This study examines the perceived effectiveness of neighborhood councils (NCs) in Los Angeles, a government-sanctioned and financed institutional innovation in urban governance. The study considers NC boards as a dynamic and open social system that interacts with NCs’ internal and external environment. We propose that three factors—internal capacity, external networking, and attention-action congruence—are related to perceived NC effectiveness. The findings from a questionnaire survey of 80 NCs show that NC leaders perceive their organizations to be moderately effective. While internal capacity contributes to all three dimensions of effectiveness, external networking enhances NCs’ effectiveness in solving community issues and advising about city policies. Attention-action congruence, which examines the correspondence between NC board members’ issue orientation and actual actions, is positively related to NCs’ effectiveness in advising about city policies. The study concludes with considerations for enhancing the effectiveness of neighborhood associations.
AgranoffR. (2006). Inside collaborative networks: Ten lessons for public managers. Public Administration Review, 66, 56-65.
2.
AlfordJ. (2002). Why do public-sector clients coproduce? Toward a contingency theory. Administration & Society, 34, 32-56.
3.
AndrewsK. T.GanzM.BaggettaM.HanH.LimC. (2010). Leadership, membership, and voice: Civic associations that work. American Journal of Sociology, 115, 1191-1242.
4.
BerryJ. M.PortneyK. E.ThomsonK. (2002). The rebirth of urban democracy. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
5.
BradshawP.MurrayV.WolpinJ. (1992). Do nonprofit boards make a difference? An exploration of the relationships among board structure, process, and effectiveness. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 21, 227-249.
6.
BrassD. J.GalaskiewiczJ.GreveH. R.TsaiW. (2004). Taking stock of networks and organizations: A multilevel perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 47, 795-817.
7.
BrownT. L.PotoskiM. (2003). Contract–management capacity in municipal and county governments. Public Administration Review, 63, 153-164.
8.
BrownW. A. (2005). Exploring the association between board and organizational performance in nonprofit organizations. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 15, 317-339.
9.
BryerT. A. (2009). Explaining responsiveness in collaboration: Administrator and citizen role perceptions. Public Administration Review, 69, 271-283.
10.
BryerT. A.CooperT. L. (2007). Challenges in enhancing responsiveness in neighborhood governance. Public Performance & Management Review, 31, 191-214.
11.
CairnsB.HarrisM.YoungP. (2005). Building the capacity of the voluntary nonprofit sector: Challenges of theory and practice. International Journal of Public Administration, 28, 869-885.
12.
CarpiniM. X. D.CookF. L.JacobsL. R. (2004). Public deliberation, discursive participation, and citizen engagement: A review of the empirical literature. Annual Review of Political Science, 7, 315-344.
13.
ChambréS. M.FattN. (2002). Beyond the liability of newness: Nonprofit organizations in an emerging policy domain. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 31, 502-524.
14.
ChaskinR. J.GargS. (1997). The issue of governance in neighborhood-based initiatives. Urban Affairs Review, 32, 631-661.
15.
ChaskinR. J.GreenbergD. M. (2015). Between public and private action: Neighborhood organizations and local governance. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 44, 248-267.
16.
ChenB.CooperT. L.SunR. (2009). Spontaneous or constructed? Neighborhood governance reforms in Los Angeles and Shanghai. Public Administration Review, 69(Suppl. 1), S108-S115.
17.
ChristensenR. K.GazleyB. (2008). Capacity for public administration: Analysis of meaning and measurement. Public Administration and Development: The International Journal of Management Research and Practice, 28, 265-279.
18.
CooperT. L.BryerT. A.MeekJ. W. (2006). Citizen-centered collaborative public management. Public Administration Review, 66(Suppl. 1), 76-88.
19.
CooperT. L.MussoJ. A. (1999). The potential for neighborhood council involvement in American metropolitan governance. International Journal of Organization Theory & Behavior, 2, 199-232.
20.
EisingerP. (2002). Organizational capacity and organizational effectiveness among street-level food assistance programs. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 31, 115-130.
21.
EmersonK.NabatchiT.BaloghS. (2012). An integrative framework for collaborative governance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 22, 1-29.
22.
FredericksenP.LondonR. (2000). Disconnect in the hollow state: The pivotal role of organizational capacity in community-based development organizations. Public Administration Review, 60, 230-239.
GalaskiewiczJ.BielefeldW.DowellM. (2006). Networks and organizational growth: A study of community based nonprofits. Administrative Science Quarterly, 51, 337-380.
25.
GreenJ. C.GriesingerD. W. (1996). Board performance and organizational effectiveness in nonprofit social services organizations. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 6, 381-402.
26.
GuoC.MussoJ. A. (2007). Representation in nonprofit and voluntary organizations: A conceptual framework. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 36, 308-326.
27.
HansenS. B. (1975). Participation, political structure, and concurrence. American Political Science Review, 69, 1181-1199.
28.
HarmanH. H. (1976). Modern factor analysis. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
29.
HeikkilaT.IsettK. R. (2007). Citizen involvement and performance management in special-purpose governments. Public Administration Review, 67, 238-248.
30.
HermanR. D.RenzD. O. (1997). Multiple constituencies and the social construction of nonprofit organization effectiveness. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 26, 185-206.
31.
HermanR. D.RenzD. O. (2008). Advancing nonprofit organizational effectiveness research and theory: Nine theses. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 18, 399-415.
32.
HicklinA.O’TooleL. J.MeierK. J. (2008). Serpents in the sand: Managerial networking and nonlinear influences on organizational performance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18, 253-273.
33.
HillmanA. J.DalzielT. (2003). Boards of directors and firm performance: Integrating agency and resource dependence perspectives. Academy of Management Review, 28, 383-396.
34.
HoustonD.OngP. M. (2012). Determinants of voter participation in neighborhood council elections. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 41, 686-703.
35.
IsettK. R.ProvanK. G. (2005). The evolution of dyadic interorganizational relationships in a network of publicly funded nonprofit agencies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15, 149-165.
36.
JohansenM.LeRouxK. (2013). Managerial networking in nonprofit organizations: The impact of networking on organizational and advocacy effectiveness. Public Administration Review, 73, 355-363.
37.
JunK. N. (2007). Event history analysis of the formation of Los Angeles neighborhood councils. Urban Affairs Review, 43, 107-122.
38.
JunK. N.MussoJ. (2013). Participatory governance and the spatial representation of neighborhood issues. Urban Affairs Review, 49, 71-110.
39.
JunK. N.ShiauE. (2012). How are we doing? A multiple constituency approach to civic association effectiveness. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 41, 632-655.
40.
KathiP. C.CooperT. L. (2005). Democratizing the administrative state: Connecting neighborhood councils and city agencies. Public Administration Review, 65, 559-567.
41.
KathiP. C.CooperT. L.MeekJ. W. (2007). The role of the university as a mediating institution in neighborhood council-city agency collaboration. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 13, 365-382.
42.
KatzD.KahnR. L. (1978). The social psychology of organizations (2nd ed.). New York, NY: John Wiley.
43.
KingdonJ. W. (1995). Agendas, alternatives, and public policies. London, England: Longman.
44.
LawtonA.MacaulayM. (2014). Localism in practice: Investigating citizen participation and good governance in local government standards of conduct. Public Administration Review, 74, 75-83.
45.
LowndesV.SullivanH. (2008). How low can you go? Rationales and challenges for neighbourhood governance. Public Administration, 86, 53-74.
46.
MarwellN. P. (2004). Privatizing the welfare state: Nonprofit community-based organizations as political actors. American Sociological Review, 69, 265-291.
47.
McPhersonM. (1983). The size of voluntary organizations. Social Forces, 61, 1044-1064.
48.
MeierK. J.O’TooleL. J. (2003). Public management and educational performance: The impact of managerial networking. Public Administration Review, 63, 689-699.
49.
MorrisonE. W. (2002). Newcomers’ relationships: The role of social network ties during socialization. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 1149-1160.
50.
MussoJ.WeareC.BryerT.CooperT. L. (2011). Toward “strong democracy” in global cities? Social capital building, theory-driven reform, and the Los Angeles neighbourhood council experience. Public Administration Review, 71, 102-111.
51.
MussoJ.WeareC.ElliotM.KitsuseA.ShiauE. (2007). Toward community engagement in city governance: Evaluating neighborhood council reform in Los Angeles. Neighborhood Participation Project, School of Policy, Planning, and Development, University of Southern California. Retrieved from https://www.venicenc.org/files/USC-10YrStudyOfNCeffectiveness.pdf
52.
MussoJ.WeareC.OztasN.LogesW. E. (2006). Neighborhood governance reform and networks of community power in Los Angeles. The American Review of Public Administration, 36, 79-97.
53.
NeweyW. K.WestK. D. (1987). Hypothesis testing with efficient method of moments estimation. International Economic Review, 28, 777-787.
54.
NewtonK. (1982). Is small really so beautiful? Is big really so ugly? Size, effectiveness, and democracy in local government. Political Studies, 30, 190-206.
55.
OztasN. (2004). Neighborhood network structure of social capital: A multilevel analysis of the Los Angeles experiment (Doctoral dissertation). University of Southern California, Los Angeles.
56.
PfefferJ.SalancikG. R. (1978). The external control of organizations: A resource dependence approach. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
57.
PurdueD. (2001). Neighbourhood governance: Leadership, trust and social capital. Urban Studies, 38, 2211-2224.
58.
RichR. C. (1980). The dynamics of leadership in neighborhood organizations. Social Science Quarterly, 60, 570-587.
59.
RobertsN. (2004). Public deliberation in an age of direct citizen participation. The American Review of Public Administration, 34, 315-353.
60.
SandfortJ. (2013). Analyzing the practice of nonprofit advocacy: Comparing two human services networks. In PekkhanenR. J.SmithS. R.TsujinakaY. (Eds.), Nonprofits and advocacy: Engaging community and government in an era of retrenchment (pp. 222-253). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
61.
SchumakerP. (1993). Estimating the first and (some of the) third faces of community power. Urban Affairs Quarterly, 28, 441-461.
62.
SowaJ. E.SeldenS. C.SandfortJ. R. (2004). No longer unmeasurable? A multidimensional integrated model of nonprofit organizational effectiveness. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 33, 711-728.
63.
VerbaS.NieN. H. (1987). Participation in America: Political democracy and social equality. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
64.
WagenaarH. (2007). Governance, complexity, and democratic participation: How citizens and public officials harness the complexities of neighborhood decline. The American Review of Public Administration, 37, 17-50.
65.
WeareC.MussoJ.JunK. N. (2009). Cross-talk: The role of homophily and elite bias in civic associations. Social Forces, 88, 147-173.
