Alliances between Firms and Non‐profits: A Multiple and Behavioural Agency Approach

Abstract

We analyse business-NGO (B2N) alliances through the lenses of multiple agency and behavioural agency theories to identify the sources of agency problems and the most effective choice of mitigation mechanisms. We contend that three types of agency relationships constitute B2N alliances: the relationship between the firm's managers and B2N alliance employees; the relationship between the NGO's managers and the B2N alliance employees; and the novel 'claimed principal-agent relationship' involving the external beneficiary, the NGO's managers and the alliance employees. We argue that B2N alliances' three types of agency problems stem from (1) the relative emphasis on public vs. private goods, both at the employee and at the partner levels, and (2) the level of the external beneficiary's voice. We then predict the mechanisms to mitigate these problems: hiring altruistic over self-interested individuals; narrowly specifying the employees' activities; emphasizing input-based and intrinsic incentive mechanisms; and investing significantly into non-intrusive monitoring mechanisms.

Collaboration, Coordination, and Cooperation Among Organizations: Establishing the Distinctive Meanings of These Terms Through a Systematic Literature Review

“…We find that researchers' use of collaboration distinctively evokes considerations about "the psychological best interests of the organizational parties" (Ring & Van de Ven, 1994: 107); "interpersonal care and concern for their counterparts in the partner organization" (Lioukas & Reuer, 2015: 1829; and the norms of reciprocity, solidarity, and mutual assistance toward counterparties (Dyer & Singh, 1998;Fonti, Maoret, & Whitbred, 2017;Jones et al, 1997). Similar norms and behaviors have been reported in partnerships between not-for-profit and for-profit organizations that voluntarily help each other improve the other's internal performance (Galaskiewicz, 1985;Hardy et al, 2003;Rivera-Santos, Rufín, & Wassmer, 2017). In contrast, we did not find these norms and behaviors in the definitions of coordination and cooperation among organizations.…”

Adaptive learning in cross-sector collaboration during global emergency: conceptual insights in the context of COVID-19 pandemic

“…Governments, businesses, and not-for-profit NGOs have notably varying goals, motivations, and stakeholders, which easily generates and intensifies tensions that may negatively affect collaboration effectiveness (Herlin, 2015, Googins and Rochlin, 2000, Ritvala et al, 2014. Different problems rooted in the relative emphasis on public vs. private goods across public and private actors, the level of the external stakeholders' voice, and cultural distance between collaborating actors render the management of cross-sector collaborations a challenging task (Al-Tabbaa et al, 2014, Rivera-Santos et al, 2017. Accordingly, the acknowledgment and adoption of hybridity in governance and organizational logics (Quélin et al, 2017), as well as relationship coordination became vital requirements (Yaziji and Doh, 2009) so that these collaborations could successfully adapt to partners' discrepancies and emergent constraints over their lifespan (Caldwell et al, 2017).…”

Examining alliance management capabilities in cross-sector collaborative partnerships

“…Therefore, numerous studies have sought to identify and understand conditions that are likely to underpin the achievement of collaborative advantage (the desired synergistic outcome of collaborative activity). As such, current research has focused on examining the micro-foundations of partnerships (i.e., the interactions between individuals) (e.g., Kolk et al, 2015;Rivera-Santos et al, 2017), approaches for effective resource pooling and usage (e.g., Berger et al, 2004;Klitsie et al, 2018), antecedents for institutionalizing the relationship within partners (e.g., Clarke & Fuller 2011;Seitanidi & Crane, 2009), and the role of leadership, governance and structure in driving collaboration success (e.g., Crosby & Bryson, 2010;Huxham & Vangen, 2005).…”