Shared service strategies in local government – a multiple case study exploration

Abstract

PurposeThe paper seeks to investigate into the shared services phenomenon in the context of government reforms. It especially aims to address the emergence and shaping of shared services. The paper seeks to develop the notion of shared service centres (SSCs) and shared service networks (SSNs).Design/methodology/approachAn interview‐ and document analysis‐based multiple case study was conducted in Germany. The qualitative analysis covered two shared service projects on the local government level.FindingsImportant preconditions for shared service emergence are identified, including cost pressure as motive, the existence of key actors as well as the existence of prior cooperation. Moreover, the paper provides evidence that the structure of previous cooperation exerts influence on if shared services are organized in a centralised (SSC) or decentralised format (SSN).Research limitations/implicationsThe case selection is a possible limitation of the presented study. The selected cases give an insight into the topic of shared service configuration. The findings derived constitute indicators of possible patterns, which have to be approved by further research in order to identify reliable causal relationships and improve generalisablity of the results presented here.Originality/valueAn insight into conditions of adaptation and shaping of shared services is given, suggesting causal relationships for further theory testing and development.

Standardized but flexible information exchange for networked public administrations

“…Because of their role in delivering identical or at least similar services to citizens and companies, public administrations often cooperate to leverage synergies and improve efficiency, with many administrations sharing the responsibility for service delivery and collectively providing services (Bel and Warner, 2015;Kwon and Feiock, 2010;Leroux and Carr, 2007;Wood, 2006). The concepts of shared service centers and shared service networks have emerged as a way to optimize the execution of the internal governmental processes involved in providing services (Niehaves and Krause, 2010;Paagman et al, 2015). Two kinds of integration from a technological perspective can be distinguished (Klischewski, 2004): Process integration, which refers to intergovernmental process networks, can be achieved by establishing shared service networks, and information integration, where data becomes a common resource (Bigdeil et al, 2013;Wenjing, 2011;Yang and Maxwell, 2011).…”

Alliance strategy: context, process, and requirements

“…For instance, national government's Ministries increasingly share services; locally, emergency management or health care organizations operating in adjacent regions do the same (Arya, 2011;Niehaves and Krause, 2010;Palm and Ramsell, 2007). Another example would be international cooperation of the military for training purposes or in crisis areas, or cooperation between the military and NGOs (Rietjens et al, 2013).…”

“…Over time, with sustained cooperation programs, organizations may setup shared facilities (Niehaves and Krause, 2010) or specialize, thereby increasing mutual dependence (Faleg and Giovannini, 2012).…”

“…Other benefits in reducing bullwhip effect may include decrease in production overtime, increased customer satisfaction, and reduced lead times' (Björk et al, 2012). Organizations can improve performance by sharing back-office services and service delivery (Arya, 2011;Niehaves and Krause, 2010), or bundle incoming or outgoing logistical flows to reduce environmental impact and monetary costs. And finally, organizations may share assets, pool stocks and co-organize maintenance services to improve economies of scale, uptime, safety, and capacity use (Karsten and Basten, 2014;Van Horenbeek et al, 2013).…”

“…integrated or comprehensive offering by diverse organizations (Kamal, 2012;Niehaves and Krause, 2010)),…”