“Whole” goal-directed networks are inherently full of conflict and tensions, but a certain level of agreement about network-level goals is important for goal-directed service delivery networks. This work examines goal congruency in a large, heterogeneous child and youth health and well-being network. By drawing on the dimensions of social capital to categorize types of network relationships, the tie portfolios that are associated with perceived goal congruence between network and organizational member goals are examined. Using crisp-set qualitative comparative analysis (cs-QCA), the results indicate that the perception of goal congruence is present when organizations have a high number of linking ties or a strong tie to network management staff combined with a high number of bridging ties. Implications are discussed for network governance and management, focusing especially on the types of relationships among network members that may need to be facilitated to support goal congruence, and thus, effective network functioning.
AgranoffR. (2007). Managing within networks. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
2.
AgranoffR.McGuireM. (2001). Big questions in network management research. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 11, 295-326.
3.
BarnardC. I. (1938). The functions of the executive. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
4.
BartelingsJ. A.GoedeeJ.RaabJ.BijlR. (2017). The nature of orchestrational work. Public Management Review, 19, 342-360.
5.
BaumgartnerM. (2015). Parsimony and causality. Quality & Quantity, 49, 839-856.
6.
BraumoellerB. F. (2015). Guarding against false positives in qualitative comparative analysis. Political Analysis, 23, 471-487.
7.
BungerA. C. (2013). Administrative coordination in nonprofit human service delivery networks: The role of competition and trust. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 42, 1155-1175.
8.
CicchettiD. V. (1994). Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instruments in psychology. Psychological Assessment, 6, 284-290.
9.
FissP. C. (2011). Building better causal theories: A fuzzy set approach to typologies in organization research. Academy of Management Journal, 54, 393-420.
10.
HugS. (2013). Qualitative comparative analysis: How inductive use and measurement error lead to problematic inference. Political Analysis, 21, 252-265.
11.
KanterR. M.KhuranaR. (2009). Types and positions: The significance of Georg Simmel’s structural theories for organizational behavior. In AdlerP. S. (Ed.), The oxford handbook of sociology and organization studies: Classical foundations (pp. 291-306). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
12.
KettlD. (2008). The next government of the United States. New York, NY: W.W. Norton.
13.
KickertW. J. M.KlijnE.-H.KoppenjanJ. F. M. (1997). Managing complex networks. London, England: Sage.
14.
KleinK. J.DansereauF.HallR. J. (1994). Levels issues in theory development, data collection, and analysis. Academy of Management Review, 19, 195-229.
15.
KrishnaA. (2002). Active social capital: Tracing the roots of development and democracy. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
16.
KrogslundC.ChoiD. D.PoertnerM. (2015). Fuzzy sets on shaky ground: Parameter sensitivity and confirmation bias in fsQCA. Political Analysis, 23, 21-41.
17.
KumarN.SternL. W.AndersonJ. C. (1993). Conducting interorganizational research using key informants. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 1633-1651.
18.
LemaireR. H.ProvanK. G. (2018). Managing Collaborative Effort: How Simmelian Ties Advance Public Sector Networks. American Review of Public Administration, 48, 379-394.
19.
LipsetS. M.TrowM. A.ColemanJ. S. (1956). Union democracy. New York, NY: Free Press.
20.
MacciòL.CristofoliD. (2017). How to support the endurance of long-term networks: The pivotal role of the network manager. Public Administration, 95, 1060-1076. doi:10.1111/padm.12349
21.
MarsdenP. V. (1990). Network data and measurement. Annual Review of Sociology, 16, 435-463.
22.
McGuireM. (2002). Managing networks: Propositions on what managers do and why they do it. Public Administration Review, 62, 599-609.
23.
McGuireM.AgranoffR. (2011). The limitations of public management networks. Public Administration, 89, 265-284.
24.
McPhersonM.Smith-LovinL.CookJ. M. (2001). Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 415-444.
25.
MeyersM. K.RiccucciN. M.LurieI. (2001). Achieving goal congruence in complex environments: The case of welfare reform. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 11, 165-201.
26.
MichelsR. (1915). Political parties: A sociological study of the oligarchical tendencies of modern democracy (PaulE.PaulC., Trans.). New York, NY: The Free Press.
27.
MilwardH. B.ProvanK. G. (2006). A manager’s guide to choosing and using collaborative networks. Washington, DC: International Business Machines Center for The Business of Government.
28.
NarayanD. (2000). Voices of the poor. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
29.
O’TooleL. (2015). Networks and Networking: The public administrative agendas. Public Administration Review, 75, 361-371.
30.
PaquinR. L.Howard-GrenvilleJ. A. (2013). Blind dates and arranged marriages: Longitudinal processes of network orchestration. Organization Studies, 34, 1623-1653.
31.
ProvanK. G.FishA.SydowJ. (2007). Interorganizational networks at the network level: A review of the empirical literature on whole networks. Journal of Management, 33, 479-516.
32.
ProvanK. G.HuangK.MilwardH. B. (2009). The evolution of structural embeddedness and organizational social outcomes in a centrally governed health and human services network. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 19, 873-893.
33.
ProvanK. G.KenisP. (2008). Modes of network governance: Structure, management, and effectiveness. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18, 229-252.
34.
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.
35.
ProvanK. G.MilwardH. B. (1995). A preliminary theory of interorganizational network effectiveness: A comparative study of four community mental health systems. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(1), 1-33.
36.
ProvanK. G.MilwardH. B. (2001). Do networks really work? A framework for evaluating public-sector organizational networks. Public Administration Review, 61, 414-423.
37.
PutnamR. D. (1993). Making democracy work. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
38.
PutnamR. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
39.
RaabJ.LemaireR. H.ProvanK. G. (2013). Chapter 10 the configurational approach in organizational network research. In FissP.CambréB.MarxA. (Ed.), Configurational theory and methods in organizational research (pp. 225-253). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group.
40.
RaginC. C. (1987). The comparative method. Berkeley: University of California Press.
41.
RaginC. C. (2000). Fuzzy set analysis. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
42.
RaginC. C. (2008). Redesigning social inquiry: Fuzzy sets and beyond. Chicago, IL: University of California Press.
43.
RaginC. C.DaveyS. (2016). Fuzzy-set/qualitative comparative analysis. Irvine: Department of Sociology, University of California.
44.
Saz-CarranzaA.OspinaS. M. (2011). The behavioral dimension of governing interorganizational goal-directed networks: Managing the unity-diversity tension. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21, 327-365.
45.
SeawrightJ. (2014). Comment: Limited diversity and the unreliability of QCA. Sociological Methodology, 44, 118-121.
46.
SzreterS.WoolcockM. (2004). Health by association? Social capital, social theory, and the political economy of public health. International Journal of Epidemiology, 33, 650-667.
47.
StevensonW. B.GreenbergD. (2000). Agency and social networks: Strategies of action in a social structure of position, opposition, and opportunity. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45, 651-678.
48.
ThiemA.BaumgartnerM.BolD. (2016). Still lost in translation! A correction of three misunderstandings between configurational comparativists and regressional analysts. Comparative Political Studies, 49, 742-774.
49.
TolbertP. S.HiattS. R. (2009). On organizations and oligarchies: Michels in the twenty-first century. In AdlerP. S. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of sociology and organization studies: Classical foundations (pp. 174-199). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
50.
VangenS.HuxhamC. (2012). The tangled web: Unraveling the principle of common goals in collaborations. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 22, 731-760.
51.
VenkatramanN.GrantJ. H. (1986). Construct measurement in organizational strategy research: A critique and proposal. Academy of Management Review, 11, 71-87.
52.
WassermanS.FaustK. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
53.
ZaheerA.McEvilyB.PerroneV. (1998). Does trust matter? Exploring the effects of interorganizational and interpersonal trust on performance. Organization Science, 9, 141-159.
