The effects of boundary spanners on trust and performance of urban governance networks: findings from survey research on urban development projects in the Netherlands

Abstract

Article, published, full reference:Reference:Van Meerkerk, I., and J. Edelenbos (2014). The effects of boundary spanners on trust and performance of urban governance networks: findings from survey research on urban development projects in the Netherlands. Policy Sciences, 47 (1): 3-24.A previous version of the manuscript was presented at: the Annual Conference of the International Research Society for Public Management (IRSPM). Panel: Predicting the performance of public networks: Rome (2012, april 11 -april 13). 2 The Effects of Boundary Spanners on Trust and Performance of Urban Governance Networks Findings from Survey Research on Urban Development Projects in The Netherlands AbstractPrevious research has extensively analyzed the role, and indicated the importance, of network management for the functioning and performance of public or governance networks. In this article, we focus on the influence of boundary spanning actors in such networks -an aspect less examined in the governance network literature. Boundary spanners are considered to be important for governance network performance. Building on the literature, we expect a mediating role of trust in this relationship. To empirically test these relationships, we conducted survey research (N=141) among project managers involved in urban governance networks: networks around complex urban projects that include the organizations involved in the governance process (the formulation of policies, decision making, and implementation) in these complex projects. We found a strong positive relationship between the presence of boundary spanners and trust and governance network performance. The results indicate a partially mediating role of trust in this relationship. Furthermore, we found that these boundary spanners originated mainly from private and societal organizations, and less from governmental organizations.

Network Management--New Strategies in Elderly Services for Thai Government

“…The results show that trust has a positive influence on the network performance. This corresponds to Meerkerk and Edelenbos (2014). The results were showed trust has a positive influence on the network performance.…”

“…3) Making the group targets agreement to operate the agency can merge agreement by taking into account the objectives of all parties (Thomson, et al, 2007). 4) Well-coordinated task by using informal and informal communication channels to exchange views with other agencies (Meerkerk & Edelenbos, 2014). 5) Monitoring and assessing work of the partners to ensure that they are operating according to their roles and responsibilities (Van Wart, 2015).…”

“…Therefore, partners would focus on working together to achieve their goals instead of focusing on the details of each partner (MÖllering, 2006). There is a greater possibility that partners will invest in long-term resources as well as stimulate learning, causing an innovative for problem solution which will lead to more success for network management (Meerkerk & Edelenbos, 2014).…”

The Co-Evolution of Institutional Logics and Boundary Spanning in Sustainability Transitions: the Case of Urban Stormwater Management in Melbourne, Australia

“…Langan-Fox and Cooper, 2014;Meerkerk & Edelenbos, 2013;Williams, 2002Williams, , 2010) from which we draw to characterize them (Table 1). Building on this understanding we subsequently link these attributes and ways of working with the microfoundations of institutional logics and explain how a combination of boundary spanners' characteristics enables the use of the availability, accessibility, and activation mechanisms (Table 2).…”

“…Boundary spanners' attributes mean they can conceptualize and act upon this heterogeneous institutional environment, which they do through their particular ways of working. While boundary spanners are highly trusted individuals familiar with the formal and informal norms of an organization and its field (Steadman, 1992;Williams, 2002), they often inhibit a peripheral position or show inter-organizational mobility (Meerkerk & Edelenbos, 2013;Organ, 1971). This attribute enables boundary spanners to be more reflective and critical about routine behaviour, allowing them to discover and recognize the value of innovative practices (Organ, 1971;Williams, 2012b).…”