A Communicative Framework of Value in Cross-Sector Partnerships

Abstract

Cross-sector partnerships (XSPs) are an important part of today's organizational landscape and a favored strategy for addressing complex social problems. However, a discrepancy exists between the popularity and prevalence of XSPs and evidence of their ability to produce value with respect to the problems they address. We therefore offer a framework for increasing and assessing XSP value based on an alternative conception of organizational constitution rooted in communication theory. Our central argument is that the overall value of XSPs is not merely in connecting interested parties but, rather, in their ability to act-to substantially influence the people and issues within their problem domain. This ability, we argue, comes from the constitution of organizational forms that are distinct from their members and that display collective agency-the capacity to influence a host of relevant outcomes beyond what individual organizations could do on their own. Our primary contributions are developing a framework for understanding XSP constitution in terms of communication processes and explaining how XSP value can be increased and assessed through communication practices. Addressing complex social issues such as poverty, crime, economic development, and public health cannot be managed by any single entity; increasingly, such problems require collaboration across multiple organizations (Selsky & Parker, 2005). These cross-sector partnerships (XSPs)-involving businesses, government, and civil society groups-make up a unique form of social organization. XSPs are multilateral collectives that engage in mutual problem solving, information sharing, and resource allocation

Tackling Grand Challenges Pragmatically: Robust Action Revisited

“…Taking a 35 distributed approach to stakeholder theory could help researchers better understand current developments in the governance landscape, both at the national and transnational level (Bruszt & McDermott, 2014;Djelic & Sahlin-Andersson, 2006;Sabel & Zeitlin, 2012), as well as the growth of private regulatory initiatives and cross-sector partnerships (Bartley, 2007;Koschmann, Kuhn, & Pfarrer, 2012;Mair et al, 2012). of the global economy is leading to the demise of the public corporation (Davis, 2010) and the ascendance of local forms of organizing (Davis, 2013).…”

From ‘matters of concern’ to ‘matters of authority’: Studying the performativity of strategy from a communicative constitution of organization (CCO) approach

“…These persons or things -and this is a central point in our argument about performativity -become co-authors of our actions and decisions, since they also express themselves through what we communicate. This idea also comes from the etymology of the word auctor, which itself comes from the Latin word augere, which means to augment (Cooren, 2010 Koschmann, 2012;Koschmann et al, 2012).…”

Communicative Dynamics and the Polyphony of Corporate Social Responsibility in the Network Society

“…Communication and symbolic representations interactively construct worlds, symbolic forms, narrations and myths about organizations and their legitimacy (Christensen andCheney 2000, 2011;Meyer and Rowan 1977;Schultz 2011). Organizations are thus also constructs that emerge in (Taylor and Van Every 2000) and consist of communications (Christensen and Cornelissen 2011;Koschmann et al 2012).…”