The Dynamics of Multi‐organizational Partnerships: an Analysis of Changing Modes of Governance
| Author | Chris Skelcher,Vivien Lowndes |
| Published date | 01 June 1998 |
| Date | 01 June 1998 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9299.00103 |
THE DYNAMICS OF
MULTI-ORGANIZATIONAL PARTNERSHIPS:
AN ANALYSIS OF CHANGING MODES OF
GOVERNANCE
1
VIVIEN LOWNDES AND CHRIS SKELCHER
Multi-organizational partnerships are now an important means of governing and
managing public programmes. They typically involve business, community and
not-for-profit agencies alongside government bodies. Partnerships are frequently
contrasted with competitive markets and bureaucratic hierarchies. A more complex
reality is revealed once partnerships as an organizational form are distinguished
from networks as a mode of social co-ordination or governance. Data from studies
of UK urban regeneration partnerships are used to develop a four-stage partnership
life cycle: pre-partnership collaboration; partnership creation; partnership pro-
gramme delivery; and partnership termination. A different mode of governance –
network, market or hierarchy – predominates at each stage. Separating organiza-
tional form from mode of governance enables a richer understanding of multi-
organizational activity and provides the basis from which theory and practice can
be developed. The key challenge for partnerships lies in managing the interaction
of different modes of governance, which at some points will generate competition
and at other points collaboration.
INTRODUCTION
Debates in the academic and public management worlds are currently
emphasizing the benefits that collaborative, inter-agency partnerships can
offer as a means of achieving public policy goals. The idea of ‘collaborative
advantage’ (Huxham 1996) presents an attractive alternative to the market,
quasi-market and contractualized relationships that have dominated the
public management reform movement internationally in the past decade.
It also encourages further progress away from the large-scale, bureaucratic
and paternalistic public service organizations which developed to deliver
welfare state programmes in the third quarter of this century.
There has been recent and sustained growth in the number and types of
partnerships created to realize public policy intentions. Governmental bodies
in the UK, particularly at the local level, have been active in establishing for-
Vivien Lowndes is Professor of Local Government Studies at de Montfort University, Leicester and
Chris Skelcher is Senior Lecturer in the Institute of Local Government Studies, University of
Birmingham.
Public Administration Vol. 76 Summer 1998 (313–333)
Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 1998, 108 Cowley Road, Oxford OX4 1JF, UK and 350 Main Street,
Malden, MA 02148, USA.
314 VIVIEN LOWNDES AND CHRIS SKELCHER
malized collaborative relationships with businesses, voluntary (or non-
governmental) organizations and community associations. Such partnerships
are particularly pronounced in the fields of urban and rural regeneration,
where local authorities have created working arrangements with a range of
other agencies to promote the economic, social and political revitalization of
communities, but are also found in social care, education, environmental and
other policy sectors. These relationships are formalized by an agreement
between the parties which is given concrete expression through the creation
of an organizational structure – a partnership board or forum. Here, strategy
is developed and decisions are made which may have implications for the
policies, resources and actions of the individual agencies involved.
The argument put forward in this article, however, is that partnership as
an organizational structure is analytically distinct from network as a mode
of governance – the means by which social co-ordination is achieved. The
creation of a partnership board does not imply that relations between actors
are conducted on the basis of mutual benefit, trust and reciprocity – the
characteristics of the network mode of governance. Rather, partnerships are
associated with a variety of forms of social co-ordination – including net-
work, hierarchy and market. The failure to distinguish between partner-
ships as organizational manifestations and the modes of social co-
ordination that accompany them has constrained theoretical development
and empirical investigation of this important field. Drawing on our studies
of UK urban regeneration partnerships, we argue that market and hier-
archical arrangements as well as networking are apparent in partnerships.
Indeed, we propose that partnerships pass through a life cycle in which
different modes of governance assume a particular importance at different
points in time and in relation to particular partnership tasks. Strategies to
develop effective partnerships thus involve combining different modes of
governance in an environment where the power relations between various
partners will be shifting and the resulting dynamics will at one point stimu-
late co-operation and at another competition.
We begin by identifying the factors behind the growth of partnerships
in local governance, and urban regeneration in particular. We then explore
the concept of modes of governance, examining the characteristics of mar-
ket, hierarchy and network. This leads to the formulation of a model which
shows how different modes of governance are combined within the life
cycle of urban regeneration partnerships, illustrated from our recent empiri-
cal research. The article concludes by discussing the implications for theory
and practice of the notion of plural modes of governance within multi-
organizational partnerships.
MOTIVATIONS FOR MULTI-ORGANIZATIONAL PARTNERSHIPS
Resource dependency issues have been an important motivator in the develop-
ment of partnerships by UK publicservice agencies. The impact of continued
constraint on public resources since the mid-1970s has stimulated govern-
Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 1998
To continue reading
Request your trial