Scholars suggest three partnering strategies that nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) can use to pursue strategic relationships in civil society networks: (a) the development of overlapping ties associated with network closure, (b) adopting an intermediary role between two disconnected organizations associated with brokerage, and (c) complying with the match-making demands of third-party organizations. Collaborative relationships among 489 NGOs were examined over a 14-year period (1990-2004) to determine which of these strategies NGOs use and when. The network demonstrated a strong preference for closure at the beginning of the observation period, after which time partnerships settled into a more stable pattern of intra-sector collaboration after 1996. Brokerage and constrained-choice strategies were not prevalent at any point over the observation period. Results are discussed in terms of network evolution and implications of the observed NGO preferences for closure. The potential benefits of emergent stability are also discussed.
AstleyW. G. (1985). The two ecologies: Population and community perspectives on organizational evolution. Administrative Science Quarterly, 30, 224-241.
2.
AtoubaY. C.ShumateM. (2010). Interorganizational networking patterns among development organizations. Journal of Communication, 60, 293-317. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01483.x
3.
AtoubaY. C.ShumateM. (2015). International nonprofit collaboration: Examining the role of homophily. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 44, 587-608. doi:10.1177/0899764014524991
4.
AustinJ. E.SeitanidiM. M. (2012). Collaborative value creation: A review of partnering between nonprofits and businesses: Part I. Value creation spectrum and collaboration stages. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 41, 726-758.
5.
BakerW. E.ObstfeldD. (1999). Social capital by design: Structures, strategies, and institutional context. In LeendersR. Th. A. J.GabbayS. M. (Eds.), Corporate social capital and liability (pp. 88-105). New York, NY: Springer.
6.
BaldassariD.DianiM. (2007). The integrative power of civic networks. American Journal of Sociology, 113, 735-780. doi:10.1086/521839
7.
BrinkerhoffJ. M. (2002). Government-nonprofit partnership: A defining framework. Public Administration and Development, 22, 19-30. doi:10.1002/pad.203
8.
BryantJ. A.MongeP. R. (2008). The evolution of the children’s television community, 1953-2003. International Journal of Communication, 2, 160-192.
9.
BurtR. S. (1992). Structural holes: The structure of social capital competition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
10.
BurtR. S. (2001). Structural holes versus network closure as social capital. In LinN.CookK. S.BurtR. S. (Eds.), Social capital: Theory and research (pp. 31-56). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
11.
CastellsM. (1999). Information technology, globalization and social development (Vol. 114). Geneva, Switzerland: United Nations Research Institute for Social Development.
12.
CastellsM. (2004). The network society: A cross-cultural perspective. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
13.
DoerfelM. L.TaylorM. (2004). Network dynamics of interorganizational cooperation: The Croatian civil society movement. Communication Monographs, 71, 373-394. doi:10.1080/0363452042000307470
14.
DoerfelM. L.TaylorM. (2017). The story of collective action: The emergence of ideological leaders, collective action network leaders, and cross-sector network partners in civil society. Journal of Communication, 67, 920-943.
FoxJ. (1996). How does civil society thicken? The political construction of social capital in rural Mexico. World Development, 24, 1089-1103. doi:10.1016/0305-750X(96)00025-3
17.
GargiuloM.BenassiM. (2000). Trapped in your own net? Network cohesion, structural holes, and the adaptation of social capital. Organization Science, 11, 183-196.
18.
GazleyB.GuoC. (2015). What do we know about nonprofit collaboration? A Comprehensive systematic review of the literature. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2015(1), Article 15409. doi:10.5465/ambpp.2015.303
19.
GittellR.VidalA. (1998). Community organizing: Building social capital as a development strategy. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
20.
GraddyE. A.ChenB. (2006). Influences on the size and scope of networks for social service delivery. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 16, 533-552. doi:10.1093/jopart/muj005
21.
GrayB. (1989). Collaborating: Finding common ground for multiparty problems. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
22.
GreenH. D.WassermanS. (2013). Network analysis: A definitional guide to important concepts. In LittleT. D. (Ed.), Oxford handbook of quantitative methods (pp. 154-174). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
23.
GulatiR. (1995). Social structure and alliance formation patterns: A longitudinal analysis. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 619-652.
24.
GulatiR.GargiuloM. (1999). Where do interorganizational networks come from?American Journal of Sociology, 104, 1439-1493.
25.
GuoC.AcarM. (2005). Understanding collaboration among nonprofit organizations: Combining resource dependency, institutional, and network perspectives. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 34, 340-361. doi:10.1177/0899764005275411
26.
HagerM. A.GalaskiewiczJ.LarsonJ. A. (2004). Structural embeddedness and the liability of newness among nonprofit organizations. Public Management Review, 6, 159-188.
27.
HeffrenW.McDonaldA.CasebeerA.WallstenD. (2003). Mandated intersectoral, interdisciplinary collaboration: Opportunity or oxymoron? In HibbertP. (Ed.), Co-creating emergent insight (pp. 221-227). Glasgow, Scotland: Graduate School of Business, University of Strathclyde.
28.
HunterD. R. (2007). Curved exponential family models for social networks. Social Networks, 29, 216-230. doi:10.1016/j.socnet.2006.08.005
29.
HuxhamC.VangenS. (2013). Managing to collaborate: The theory and practice of collaborative advantage. New York, NY: Routledge.
KeyesL. C.SchwartzA.VidalA. C.BrattR. G. (1996). Networks and nonprofits: Opportunities and challenges in an era of federal devolution. Housing Policy Debate, 7, 201-229. doi:10.1080/10511482.1996.9521219
32.
KingN. C. (2004). Social capital and nonprofit leaders. Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 14, 471-486.
33.
KlerxL.LeeuwisC. (2009). Establishment and embedding of innovation brokers at different innovation system levels: Insights from the Dutch agricultural sector. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 76, 849-860. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2008.10.001
34.
KrivitskyP. N.HandcockM. S. (2014). A separable model for dynamic networks. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Statistical Methodology), 76, 29-46. doi:10.1111/rssb.12014
35.
LongoriaR. A. (2005). Is inter-organizational collaboration always a good thing?Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare, 32, 123-138.
36.
D.LusherJ.KoskinenG.Robins (Eds.). (2012). Exponential random graph models for social networks: Theory, methods, and applications. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
37.
MadonS. (1999). International NGOs: Networking, information flows and learning. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 8, 251-261.
38.
MargolinD. B.ShenC.LeeS.WeberM. S.FulkJ.MongeP. (2015). Normative influences on network structure in the evolution of the children’s rights NGO network, 1977-2004. Communication Research, 42, 30-59.
39.
McPhersonM.Smith-LovinL.CookJ. M. (2001). Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 415-444. doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.27.1.415
40.
MertonR. K. (1968). Social theory and social structure. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
41.
MeyerM.HydeC. (2004). Too much of a “good” thing? Insular neighborhood associations, nonreciprocal civility, and the promotion of civic health. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 33, 77S-96S.
42.
MongeP. R.ContractorN. S. (2003). Theories of communication networks. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
43.
MongeP. R.HeiseB. R.MargolinD. (2008). Communication network evolution in organizational communities. Communication Theory, 18, 449-477.
44.
O’BrienN. F.EvansS. K. (2017). Civil society partnerships: Power imbalance and mutual dependence in NGO partnerships. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 28, 1399-1421. doi:10.1007/s11266-016-9721-4
45.
ObstfeldD. (2017). Getting new things done: Networks, brokerage and the assembly of innovative action. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
46.
PasseyA.LyonsM. (2006). Nonprofits and social capital: Measurement through organizational surveys. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 16, 481-495.
47.
PhelpsC. C. (2010). A longitudinal study of the influence of alliance network structure and composition on firm exploratory innovation. Academy of Management Journal, 53, 890-913.
48.
RabrenovicG.PierceG. (2003). Connecting the community: Information as a resource to create social capital and enhance community economic development. In Body-GendrotS.GittellM. (Eds.), Social capital and social citizenship (pp. 65-77). Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
49.
RobinsG. (2015). Doing social network research: Network-based research design for social scientists. New York, NY: SAGE.
50.
RobinsG.PattisonP.KalishY.LusherD. (2007). An introduction to exponential random graph (p*) models for social networks. Social Networks, 29, 173-191.
51.
RodríguezC.LangleyA.BélandF.DenisJ. L. (2007). Governance, power, and mandated collaboration in an interorganizational network. Administration & Society, 39, 150-193. doi:10.1177/0095399706297212
52.
SaxenianA. (1994). Lessons from silicon valley. Technology Review, 97, 42-51.
53.
SchneiderJ. A. (2009). Organizational social capital and nonprofits. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 38, 643-662.
54.
SeitanidiM. M. (2010). The politics of partnerships: A critical examination of nonprofit-business partnerships. New York, NY: Springer.
55.
SelskyJ. W. (1991). Lessons in community development: An activist approach to stimulating interorganizational collaboration. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 27, 91-115. doi:10.1177/0021886391271005
56.
ShumateM.FulkJ.MongeP. (2005). Predictors of the International HIV–AIDS INGO network over time. Human Communication Research, 31, 482-510. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2005.tb00880.x
57.
SikkinkK.SmithJ. (2002). Infrastructures for change: Transnational organizations, 1953-1993. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
58.
SmithJ. (1997). Characteristics of the modern transnational social movement sector. In SmithJ.ChatfieldC.PagnuccoR. (Eds.), Transnational social movements and global politics: Solidarity beyond the state (pp. 42-58). Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.
59.
SteffekJ. (2013). Explaining cooperation between IGOs and NGOs—Push factors, pull factors, and the policy cycle. Review of International Studies, 39, 993-1013.
60.
StephensK. J.FulkJ.MongeP. R. (2009). Constrained choices in alliance formations: Cupids and organizational marriages. Human Relations, 62, 501-536. doi:10.1177/0018726708101982
61.
StohlM.StohlC. (2005). Human rights, nation states, and NGOs: Structural holes and the emergence of global regimes. Communication Monographs, 72, 442-467. doi:10.1080/03637750500322610
62.
TaylorM.DoerfelM. L. (2003). Building interorganizational relationships that build nations. Human Communication Research, 29, 153-181. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2003.tb00835.x
63.
TushmanM. L.RomanelliE. (1985). Organizational evolution: A metamorphosis model of convergence and reorientation. Organizational Behavior, 7, 171-222.
64.
Union of International Associations. (2017). Yearbook of international organizations online: Guide to global civil society networks. Retrieved from http://www.uia.org
65.
UzziB. (1999). Embeddedness in the making of financial capital: How social relations and networks benefit firms seeking financing. American Sociological Review, 64, 481-505. doi:10.2307/2657252
66.
WassermanS.FaustK. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
67.
WhiteB. N. F. (2005). Shifting positions on child labor: The views and practice of intergovernmental organizations. In WestonB. (Ed.), Child labor and human rights: Making children matter (pp. 319-342). Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.
68.
WoodD. J.GrayB. (1991). Toward a comprehensive theory of collaboration. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 27, 139-162. doi:10.1177/0021886391272001
