Networks are developing alongside traditional bureaucracies as viable entities for addressing wicked problems. This alternate organizational model requires that administrators learn to manage and lead in more horizontal power-sharing structures. Public administration scholars trace the rise of networks in the United States back to the 1990s, yet the settlement women of the Progressive Era established a managerial and organizational precedent for using democratically anchored governance networks to affect social change. This article examines the work of the settlement women and explores how contemporary network managers can adapt and apply valuable but frequently overlooked managerial lessons from the field’s history.
AddamsJ. (Ed.). (1895). Hull-house maps and papers: A presentation of nationalities and wages in a congested district of Chicago, together with comments and essays on problems growing out of the social conditions. New York, NY: T. Y. Crowell.
2.
AddamsJ. (1902). Democracy and social ethics. New York, NY: Macmillan.
3.
AddamsJ. (1905). Problems of municipal administration. American Journal of Sociology, 10, 425-444.
4.
AddamsJ. (1935). My friend Julia Lathrop. New York, NY: Macmillian.
5.
AgranoffR. (2006). Inside collaborative networks: Ten lessons for public managers. Public Administration Review, 6, 56-65.
6.
AgranoffR.McGuireM. (2001). Big questions in public network management research. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 11, 295-326.
7.
AllenW. H. (1907). Efficient democracy. New York, NY: Dodd, Mead.
8.
BerdahlJ. L.AndersonC. (2005). Men, women, and leadership centralization in groups over time. Group Dynamics, 5, 45-57.
9.
BerryJ. M. (2005). Nonprofits and civic engagement. Public Administration Review, 65, 568-578.
10.
BruereH. (1909). The Bureau of Municipal Research. Proceedings of the Fifth Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, 111-121.
11.
BruereH. (1912). Efficiency in city government. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 41, 1-22.
12.
BruereH. (1913). New city government. New York, NY: D. Appleton & Co.
13.
ButlerJ. (1990). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York, NY: Routledge.
14.
Caliper Corporation. (2005). The qualities that distinguish women leaders (White paper). Princeton, NJ: Author.
15.
CamillusJ. C. (2008). Strategy as a wicked problem. Harvard Business Review, 86, 99-106.
16.
ClevelandF. A. (1909). Chapters on municipal administration and accounting. New York, NY: Longmans, Green.
17.
CooperT. L. (1984). Citizenship and professionalism in public administration. Public Administration Review, 44, 143-149.
18.
CooperT. L. (1990). The responsible administrator: An approach to ethics for administrative role (3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
19.
DawesS. S. (1996). Interagency information sharing: Expected benefits, manageable risks. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 66, 377-394.
20.
EmmerikH. V.WendtH.EuwemaM. C. (2010). Gender ratio, societal culture, and male and female leadership. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 83, 895-914.
21.
FineM. G. (2007). Women, collaboration, and social change: An ethics-based model of leadership. In ChinJ. L.LottB. E.RiceJ. K.Sanchez-HuclesJ. (Eds.), Women and leadership: Transforming visions and diverse voices (pp. 177-191). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
22.
FlammangJ. A. (1985). Female officials in the feminist capital: The case of Santa Clara County. Western Political Quarterly, 38, 94-118.
23.
FollettM. P. (1924). Creative experience. New York, NY: Longmans, Green.
24.
FollettM. P. (1925, January). Constructive conflict. Paper presented at the 4th annual Bureau of Personnel Administration conference, New York, NY.
25.
FoxR. L.SchuhmannR. A. (1999). Gender and local government: A comparison of women and men city managers. Public Administration Review, 59, 232-242.
26.
HeifetzR. A.GrashowA.LinskyM. (2009). The practice of adaptive leadership. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business Press.
27.
HutchinsonJ. R.ConditD. M. (2009). Being there matters: Redefining the model public servant: Viola O. Baskerville in profile. Public Administration Review, 69, 29-38.
28.
ImperialM. T. (2005). Using collaboration as a governance strategy. Administration & Society, 37, 281-320.
29.
IsettK. R.MergelI. A.LeRouxK.MischenP. A.RethemeyerR. K. (2011). Networks in public administration scholarship: Understanding where we are and where we need to go. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21, 157-173.
30.
KaneJ.PatapanH. (2006). In search of prudence: The hidden problem of managerial reform. Public Administration Review, 6, 711-721.
31.
KeiserL. R.WilkinsV. M.MeierK. J.HollandC. (2002). Lipstick and logarithms: Gender, institutional context, and representative bureaucracy. American Political Science Review, 96, 553-564.
32.
KelleyF. (1898). Hull house. The New England Magazine, 24, 550-566.
33.
KettlD. F. (2006). Managing boundaries in American administration: The collaboration imperative. Public Administration Review, 66, 10-19.
34.
KolibaC. J.MeekJ. W.ZiaA. (2010). Governance networks in public administration and public policy. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
35.
KolibaC. J.MillsR. M.ZiaA. (2011). Accountability in governance networks: An assessment of public, private, and nonprofit emergency management practices following hurricane Katrina. Public Administration Review, 71, 210-220.
36.
LewisC. W. (2006). In pursuit of the public interest. Public Administration Review, 6, 694-700.
37.
LipnackJ.StampsJ. (1994). The age of the network. New York, NY: Wiley.
38.
LukeJ. S. (1998). Catalytic leadership: Strategies for an interconnected world. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
39.
LuttonL. (1999). History and American public administration. Administration & Society, 31, 205-221.
40.
ManiB. G. (2009). Women, men, and human capital development in the public sector: Return on investments. New York, NY: Lexington Books.
41.
MartinP. Y. (1992). Gender, interaction, and inequality in organizations. In RidgewayC. L. (Ed.), Gender, interaction and inequality (pp. 208-231). New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
42.
McDonaldB. D.III. (2010). The Bureau of Municipal Research and the development of a professional public service. Administration & Society, 42, 815-835.
43.
MeierK. J.Nicholson-CrottyJ. (2006). Gender, representative bureaucracy, and law enforcement: The case of sexual assault. Public Administration Review, 66, 850-860.
44.
MilwardH. B.ProvanK. G. (2006). Health services delivery networks: What do we know and where should we be headed?Healthcare Papers, 7, 32-39.
45.
OspinaS.DiazW.SullivanJ. (2002). Negotiating accountability: Managerial lessons from identity-based nonprofit organizations. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 31, 5-31.
46.
ProvanK. G.LemaireR. H. (2012). Core concepts and key ideas for understanding public sector organizational networks: Using research to inform scholarship and practice. Public Administration Review, 72, 638-648.
47.
RittelH. W. J.WeberM. M. (1973). Dilemmas in general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4, 155-169.
48.
RosenthalC. S. (1998). Determinants of collaborative leadership: Civil engagement, gender or organizational norms?Political Research Quarterly, 51, 847-868.
49.
SaidelJ. R.LoscoccoK. (2005). Agency leaders, gendered institutions, and representative bureaucracy. Public Administration Review, 65, 158-170.
50.
SalamonL. M. (2002). The tools of government: A guide to the new governance. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
51.
SchacterH. L. (1995). Democracy, scientific management and urban reform: The case of the Bureau of Municipal Research and the 1912 New York City School Inquiry. Journal of Management History (Archive), 1, 52-64.
52.
SchacterH. L. (2011). Reflections on politicial engagement and voluntary association governance. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 40, 703-719.
53.
SheppardD. L. (1989). Organizations, power, and sexuality: The image and self-image of women managers. In HearnJ.SheppardD. L.Tancred-SheriffP.BurrellG. (Eds.), The sexuality of the organization (pp. 139-157). London, England: SAGE.
54.
SklarK. K. (1995). Florence Kelley and the nation’s work: The rise of women’s political culture, 1830-1900. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
55.
SkocpolT. (2003). Diminished democracy: From membership to management in American civic life. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.
56.
SorensenE.TorfingJ. (2005). The democratic anchorage of governance networks. Scandinavian Political Studies, 28, 195-218.
57.
StiversC. (1990). The public agency as polis: Active citizenship in the administrative state. Administration & Society, 22, 96-105.
58.
StiversC. (2000). Bureau men, settlement women: Constructing public administration in the progressive era. Lawrence: University of Kansas Press.
59.
StiversC. (2002). Gender images in public administration: Legitimacy and the administrative state. London, England: SAGE.
60.
TocquevilleA. (2004). Democracy in America (A. Goldhammer, Trans.). New York, NY: Library of America.
61.
Van EngenM. L.Van der LeedenR.WillemsenT. M. (2001). Gender, context and leadership styles: A field study. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 74, 581-598.
62.
WajcmanJ. (1996). Desperately seeking differences: Is management style gendered?British Journal of Industrial Relations, 34, 333-349.
63.
WaldL. (1915). The house on Henry Street. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
64.
WeberE. P.KhademianA. M. (2008). Wicked problems: Knowledge challenges, and collaborative capacity builders in network settings. Public Administration Review, 68, 334-349.
65.
WeberM. (1947). Theory of social and economic organization (AndersonA. M.ParsonsT., Trans.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
66.
WilsonW. (1887). The study of administration. Political Science Quarterly, 2, 197-222.
67.
WoodW.EaglyA. H. (2002). A cross-cultural analysis of the behavior of women and men: Implications for the origins of sex differences. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 699-727.
