2002
DOI: 10.1111/1540-6210.00240
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Managing Networks: Propositions on What Managers Do and Why They Do It

Abstract: Measuring management in networks is difficult because the allocation of managerial resources in network structures is fluid-that is, the utilization of management behaviors varies across time and space within a given program or project. As a means of focusing the network management research agenda, propositions based in contingency logic are suggested to test ideas regarding when, why, and how network managers undertake these behaviors. The propositions are intended to identify the vast inventory of network ma… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
220
0
16

Year Published

2007
2007
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
2
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 245 publications
(238 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
2
220
0
16
Order By: Relevance
“…Such an activities-based approach aligns with research that depicts management as a set of activities (e.g., planning, organizing, leading, controlling) (Manser et al, 2015;Tsoukas, 1994;Watson, 2006) and with network literature that suggests that more attention should be given to the process of orchestrating the network (e.g., Dhanaraj & Parkhe, 2006;Jones et al, 1997). Focusing on network management activities also has managerial importance: if scholarship's ultimate goal is to inform action and provide managerial guidance, we need new models of network management that fit this need (McGuire, 2002). Only if we develop a more detailed insight into network management activities we can begin to understand "what exactly should be done and how" (Provan & Kenis, 2007, p. 248).…”
Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Such an activities-based approach aligns with research that depicts management as a set of activities (e.g., planning, organizing, leading, controlling) (Manser et al, 2015;Tsoukas, 1994;Watson, 2006) and with network literature that suggests that more attention should be given to the process of orchestrating the network (e.g., Dhanaraj & Parkhe, 2006;Jones et al, 1997). Focusing on network management activities also has managerial importance: if scholarship's ultimate goal is to inform action and provide managerial guidance, we need new models of network management that fit this need (McGuire, 2002). Only if we develop a more detailed insight into network management activities we can begin to understand "what exactly should be done and how" (Provan & Kenis, 2007, p. 248).…”
Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Deze 'managers' hebben een prominente taak in het bijeenbrengen, enthousiasmeren, steunen en aansturen van mensen (McGuire, 2002). Een veiligheidscoördinator hoort het 'hele plaatje' -van politie en justitie tot hulpverlening en nazorg -te overzien.…”
Section: Tussentijdse Conclusieunclassified
“…This insight builds on a recent surge of research on the role that networks play in the capacity of public organizations (Agranoff, 2006;McGuire, 2002;Milward & Provan, 2000;O'Toole & Meier, 2004;Provan, Huang, & Milward, 2009;Weber & Khademian, 2008). Little of this research, however, examines knowledge interdependences in informal public sector networks.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%