Taking Dimensions of Purpose-Oriented Networks Seriously

Abstract

Purpose-oriented networks—often referred to as goal-directed networks—are a widely recognized empirical phenomenon in the public administration and management literatures. However, there is no systematic understanding about which characteristics are constitutive for these entities to be present. We use Goetz’s multilevel concept to develop a conceptual framework for purpose-oriented networks that includes four constitutive dimensions: purpose, joint effort, membership, and governance. Then we classify existing literature into this framework. Constitutive dimensions allow scholars to operationalize concepts and develop hypotheses that are testable across a wider range of purpose-oriented networks, better define the external validity of results, and improve the accumulation of knowledge across disciplinary perspectives as well as to point to areas in need of more study. We conclude that the fundamental concepts that constitute purpose-oriented networks are dangerously understudied and are in dire need of systematic, sustained empirical attention.

Strategic Orientation and Relationship Building Among Dyads in Complex Public Management Networks: Perspectives From State Asthma Coalitions

“…Networks form surrounding common purposes to which organizations and broader networks orient their goals (Carboni et al, 2019). Organizations and networks are goal-directed, with networks developing missions, goals, and objectives to structure their organization and activities (Agranoff, 2006; Kilduff & Tsai, 2003; Provan et al, 2007; Provan & Kenis, 2008; Provan & Lemaire, 2012).…”

“…We are sensitive, however, to the embeddedness of network actors in different communities of practice and varying sets of institutional pressures, as well as “the interplay between individual, organizational, dyadic and network levels of analysis” (Nowell & Kenis, 2019, p. 192). A nuanced treatment of strategic orientation and diversity could help to answer important questions about relationships between network complexity, purposes, processes, and outcomes (Berthod & Segato, 2019; Carboni et al, 2019; Lemaire et al, 2019; Nowell & Kenis, 2019).…”

Enhancing Local Service Effectiveness Through Purpose-Oriented Networks: The Role of Network Leadership and Structure

“…The current study focuses on the factors that enhance the effectiveness of such collaborations in purpose-oriented networks designed to deliver services in local authorities (Nowell & Kenis, 2019). According to Carboni et al (2019), a purpose-oriented network is defined as “ a network comprised of three or more autonomous actors who participate in a joint effort based on a common purpose” (p. 210). The term “purpose-oriented” networks (Berthod & Segato, 2019; Lemaire et al, 2019) was proposed as an extension and clarification of the well-known term “goal-directed networks.” According to this line of research (Nowell & Kenis, 2019), “goal-directed” implies that network members have identified and agreed on a set of goals that guide the work of the network, which in practice is often not necessarily true.…”

Governing a multilevel and cross‐sectoral climate policy implementation network

“…For national governments to meet their international obligations they will need to involve and coordinate the actions of local, regional, national and international level actors from across multiple sectors when developing and implementing their plans. When this occurs, it leads to the formation of purpose-oriented policy implementation networks, which can be defined as 'a network comprised of three or more autonomous actors who participate in a joint effort based on a common purpose' (Carboni et al, 2019).…”

“…(ii) How is the network governed? (Carboni et al, 2019;Planko et al, 2017;Turrini et al, 2010). Following this, we present our results and discuss our findings.…”