Reflections on benefits and challenges of longitudinal organisational network analysis as a tool for health systems research and practice

Abstract

As health systems practitioners and researchers increasingly turn towards systems thinking approaches and work on building interorganisational networks, they have demonstrated increasing interest in network analysis for investigating relationships and interactions between system actors, both at the individual and organisational levels. Despite the potential of network-based approaches to improve health system efficiency, effectiveness and responsiveness, both the theoretical and practical guidance on designing and evaluating network-building strategies is underdeveloped within the field. While there are multiple tools and resources to help users collect, manage and analyse network data, there is much less guidance on the practical applications of this information. One apparent gap is the limited application of longitudinal organisational network analysis, in which data are collected from the same organisational actors repeatedly over multiple time points. This yields insights into the dynamic nature of networks, including how the network structure and interactions change over time. Given that networks are rarely static, the addition of the time dimension has the potential to substantially enhance the analytical value of network analysis and contribute to more nuanced guidance for interested practitioners and policymakers. In this article, the authors draw on their experiences in conducting longitudinal network analysis of interorganisational relationships in the USA and India to comment on the opportunities and challenges of the methodology within the field of health systems research. We also provide suggestions as to how some of these challenges may be addressed or mitigated.

Mapping the Lay of the Land: Using Interactive Network Analytic Tools for Collaboration in Rural Cancer Prevention and Control

“…Regardless, this study is consistent in agency composition with a U.S. study with 162 public health networks where governmental and community-based organizations were predominantly in the health, education, and social service sectors (51). This study was cross-sectional, whereas there would be added value to conducting longitudinal network analyses (56). Recall bias is likely since we asked about collaboration in the previous calendar year because of agencies prioritizing responses to the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 when data were collected.…”

Governance of the wildlife trade and the prevention of emerging zoonoses: a mixed methods network analysis of transnational organisations, silos, and power dynamics

“…First, while the analysis was carried out at the level of organisations, our participants were individuals working within those organisations, targeting a key informant in each organisation in line with typical practice in organisational network analysis [ 41 – 43 ]. It is therefore possible that their perspectives did not include all of their organisations’ interactions [ 44 ]. We tried to mitigate this by emphasising that we were interested in the interactions of the organisation as a whole; by inviting potential participants to forward the survey to a colleague who might be best placed to speak from the organisational perspective, if they did not feel able to do so; and by advising participants that they could gather input from colleagues to complete the survey if they felt this was appropriate.…”

“…Second, given that we received responses from less than half of the organisations identified in the network, our data set is likely to be characterised by data missingness, which is a key challenge in survey-based research, and network analysis in particular [ 29 , 44 ]. At the data collection phase, we attempted to mitigate this by following up with participants up to three times over the space of several months; seeking personalised introductions; and inviting additional participants from the same organisations where no response was received.…”

Analyzing mechanisms of interdisciplinary cooperation in promoting students’ health at university

“…According to the theoretical concept of structural holes , by contrast, closing of gaps between actors having complementary sources of information reduces redundancy by adding isolates to new other subgroups. However, these efforts can also lead to the following challenges [ 112 ]: Increased interorganizational competition, time and resource investment with little benefit to members, worsening benefit-cost-ratio or reduced efficiency after reaching a certain network size, network opposition and professional protectionism, ambiguity or uncertainty relating to accountability mechanisms, and coercion or manipulation of weaker network members by more powerful ones.…”