The Design and Implementation of Cross‐Sector Collaborations: Propositions from the Literature

Abstract

People who want to tackle tough social problems and achieve beneficial community outcomes are beginning to understand that multiple sectors of a democratic society—business, nonprofits and philanthropies, the media, the community, and government—must collaborate to deal effectively and humanely with the challenges. This article focuses on cross‐sector collaboration that is required to remedy complex public problems. Based on an extensive review of the literature on collaboration, the article presents a propositional inventory organized around the initial conditions affecting collaboration formation, process, structural and governance components, constraints and contingencies, outcomes, and accountability issues.

Ecomuseums as cross-sector partnerships: governance, strategy and leadership

“…Existing literature on cross-sector partnerships indicates that this is a challenging organizational form (Huxham and Vangen, 2005;Bryson et al, 2006). There is a high direct cost to each partner (staff time, financial contribution, sharing assets and/ or information, and the associated risks).…”

“…A cross-sector partnership involves the public, private and/or third sectors working together to commit resources and capabilities and share decision-making for the mid-to long-term, to address a wicked social problem (Selsky and Parker, 2005;Bryson et al, 2006). Existing literature on cross-sector partnerships indicates that this is a challenging organizational form (Huxham and Vangen, 2005;Bryson et al, 2006).…”

Problem structuring: on the nature of, and reaching agreement about, goals

“…The notion of a meta-goal is important for collaborations and is the expression of the potential for 'collaborative advantage' (Eden and Huxham 2001;Huxham and Vangen 1996;Vangen and Huxham 2011;and also Ackermann et al 2005;Bryson et al 2006). Only when meta-goals can be identified, it is possible to conceive of the means for supplying a potential 'collaborative advantage' for the different 'organisations'.…”

Managing governance complexity and knowledge networks in transparency initiatives: the case of police open data

“…Such information access laws and norms are a building block for institutionalised transparency (Roberts 2005;Chan and Rosenbloom 2010). However, laws and norms can be a source of complexity (Bryson, Crosby, and Stone 2006). Public organisations encounter conflicts in the interpretation of legal constraints of open data such as when public organisations hold sensitive personal information about citizens in medical records or criminal history.…”