Abstracts – Browse Results
Click on the titles below to expand the information about each abstract.
Viewing 1 results ...
Gottlieb, S C, Frederiksen, N, Koch, C and Thuesen, C (2018) Institutional Logics and Hybrid Organizing in Public-Private Partnerships . In: Gorse, C and Neilson, C J (Eds.), Proceedings 34th Annual ARCOM Conference, 3-5 September 2018, Queen’s University, Belfast, UK. Association of Researchers in Construction Management, 383–392.
- Type: Conference Proceedings
- Keywords: complexity, hybrid organizations,institutional logics, partnerships
- ISBN/ISSN: 978-0-9955463-2-5
- URL: http://www.arcom.ac.uk/-docs/proceedings/487a2f66e7bff290136c5a8fe1e375ad.pdf
- Abstract:
Cross-sectoral collaboration has been touted as a solution to a range of problems in various sectors. In the construction context, strategic partnerships have recently given promises of increased productivity and innovative solutions through business models combining logics and governance structures from both the public and private sectors. Very little is, however, known about how partnerships respond to the competing institutional demands they face in an attempt to deliver. Drawing on a longitudinal case study of a municipality’s efforts to create cost efficient services, we explore the establishment and early years of two strategic partnerships as emerging hybrid organizations, asking what is a hybrid organization? Throughout three analytical phases, we illustrate how the partnerships develop different strategies and responses to cope with the multiple demands from their institutional environment. We show how the partnerships in the first phase respond to the institutional pluralism in the early establishment of the partnerships by mobilizing an institutional logic that constitutes a legitimate alternative to the given dominant constellation of conflicting institutional logics in the field. We then shed light on the incompatibilities between logics that occurred in the second phase, where partnership ideals and operational concerns and routines had to be balanced. Finally, we illustrate how the partnerships in a third phase of reorientation and consolidation developed divergent strategies for coping with the institutional complexity based on a blending respectively segregation of logics. On the back of the analysis, we discuss how the partnerships’ responses to the competing demand entail institutional work aimed at shaping field structures. In conclusion, we argue that characteristics associated with field structure and particular organizational attributes (e.g. size and composition of the portfolio of projects) play a prominent role in explaining the differences in organizational responses, and hence the hybrid form of the partnerships.