This research seeks to explain the structure of the interorganizational network of international development organizations, including international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs) and intergovernmental organizations (IGOs). The study uses a multitheoretical, multilevel model to examine the endogenous and exogenous influences on the international development organization network. Results indicate that homophily, mutuality, transitivity, and centralization influence the configuration of the international development organizational network. In particular, IGOs tended to collaborate with IGOs; both INGOs and IGOs were likely to seek joint dependencies over asymmetric dependencies; some organizations acted as intermediary coordinators; and organizations were more likely to form collaborations with partners of partners. Implications for executive directors of INGOs and policymakers are drawn from the results.

The importance and popularity of interorganizational collaboration among nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) have grown considerably in recent years. Despite these growths, however, not much is known about why NGOs network the way they do or why NGO networks are structured the way they are. Using homophily theory and exponential random graph modeling, this study examines the patterns of interorganizational collaborative ties among infectious diseases international NGOs (INGOs) in 2007 (n = 94). The results suggest that these NGOs are more likely to collaborate when they have the same status, when they have similar (closer) founding dates, when they are headquartered in the same global hemisphere (north/south), when they have common funding partners, and when they are headquartered in the same geographic regions. Overall, the findings from this study suggest that various sources of homophily inform partner selection among infectious disease INGOs.

No abstract

Interorganizational communication describes the structures, forms, and processes created by the exchange of messages and the co‐creation of meaning among organizations and their stakeholders. Research in this area has its roots in the study of organizational interlocks and boundary spanners and, more recently, in the field of communication, especially when conceptualized as networks. Several theories have been used to explain the emergence of interorganizational communication. Traditional theories have focused on economic and sociological explanations. More recent theories have given primacy to communication based mechanisms. Interorganizational communication encompasses four distinct types of relations: affinity, flow, representational, and semantic. Most research to date has focused on affinity interorganizational communication, or the socially constructed relationships between organizations in which communication is implicitly assumed to facilitate the creation of shared meaning and coordination of organizational activities. The prospects for advancing research and theory in interorganizational communication depend upon attending to these types of relations.

This research examines the antecedents that motivate and prepare social entrepreneurs to begin social ventures. Drawing from in-depth interviews with 20 social entrepreneurs, this research reveals that there are two paths to social entrepreneurship: the activist path and the business path. Both activist and business social entrepreneurs were motivated by a family legacy or a transformative early adulthood experience as the moral basis for forming a social venture, and both suggested that prior work experience was instrumental in helping them launch their social venture. However, activist social entrepreneurs were likely to form their social venture as a continuation of their ongoing work on a social issue. In contrast, business social entrepreneurs' first activity on a social issue was to form a social venture. This research suggests that these two different paths to social entrepreneurship result in different types of social ventures.