Santiago Pulido-Gómez, Jorrit de Jong, Jan W Rivkin
{"title":"城市跨部门合作:学习之旅还是指责游戏?","authors":"Santiago Pulido-Gómez, Jorrit de Jong, Jan W Rivkin","doi":"10.1093/jopart/muae026","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The success of cross-sector collaborations (CSCs) in cities is mixed, and important questions remain about what distinguishes effective from ineffective collaborations. This comparative case study examined nine CSCs in three U.S. cities covering three public policy areas: education, economic development, and public safety. Nine group interviews, 110 individual interviews, and analysis of archival documents revealed common patterns, allowing us to build grounded theory about the roots of CSC success. We propose that how a collaboration responds to setbacks plays a crucial role. Success arises in collaborations that respond to setbacks with a process of mutual learning, in which participants come to anticipate each other’s actions, devise new ways of apportioning labor, and approach problems collectively. In contrast, failure follows when setbacks lead collaborations into a process of mutual blaming. No single mode of network governance is especially associated with success, but more successful collaborations tend to be characterized by adaptability concerning governance mode. Mutual learning appears to be facilitated by a few key actions: building on prior relationships, relying on trusted key participants, engaging with the community, using data to advantage, and investing in joint problem-solving. Our findings suggest that collaborative leaders in public, private, and nonprofit organizations should emphasize these key actions to enable collaboration and facilitate mutual learning.","PeriodicalId":48366,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory","volume":"23 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cross-Sector Collaboration In Cities: Learning Journey Or Blame Game?\",\"authors\":\"Santiago Pulido-Gómez, Jorrit de Jong, Jan W Rivkin\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/jopart/muae026\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The success of cross-sector collaborations (CSCs) in cities is mixed, and important questions remain about what distinguishes effective from ineffective collaborations. This comparative case study examined nine CSCs in three U.S. cities covering three public policy areas: education, economic development, and public safety. Nine group interviews, 110 individual interviews, and analysis of archival documents revealed common patterns, allowing us to build grounded theory about the roots of CSC success. We propose that how a collaboration responds to setbacks plays a crucial role. Success arises in collaborations that respond to setbacks with a process of mutual learning, in which participants come to anticipate each other’s actions, devise new ways of apportioning labor, and approach problems collectively. In contrast, failure follows when setbacks lead collaborations into a process of mutual blaming. No single mode of network governance is especially associated with success, but more successful collaborations tend to be characterized by adaptability concerning governance mode. Mutual learning appears to be facilitated by a few key actions: building on prior relationships, relying on trusted key participants, engaging with the community, using data to advantage, and investing in joint problem-solving. Our findings suggest that collaborative leaders in public, private, and nonprofit organizations should emphasize these key actions to enable collaboration and facilitate mutual learning.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48366,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory\",\"volume\":\"23 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muae026\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muae026","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Cross-Sector Collaboration In Cities: Learning Journey Or Blame Game?
The success of cross-sector collaborations (CSCs) in cities is mixed, and important questions remain about what distinguishes effective from ineffective collaborations. This comparative case study examined nine CSCs in three U.S. cities covering three public policy areas: education, economic development, and public safety. Nine group interviews, 110 individual interviews, and analysis of archival documents revealed common patterns, allowing us to build grounded theory about the roots of CSC success. We propose that how a collaboration responds to setbacks plays a crucial role. Success arises in collaborations that respond to setbacks with a process of mutual learning, in which participants come to anticipate each other’s actions, devise new ways of apportioning labor, and approach problems collectively. In contrast, failure follows when setbacks lead collaborations into a process of mutual blaming. No single mode of network governance is especially associated with success, but more successful collaborations tend to be characterized by adaptability concerning governance mode. Mutual learning appears to be facilitated by a few key actions: building on prior relationships, relying on trusted key participants, engaging with the community, using data to advantage, and investing in joint problem-solving. Our findings suggest that collaborative leaders in public, private, and nonprofit organizations should emphasize these key actions to enable collaboration and facilitate mutual learning.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory serves as a bridge between public administration or public management scholarship and public policy studies. The Journal aims to provide in-depth analysis of developments in the organizational, administrative, and policy sciences as they apply to government and governance. Each issue brings you critical perspectives and cogent analyses, serving as an outlet for the best theoretical and research work in the field. The Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory is the official journal of the Public Management Research Association.