The study from which this article is drawn constitutes one of the first attempts to remedy the paucity of research on accountability in the context of interorganizational networks and public–private partnerships. The data for the study were drawn from field research focusing particularly on partnerships formed between K-12 public schools and private and/or non-profit organizations in the United States. The most frequently cited difficulties associated with accountability in partnerships were the availability of and access to information, sectoral and personal differences, and frequent changes in personnel, resources, and partners.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Acar, M. (2000) ‘ Performance in Multi-sectoral Collaborations: A Process Model ’, Paper presented at the First Asian Pacific Research Universities (APRU) Doctoral Students Conference, 3–5March, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California.
2.
Acar, M. (2001) ‘Accountability in Public–Private Partnerships’, Unpublished dissertation, University of Southern California.
3.
Agranoff, R. and McGuire, M. (1998) ‘ Multi-network Management: Collaboration and the Hollow State in Local Economic Policy ’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory8(1): 67–91 .
4.
Alexander, J.A. , Comfort, M.E. and Weiner, B.J. (1998) ‘ Governance in Public–Private Community Health Partnerships: A Survey of the Community Care Network Demonstration Sites ’, Non-profit Management and Leadership8(4): 311–332 .
5.
Bardach, E. and Lesser, C. (1996) ‘ Accountability in Human Services Collaboratives — For What? and To Whom? ’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory6(2): 197–224 .
6.
Coe, B. (1988) ‘ Open Focus: Implementing Projects in Multi-organizational Settings ’, International Journal of Public Administration11(4): 503–526 .
7.
Cummings, S. , Koebel, C.T. and Whitt, J.A. (1988) ‘ Public–Private Partnerships and Public Enterprise ’, Urban Resources5: 35–6, 47–48 .
8.
Freeman, J. (1997) ‘ Collaborative Governance in the Administrative State ’, UCLA Law Review45(1): 1–98 .
9.
Ghere, R.K. (1996) ‘ Aligning the Ethics of Public–Private Partnership ’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory6(4): 599–621 .
10.
Janesick, V.J. (1998) ‘The Dance of Qualitative Research Design — Metaphor, Methodolatry, and Meaning’, in N.K. Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln (eds) Strategies of Qualitative Inquiry, pp. 35–55.
11.
Kanter, R.M. (1994), ‘ Collaborative Advantage: The Art of Alliances ’, Harvard Business Review (Jul.–Aug.): 96–108 .
12.
Lowndes, V. and Skelcher, C. (1998) ‘ The Dynamics of Multi-organizational Partnerships: An Analysis of Changing Modes of Governance ’, Public Administration76(Summer): 313–333 .
13.
Mandell, M.P. (1994) ‘ Managing Interdependencies Through Program Structures: A Revised Paradigm ’, American Review of Public Administration24(1): 99–121 .
14.
Milward, H.B. (1996) ‘ Symposium on the Hollow State: Capacity, Control, and Performance in Interorganizational Settings ’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory6(2): 193–195 .
15.
O’Looney, J. (1992) ‘ Public–Private Partnerships in Economic Development: Negotiating the Tradeoff Between Flexibility and Accountability ’, Economic Development Review (Fall): 14–22 .
16.
O’Toole, L.J., Jr (1997) ‘ Treating Networks Seriously: Practical and Research-based Agendas in Public Administration ’, Public Administration Review57(1): 45–52 .
17.
Oztel, H. and Martin, S. (1998) ‘ Local Partnership for Economic Development: Business Links and the Restructuring of SME Support Networks in the United Kingdom ’, Economic Development Quarterly12(3): 266–278 .
18.
Patton, M.Q. (1990) Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods, 2nd edn.Newbury Park, CA: Sage .
19.
Radin, B.A. and and Romzek, B.S. (1996) ‘ Accountability Expectations in an Intergovernmental Arena: The National Rural Development Partnership ’, Publius: The Journal of Federalism26(2): 59–81 .
20.
Robertson, P.J. and Acar, M. (1999) ‘ Concentrated Hopes, Diffused Responsibilities: Accountability in Public–Private Partnerships ’, Paper presented at the 60th National Conference of the American Society for Public Administration, 10–14April, Orlando, FL.
21.
Rodal, A. (1993) ‘ Managing Partnerships ’, Optimum — The Journal of Publci Sector Management24(3): 49–63 .
22.
Rosenau, P.V. (1999) ‘ Introduction — The Strengths and Weaknesses of Public–Private Policy Partnerships ’, American Behavioral Scientist43(1): 10–34 .
23.
Stephenson, M.O., Jr (1991) ‘ Whither the Public–Private Partnership: A Critical Overview ’, Urban Affairs Quarterly27(1): 109–127 .
24.
Waddock, S.A. (1988) ‘ Building Successful Social Partnerships ’, Sloan Management Review (Summer): 17–23 .
25.
Weber, E.P. (1999) ‘ The Question of Accountability in Historical Perspective: From Jackson to Contemporary Grassroots Ecosystem Management ’, Administration and Society31(4): 451–494 .
26.
Weiss, R.S. (1994) Learning from Strangers: The Art and Method of Qualitative Interview Studies.New York: The Free Press .
