The Interorganizational Network as a Political Economy

Benson, J. Kenneth

doi:10.2307/2391696

Cited by 884 publications

(530 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

482

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In contrast to the first two areas of IOS research, studies of IOS consequences use a broad array of theories. These include the resource-based view of the firm (Barney, 1991), organizational information processing (Tushman & Nadler, 1978), resource dependence (Pfeffer & Salancik, 1978), social network theory (Powell, 1990), population ecology (Hannan & Freeman, 1989), political economy (Benson, 1975), organizational learning (Argyris & Schon, 1978), relational exchange theory (Heide, 1994), institutional theory (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983), structuration theory (Giddens, 1984), and stakeholder salience theory (Mitchell, Agle, & Wood, 1997). The relationships examined are shown in Figure 4.…”

Section: Organizational Consequences Of Ios Usementioning

confidence: 99%

Theoretical Foundations of Empirical Research on Interorganizational Systems: Assessing Past Contributions and Guiding Future Directions

Robey¹,

Im²,

Wareham³

2008

JAIS

163

191

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper guides the theoretical development of future research on interorganizational systems (IOS). We first assess past IOS research by reviewing and summarizing the findings of 51 empirical studies of IOS published in 11 IS journals between 1990 and 2003. This literature addresses three primary issues: (1) factors influencing organizational decisions to adopt IOS; (2) the impact of IOS on governance over economic transactions; and (3) the organizational consequences of IOS adoption. From our assessment of the findings and theoretical approaches taken in past research, we offer three recommendations for future research. First, the theoretical foundations of IOS research during this period are diverse, representing 17 different yet complementary theories. We recommend that researchers continue to diversify their theoretical approaches in order to address new research challenges. Second, we recommend that IOS researchers move beyond mere descriptions of IOS artifacts by engaging with IOS artifacts on theoretical grounds. Third, we identify and describe new theoretical directions for future IOS research in each of the main issue areas.

show abstract

Section: Organizational Consequences Of Ios Usementioning

confidence: 99%

Theoretical Foundations of Empirical Research on Interorganizational Systems: Assessing Past Contributions and Guiding Future Directions

Robey¹,

Im²,

Wareham³

2008

JAIS

163

191

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Dicha participación ayuda a las organizaciones a adquirir recursos tangibles (por ejemplo, bienes materiales o capital financiero) e intangibles (como información, ideas o reputación) que les permiten a las organizaciones subsistir y alcanzar posiciones competitivas. La perspectiva del intercambio (Benson, 1975;Cook, 1977) afirma que la conjunción de distintos intereses en la red puede producir beneficios para todos los agentes involucrados. Este enfoque también se denomina transaccional y se centra en los beneficios que la participación en la red puede ofrecer a sus miembros.…”

Section: El Ars Aplicado Al Estudio De Los Vínculos Interorganizativosunclassified

Evaluación de procesos comunitarios y análisis de redes inter-organizativas: elementos para mejorar la efectividad de las intervenciones comunitarias

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

El propósito de este artículo es investigar la conexión existente entre el Sentido Psicológico de Comunidad, la Participación Comunitaria y el análisis de redes organizativas, examinando la influencia que dichos enfoques ejercen en los niveles de análisis individual, organizativo y comunitario. Para alcanzar este objetivo, ofrecemos una revisión de la literatura en las tres perspectivas y, a continuación, se analiza el modo en que quedan articulados con los distintos niveles de análisis. Finalmente, exponemos algunas aportaciones que la aplicación de un enfoque ecológico multinivel puede tener para mejorar la efectividad de las intervenciones comunitarias.

show abstract

“…ainsi, si les nombreux développements des trente dernières années ont permis de résoudre 1. représentativité (cinq-Mars & Fortin, 1999;israël et al, 1998) 2. diversité (cinq-Mars & Fortin, 1999) 3. niveau d'autonomie et de pouvoir (Benson, 1975;hagebak, 1979) 4. niveau de cohérence en ce qui a trait aux motivations, valeurs et philosophies d'action et de problématisation (amblard et al, 1996;Benson, 1975;Friedberg, 1992;israel et al, 1998;Konrad, 1996;levine & white, 1961;shortell, 1993;weiss, 1981) 1. histoire de la collaboration et des liens (Bolland & wilson, 1994;cinq-Mars & Fortin, 1999;Gillies et al, 1993;israel et al, 1998) 2. climat actuel et passé (Benson, 1975;Bolland & wilson, 1994;longest, 1990;ring & van de ven, 1994) 3. niveau de reconnaissance des rôles et des responsabilités de chacun des partenaires (Benson, 1975;cinq-Mars & Fortin, 1999) 4. degré de formalisation des relations entre ceux-ci (cinq-Mars & Fortin, 1999;Friedberg, 1992;Konrad, 1996;ring & van de ven, 1994) 5. nature et la qualité du leadership de cette démarche (cinq-Mars & Fortin, 1999;israel et al, 1998) 6. nature imposée ou non de ce processus (Boland & wilson, 1994;longest, 1990) Les critères pour établir leur interaction tableau 2 La nature des partenaires et leur interaction Les critères pour établir la nature des partenaires la plupart des problèmes méthodologiques liés à la légitimité scientifique, il faut constater que le problème demeure presque entier en ce qui concerne la persuasion (volet politique). en bout de ligne : « […] social justice frameworks may still be seen as methodologically less mature (datta, 2006, p. 428).…”

Section: Les Méthodologies Requisesunclassified

L’implication des détenteurs d’enjeux (stakeholders) au sein de la démarche d’évaluation de programme: problème et/ou solution ?

Hurteau

2014

mee

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Considérant le peu d’articles publiés dans la revue Mesure et évaluation en éducation qui portent sur l’évaluation de programme, nous avons décidé de traiter de l’implication des détenteurs d’enjeux, compte tenu de l’intérêt qu’elle soulève. La première partie de l’article développe cette thématique, ce qui permet de distinguer deux problèmes, soit la sélection des participants et les modalités d’inclusion. La seconde partie consiste en une analyse des articles pertinents dans la revue en vue d’apporter des éléments de solution. Ainsi, si l’implication des détenteurs d’enjeux s’avère une solution que personne ne nie afin d’assurer la crédibilité de la démarche évaluative, il n’en demeure pas moins que son application pose plusieurs problèmes, ce qui nous amène à conclure qu’elle constitue certes une solution et aussi un problème.Considering that while there is currently an intense interest in program evaluation, actually it has been the object of few journal articles. We have chosen to develop one of the main issues in the field : the participation of stakeholders. The first part of the article allows the identification of two interrelated problems : the selection of participants and ways to involve them in the process. The second part is dedicated to the analysis of relevant articles which pose possible solutions. However, while it seems that participation of stakeholders is indeed required in order to give credibility to the evaluation process, such participation poses certain difficulties, leading to the conclusion that it, in itself, offers both solution and further problems.Considerando o pequeno número de artigos publicados na revista Mesure et évaluation en éducation sobre a avaliação de programas, decidimos tratar a implicação do público interessado (“stakeholders”), tendo em conta o interesse que suscita. A primeira parte do artigo desenvolve esta temática, o que permite distinguir dois problemas : a selecção dos participantes e as formas do seu envolvimento no processo. A segunda parte consiste numa análise de artigos pertinentes publicados na revista com o objectivo de encontrar soluções possíveis. No entanto, se a implicação do público interessado (“stakeholders”) se torna uma solução que ninguém nega para assegurar a credibilidade do processo de avaliação, não é menos verdade que a sua aplicação coloca muitos problemas, o que nos leva a concluir que ela constitui, simultaneamente, uma solução e um problema

show abstract

The Interorganizational Network as a Political Economy

Cited by 884 publications

References 16 publications

Theoretical Foundations of Empirical Research on Interorganizational Systems: Assessing Past Contributions and Guiding Future Directions

Theoretical Foundations of Empirical Research on Interorganizational Systems: Assessing Past Contributions and Guiding Future Directions

Evaluación de procesos comunitarios y análisis de redes inter-organizativas: elementos para mejorar la efectividad de las intervenciones comunitarias

L’implication des détenteurs d’enjeux (stakeholders) au sein de la démarche d’évaluation de programme: problème et/ou solution ?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About