Deliberation, Consensus, and Stakeholder Satisfaction: A Simulation of Collaborative Governance.

Robertson, Peter J.; Choi, Taehyon

doi:10.5465/ambpp.2010.54501327

Cited by 11 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Increasingly complex societal issues cut across the boundaries of single organizations. A collaborative governance arrangement engages public and private actors in a collective decisionmaking process aimed at consensus (Ansell and Gash, 2008; see also Robertson and Choi, 2012). The dynamics that apply to the practices of these collaborations are, to a substantial extent, different from the dynamics that apply to the practices within organizations.…”

Section: The Visibility Of Trustmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Visibility of Trust: Exploring the connection between trust and interaction in a Dutch collaborative governance boardroom

Oortmerssen

Woerkum

Aarts

2013

Public Management Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In multi-stakeholder collaboration settings, trust plays a significant role. We explore the connection between trust and interaction over time in a collaborative governance board. To this end, we conducted a case study of the board of a collaborative governance arrangement in professional education. The results include an increase in trust within the board as well as three changes in the interaction pattern during board meetings: more openness, more responsiveness and more speed. It is argued that the increase in trust and the changes in interaction are related, implying that trust is visible in interaction content, interaction atmosphere and interaction process.

show abstract

Section: The Visibility Of Trustmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Visibility of Trust: Exploring the connection between trust and interaction in a Dutch collaborative governance boardroom

Oortmerssen

Woerkum

Aarts

2013

Public Management Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The effect of agenda setting can be significant [44], especially given informationprocessing biases. An alternative can be defined, following the definition of the agent preference, as a string of n binary numbers.…”

Section: Rules Of Deliberationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, two or three choices were used in the group decision-making experiments [5,11]. Alternatively, it can be designed that group members start with a specific alternative, and it is gradually modified as information about the alternative is shared [44].…”

Section: Rules Of Deliberationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Motivated Information Processing in Groups: A Design of a Computational Model

Choi

2012

2012 45th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

According to group research, group members often fail to consider critical unique information in a group decision-making setting because of their motivated information-processing behavior. Given the complexity of experimental designs to investigate the problem, agent-based modeling can provide hypotheses that can work as theoretical guidance for future research. The purpose of this paper is to identify human motivations and biases in group information processing relevant to modeling the group decision-making process, and to develop a conceptual framework of a computational model. In this paper, we reviewed the group informationprocessing literature to identify commonly observed human motivations and biases in information processing. Specifically, we provided an integrated framework by combining the hidden profile model, the motivated information-processing model, and the information asymmetries model. Finally, we provided a design of agents for future modeling of group processes, which uses empirical findings from the literature as the fundamental assumptions about agent behavior.

show abstract

“…However, facilitating co‐production remains complex. Stakeholders bring distinct narratives or frames (Schon & Rein, ) to bear on the decision‐making process based on their distinct interests, motives, resources, cultures, and social status (Choi & Robertson, ; Fung, ; Robertson & Choi, ). These narratives represent the lived experiences of stakeholders and shape the views they express within a deliberative encounter.…”

Section: Co‐production: An Elite Narrative?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Inside co‐production: Stakeholder meaning and situated practice

Crompton

2018

Soc Policy Adm

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Co-production has risen to the fore of contemporary policymaking, with the intention of placing citizens at the heart of public service design and production. Although this may lead to more democratic and legitimate decisionmaking, achieving "meaningful" co-production can be difficult. In this qualitative study, we examine what constitutes meaningful co-production, in particular asking whether there is a disconnect between the elite policy narrative that legitimizes co-production and stakeholder experiences of this approach. Our research adopts a decentred approach to examine the different ways that actors understand and participate in co-production, both as a methodology and as an interactive social practice. We conclude that a lack of synergy between local narratives may undermine the potential success of co-production.

show abstract

Deliberation, Consensus, and Stakeholder Satisfaction: A Simulation of Collaborative Governance.

Cited by 11 publications

References 0 publications

The Visibility of Trust: Exploring the connection between trust and interaction in a Dutch collaborative governance boardroom

The Visibility of Trust: Exploring the connection between trust and interaction in a Dutch collaborative governance boardroom

Motivated Information Processing in Groups: A Design of a Computational Model

Inside co‐production: Stakeholder meaning and situated practice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About