Wicked Problems, Knowledge Challenges, and Collaborative Capacity Builders in Network Settings

Abstract

Networks have assumed a place of prominence in the literature on public and private governing structures. The many positive attributes of networks are often featured—the capacity to solve problems, govern shared resources, create learning opportunities, and address shared goals—and a literature focused on the challenges networks pose for managers seeking to realize these network attributes is developing. The authors share an interest in understanding the potential of networks to govern complex public, or “wicked,” problems. A fundamental challenge to effectively managing any public problem in a networked setting is the transfer, receipt and integration of knowledge across participants. When knowledge is viewed pragmatically, the challenge is particularly acute. This perspective, the authors argue, presents a challenge to the network literature to consider the mind‐set of the managers—or collaborative capacity‐builders—who are working to achieve solutions to wicked problems. This mind‐set guides network managers as they apply their skills, strategies, and tools in order to foster the transfer, receipt, and integration of knowledge across the network and, ultimately, to build long‐term collaborative problem‐solving capacity.

Young children’s imagination in science education and education for sustainability

“…In these living conditions where increasing biodiversity loss and social and ecological crisis are a reality (Sauvé 2009), there is unquestionably a need for new ideas on how to address these multifarious problems (Churchman 1967;Harvey and Pilgrim 2011). These problems are often unstructured, cross-cut through several structures, and present a range of contradictory options on how to live our lives (Weber and Khademian 2008). This is indeed relevant when particularly addressing sustainability issues (Sandri 2013), due to the fact that they simultaneously address economical, social, and ecological dimensions.…”

Research utilisation and knowledge mobilisation in the commissioning and joint planning of public health interventions to reduce alcohol-related harms: a qualitative case design using a cocreation approach

“…No single approach is either fully correct or incorrect, nor will it 'solve' unemployment forever. Weber and Khademian 74 suggest that in order to tackle wicked issues such as health inequalities it is necessary to synthesise complex sets of evidence from across different disciplines and methodological divides, and to understand the process and context of interventions while using such syntheses to inform real-world decisions.…”

“…In our study (and our data which is based solely on one commissioning site), research utilisation was made more difficult to achieve across the purchaser-provider split because it reduced the opportunities for interaction on which evidence flow largely depends. 17,19,21,30,[50][51][52]55,69,74,75,77,[81][82][83][84][85][86][90][91][92] The non-engagement of all stakeholders removed the opportunity to 'achieve stability by consensual adjustment of competing perspectives'. 221 However, in practice there are different models of commissioning 225,227 and the same may not hold true for all of them.…”

Failed Collaborative Efforts Relating to Public Lands Use in Idaho’s Boulder-White Cloud Mountains Area

“…The list of tricks that can be used to prevent collaborative discussion is long and varied (Abigail & Cahn, 2011;Clemons & McBeth, 2009;Fisher & Ury, 1991). Weber and Khademian (2008) identify additional impediments. First, long-standing adversaries must be willing to share information that would typically be hidden.…”

“…Because of the numerous interests at play in the Boulder-White Clouds area, value trade-offs are inevitable and involve consideration of what one would give up on one objective in order to achieve another (Gregory et al, 2012). The trade-off process can be extremely difficult (Abigail & Cahn, 2011;Fox & Miller, 1996;Nie, 2003;Weber & Khademian, 2008), yet the personal relationships created between the stakeholders can in time lead to trust, learning, and sharing in the process, all that lead to the trade-offs requisite to resolution (Irvin & Stansbury, 2004;King, Feltey, & Susel ,1998;Stevens, 2006). In order to create these personal relationships, it is necessary for the stakeholders to work together over a period of time.…”