Inter-organizational Information Systems and Interaction in Public vs. Private Sector – Comparing Two Cases

Abstract

Abstract. This paper compares inter-organizational (IO) interaction and interorganizational information systems (IOS) in public and private sector. The purpose of the paper is to explore differences and similarities between egovernment and e-business focusing IOS and interaction. This is done in order to facilitate learning between the two fields. The point of departure is two case studies performed in private vs. public sectors. A comparative study is made using IO concepts from industrial markets that characterize an IO relationship (continuity, complexity, symmetry, and formality) and concepts that describe dimensions of such relationships (links, bonds, and ties). The results from the comparative study show that there are several similarities concerning interaction in relations between organizations in the two sectors. There are also differences depending on the level of analysis (empirical level vs. analytical level). The study shows the need to be explicit regarding organizational value, end-customer or client/citizen value and the type of objects that are exchanged in the interaction.

Strategic Performance Measurement and Management: The Distinctive Nature of the Public Sector and Implications on Performance Measures

“…4.1.4 Conclusion on the models of public and private sector differentiation Classifying organisations as public, private or hybrid is clearly problematic. There will always be exceptions for any chosen typecast (Melin & Axelsson, 2010;Halvorsen et al, 2005;. Organisations in the same sector can still have different goals (Kankanalli & Kohli, 2009;Ward, 2006;Rochelau & Wu, 2002).…”

“…The Reformers are moderate in that they accept that sectoral differences do indeed exist but encourage the creation of a cross-learning culture that utilises "existing knowledge and experience" in order to narrow the gap between the two which is what has been happening over the years. Instead of classifying public and private organisations as either mainly similar or fundamentally different, "considering a critical, cautious, incremental but mutual transfer might be more fruitful" (Weerakkody et al, 2011;Melin & Axelsson, 2010;Kankanhalli & Kohli, 2009;Rochelau & Wu, 2002). It is proposed to carefully analyse the sectoral differences as a pre-requisite to efficaciously cross transplanting the practices.…”

“…Allison, 1984;Perry & Rainey, 1988;Ring & Perry, 1985;Nutt, 2000). Rainey et al's (1976) broadly recognized classification identified public-to-private differences in three areas supported by Allison (1984), , 1993 and Euske (2003) as reflected in  legal/political/ economic constraints  revenues Melin & Axelsson, 2010;Rochelau & Wu, 2002;Scholl, 2006;Kankanhalli & Kohli, 2009;Janssen et al, 2008;Nutt, 2000;Halvorsen et al, 2005;Euske, 2003;Ward, 2006 2 Organizational mandates and scope…”