THE VISIBLE HAND OF THE STATE: ON THE ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT OF INTEREST GROUPS
| Author | BERT FRAUSSEN |
| Published date | 01 June 2014 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12056 |
| Date | 01 June 2014 |
doi: 10.1111/padm.12056
THE VISIBLE HAND OF THE STATE:
ON THE ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
OF INTEREST GROUPS
BERT FRAUSSEN
To understand dynamics within communities of organized interests, researchers have primarily
studied organizational births and deaths. The organizational development of established interest
organizations has received far less attention. This article claims that the evolution of interest groups’
organizational features is strongly affected by evolving resource dependencies with the state. A life-
history case study of an environmental interest organization is used to substantiate this argument
empirically. The findings demonstrate that resource dependence relations with state actors critically
shape organizational development, but that this dependence affects an organization’s mission,
structure, and strategy in different ways. This conclusion highlights the vital role of government
patronage in the survival and maintenance of interest organizations.
INTRODUCTION
To facilitate the representation of particular interests and mitigate the ‘upper-class accent’,
public authorities often support organized interests that represent constituencies or causes
which would otherwise remain unheard (Walker 1991; Baumgartner and Leech 1998).
Policymakers may actively seek support from a visible and well-organized constituency, as
such backing can be critical to policy development and coherence, especially in emerging
or less salient policy domains (May et al. 2005; Jordan and Halpin 2006; Poppelaars 2007;
Halpin et al. 2011). By supporting particular interest organizations, governments seek
to increase their legitimacy and to build a more vibrant civil society (Mahoney and
Beckstrand 2011). The fact that contemporary policymakers are keen to develop close ties
with organized interests fits into a general shift towards network governance, which is
marked by a greater involvement of non-governmental organizations in public policy
(Salamon 2002; Lewis 2011).
Much research in this area has focused on non-profit organizations (Froelich 1999; Stone
et al. 2001; Nikolic and Koontz 2008; Suarez 2011; Mosley 2012; Verschuere and De Corte
2012). It demonstrates how relations with public authorities enable professionalization by
offering a more stable funding source, yet also increase bureaucratization and possibly
reduce an organization’s autonomy and responsiveness to societal needs. By exploring
the organizational implications of these evolving ties on the development of organized
interests, this article aims to increase our understanding of why ‘some organizations adapt
readily to every environmental challenge, whereas others succumb to the first traumatic
event they face’ (Aldrich and Ruef 2006, p. 13; see also Wilson 1974).
By supporting particular interest organizations, policymakers can considerably increase
an organization’s financial resources, legitimacy, and chances of survival. However, such
patronage is usually conditional on specific organizational features and activities, which
in turn shapes the further development of these organizations (Elbers and Arts 2011;
Mahoney and Beckstrand 2011). Moreover, the interaction between public authorities
and organized interests should not be depicted as static. It changes over time as a result
Bert Fraussen is in the Department of Political Science, University of Antwerp, Belgium.
Public Administration Vol. 92, No. 2, 2014 (406–421)
©2013 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT OF INTEREST GROUPS 407
of governments altering their approach towards interest organizations, for instance by
involving them in policy formulation, the implementation of policy programmes or the
education of their constituency (Jordan and Halpin 2003; Christiansen et al. 2010; Halpin
et al. 2011).
These evolving resource dependencies between governments and organized interests,
however, do not affect all organizational features equally. Peripheral features of an
organization, such as its strategies, are generally considered more flexible than core
characteristics like an organization’s mission (Halpin and Nownes 2011), and thus are
more likely to be affected by the interaction with public authorities. Eventually, the
development of these core and peripheral features, which represent vital components of
an organization’s embeddedness, will also shape organizational behaviour and strategies
(Beyers and Kerremans 2007; Eising 2007).
By conceptualizing the development of organized interests as evolving resource depen-
dencies with public authorities, this article underlines the role of government patronage.
After discussing the existing literature, resource dependence theory is introduced as a
tool to conceptualize these relations between the state and organized interests. It is argued
that components of an organization are affected in different ways by these evolving
resource dependencies, as structural and especially strategic features are more prone to
change than an organization’s mission. Subsequently, a life-history case study of a central
Flemish environmental peak association, the Federation for a Better Environment (Bond
Beter Leefmilieu, BBL), empirically demonstrates the link between organizational dynamics
and political-institutional developments.
These observations have important implications for our understanding of organizational
survival and maintenance, as well as broader community dynamics (Toke 2010). In the
long run, evolving ties with public authorities may alter the resource distribution among
organized interests and their position within policy networks, changing the political
context and possibly causing different policy outcomes. Still, while government patronage
frequently enables the accumulation of organizational capabilities, these dependencies
need to be carefully managed by organized interests, so that their development remains
aligned with their initial mission.
LOOKING BEYOND NUMBERS AND POLITICAL ACTIVITIES
To understand the evolving demographics of organizations, three processes should be
taken into account: foundings, disbandings, and organizational change (Aldrich and
Ruef 2006). Much research on populations of interest organizations, however, has mainly
focused on the first two processes, thus examining births and deaths (Lowery and
Gray 1995; Nownes 2010). Population ecology, for instance, conceives of organizations
as structurally inert and consequently considers foundings and disbandings as the
fundamental mechanisms shaping demographics (Hannan and Freeman 1984). Scholars
applying this framework have identified the great potential of members and financial
resources as critical conditions for survival (Gray and Lowery 1996). The acquisition
and accumulation of these critical capabilities, such as financial leverage and a highly
educated staff, is also considered imperative for effective advocacy (Andrews and Caren
2010; Kl ¨
uver 2012). These findings echo the liability of smallness argument, the idea that
larger organizations are better equipped to deal with environmental challenges, and thus
demonstrate the critical importance of organizational development (Hirschman 1970;
Minkoff 1999; Aldrich 2008, p. 21).
Public Administration Vol. 92, No. 2, 2014 (406–421)
©2013 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
To continue reading
Request your trial