Partnering for Grand Challenges: A Review of Organizational Design Considerations in Public–Private Collaborations

Abstract

We conduct a theory-guided review of the literatures on public–private partnerships and grand challenges (GCs). We adopt an organization design approach to review and identify constructs in public–private collaborations (PPCs) that address societal challenges. Our review identifies the complexities of organizing to tackle GCs, highlights the plurality of organizational forms in PPCs, and explores organizational design considerations in these partnerships. Given the elevated role of private actors in these collaborations, our review provides a new understanding of how they can shape a private-public interface that is robust to the scale and scope of global problems. This leads to a rich research agenda on when, why, and how public and private collaborations matter, and their implications for addressing societal challenges.

Using review articles to address societal grand challenges

“…Further, a review article can also serve all three roles, as illustrated by George et al. (in press). Table 1 provides a preview and summary of these roles of review articles, which we elaborate next.…”

“…As another example, George et al. (in press) conducted a theory‐guided review to consolidate the existing knowledge about the role of public–private partnerships in addressing societal problems. Based on their review, they advanced a rich research agenda on when, why and how public and private collaborations matter, and their implications for addressing societal challenges, which includes a number of suggestions focused on empirical opportunities related to data, measures and methods.…”

The Multiple Facets of Corporate Purpose: An Analytical Typology

“…In the context of corporate purpose, this work implies that firms pursuing deep-level approaches are more likely to catalyze systemic change, yet such effects will take longer to be realized. Moreover, they require a capacity for learning and adaptation in collaboration with partner entities from varied institutional spheres -which not all organizations possess in equal measure (George et al 2023). These insights raise questions about how firms and their leaders can realize opportunities for catalyzing change.…”

Modes of network governance revisited: Assessing their prevalence, promises, and limitations in the literature

“…Building on Provan and Kenis (2008), Gulati et al (2012), and Puranam (2018), an organizational network is defined as “a (1) multiagent system of three or more legally autonomous organizations that are (2) not bound by authority based on employment relationships but characterized by (3) a distinct identity derived from a particular boundary and membership arrangement and (4) network‐level goals toward (5) which the constituent organizations' efforts are expected to contribute” (van den Oord, 2023, p. 27). Organizational networks have become increasingly prevalent in the public and nonprofit domains (Smith, 2020; van der Weert et al, 2022) but also in various industries and business domains (Ciabuschi et al, 2020; George et al, 2023; Provan et al, 2007; Reeves & Pudin, 2022) because they present an alternative strategy to organizations to deal with environmental uncertainty and attain a purpose that a single organization cannot easily achieve independently (Nowell & Kenis, 2019; Popp et al, 2014; Provan & Lemaire, 2012).…”