nde Hi̇bri̇d Yöneti̇şi̇m Standartlarinin Geli̇şti̇ri̇lmesi̇ni̇n Önemi̇

“…Bu hibrid iyi yönetişim standardında cevaplanması gereken temel soru taraflar arasındaki güvenin nasıl oluştuğu ve bu güvenin nasıl KÖİP'lerde faydalı bir şekilde kullanılabileceğidir. Grossi ve Thomasson, (2015) çalışmalarında, kamu açısından hesap verebilirliğin arttırılması konusu üzerinde durmuşlar ve finansal ve toplumsal değerleri kapsayacak performans değerlendirmesi üzerinde çalışmışlardır. Grossi ve Thomasson, hibrid bir kuruluş olan KÖİP'lerin finansman, mülkiyet ve organizasyon yapısının, farklı amaçlar ve tarih açısından birbirlerinden farklılıklar gösterebileceğini, ancak; ortak özellikleri de olduğunu belirtmişlerdir.…”