Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The Formation of Cross-Sector Development Partnerships: How Bridging Agents Shape Project Agendas and Longer-Term Alliances

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Cross-sector development partnerships (CSDPs) are project-based collaborative arrangements between business, government, and civil society organizations in support of international development goals such as sustainability, health education, and economic development. Focusing on public private partnerships in development cooperation, we examine different constellations of bridging agents and their effects in the formation of single CSDP projects and longer-term alliances. We conceptualize bridging agency as a collective process involving both internal partner representatives and external intermediaries in initiating and/or supporting roles. We find that the involvement of external intermediaries eases the formation of single projects and longer-term alliances. However, when projects are initiated by external intermediaries they tend to be repetitive and narrow in scope, whereas projects initiated by internal partner representatives often explore novel agendas and embody a greater potential for social innovation. Yet, the longer-term pursuit of these agendas beyond single projects may require external intermediaries in supporting roles. Findings help better understand micro-processes and collective practices of brokerage and alliance formation in transnational governance contexts and beyond.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • ADA (Austrian Development Agency). (2009). Wirtschaftspartnerschaften. Ein Instrument der Österreichischen Entwicklungszusammenarbeit. Richtlinie (Development Partnerships. An instrument of Austrian Development Cooperation. Guideline). Vienna.

  • Aldrich, H. E., & Herker, D. (1977). Boundary spanning roles and organization structure. Academy of Management Review, 2, 217–230.

    Google Scholar 

  • Austin, J. E. (2010). From organization to organization: On creating value. Journal of Business Ethics, 94, 13–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Austin, J. E., & Seitanidi, M. M. (2012a). Collaborative value creation: A review of partnering between nonprofits and businesses: Part 1. Value creation spectrum and collaboration stages. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 41, 726–758.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Austin, J. E., & Seitanidi, M. M. (2012b). Collaborative value creation: A review of partnering between nonprofits and businesses: Part 2. Partnership processes and outcomes. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 41, 929–968.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartley, T. (2007). Institutional emergence in an era of globalization: The rise of transnational private regulation of labor and environmental conditions. American Journal of Sociology, 113, 297–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bechky, B. A. (2006). Gaffers, gofers, and grips: Role-based coordination in temporary organizations. Organization Science, 17, 3–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berends, H., van Burg, E., & van Raaij, E. M. (2011). Contacts and contracts: Cross-level network dynamics in the development of an aircraft material. Organization Science, 22, 940–960.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berggren, C., Soederlund, J., & Anderson, C. (2001). Clients, contractors, and consultants: The consequences of organizational fragmentation in contemporary project environments. Project Management Journal, 32, 39–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein, S., & Cashore, B. (2007). Can non-state global governance be legitimate? An analytical framework. Regulation & Governance, 1, 347–371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bitzer, V., & Glasbergen, P. (2010). Partnerships for sustainable change in cotton: An institutional analysis of African cases. Journal of Business Ethics, 93, 223–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • BMZ. (2002). Guidelines für Entwicklungspartnerschaften mit der Wirtschaft (PPP) finanziert aus den Haushaltstiteln 68711, 68712 oder 68788 (Guidelines for Development Partnerships with businesses (PPP) financed by titles 68711, 68712 or 68788). Berlin.

  • Brown, L. D. (1991). Bridging organizations and sustainable development. Human Relations, 44, 807–831.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brunsson, N., & Jacobsson, B. (2000). A world of standards. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burt, R. S. (1992). Structural holes: The social structure of competition. London: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burt, R. S. (2004). Structural holes and good ideas. American Journal of Sociology, 110, 349–399.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, A. E. (1991). Social worlds/arenas theory as organizational theory. In D. R. Maines (Ed.), Social organization and social process: Essays in honor of Anselm Strauss (pp. 119–158). New York: Aldine De Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, A., & Fuller, M. (2010). Collaborative strategic management: Strategy formulation and implementation by multi-organizational cross-sector social partnerships. Journal of Business Ethics, 94, 85–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Das, T. K., & Teng, B. (1998). Between trust and control: Developing confidence in alliances. Academy of Management Review, 23, 491–512.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davies, A., & Brady, T. (2000). Organizational capabilities and learning in complex product systems: Towards repeatable solutions. Research Policy, 29, 931–953.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deephouse, D., & Heugens, P. (2009). Linking social issues to organizational impact: The role of infomediaries and the infomediary process. Journal of Business Ethics, 86(4), 541–553.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diesing, P. (1971). Patterns of discovery in the social sciences. Chicago: Aldine-Atherton.

  • Djelic, M.-L., & Sahlin-Andersson, K. (Eds.). (2006). Transnational governance: Institutional dynamics of regulation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doz, Y. L., Olk, P. M., & Ring, P. S. (2000). Formation processes of R&D consortia: Which path to take? Where does it lead? Strategic Management Journal, 21, 239–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dyer, J. H., & Singh, H. (1998). The relational view: Cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23, 660–679.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14, 532–550.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eweje, G. (2006). The role of MNEs in community development initiatives in developing countries. Corporate Social Responsibility at work in Nigeria and South Africa. Business and Society, 45, 93–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fincham, R. (1999). The consultant–client relationship—Critical perspectives on the management of organisational change. Journal of Management Studies, 36, 335–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geppert, M., Matten, D., & Walgenbach, P. (2006). Transnational institution building and the multinational corporation: An emerging field of research. Human Relations, 59, 1451–1465.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerwin, D., & Ferris, J. S. (2004). Organizing new product development projects in strategic alliances. Organization Science, 15, 22–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • GIZ (2013). Development partnerships with the private sector (PPP). www.giz.de/themen/en/2362.htm. Accessed 8 Mar 2013.

  • Glueckler, J., & Armbruester, T. (2003). Bridging uncertainty in management consulting: The mechanisms of trust and networked reputation. Organization Studies, 24, 269–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, R. A., & Goodman, L. P. (1976). Some management issues in temporary systems: A study of professional development and manpower: The theatre case. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21, 494–501.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grabher, G. (2002). Cool projects, boring institutions: Temporary collaboration in social context. Regional Studies, 36, 205–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, B. (1989). Collaborating: Finding common ground for multiparty problems. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, R., Raynard, M., Kodeih, F., Micelotta, E. R., & Lounsbury, M. (2011). Institutional complexity and organizational responses. The Academy of Management Annals, 5, 317–371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gulati, R. (1995). Does familiarity breed trust? The implications of repeated ties for contractual choice in alliances. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 85–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hadjikhani, A. (1996). Project marketing and the management of discontinuity. International Business Review, 5, 319–336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hellgren, B., & Stjernberg, T. (1995). Design and implementation in major investments—A project network approach. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 11, 377–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hemmati, M. (2002). Multi-stakeholder processes for governance and sustainability. Beyond deadlock and conflict. London: Earthscan Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hibbert, P., & Huxham, C. (2010). The past in play: Tradition in the structures of collaboration. Organization Studies, 31, 525–554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirschman, A. O. (1967). Development projects observed. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, S. (2008). Framing contests: Strategy making under uncertainty. Organization Science, 19, 729–752.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, A. (2007). Cooperation between corporations and environmental groups: A transaction cost perspective. Academy of Management Review, 32, 889–900.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolk, A., van Dolen, W., & Vock, M. (2010). Trickle effects of cross-sector social partnerships. Journal of Business Ethics, 94, 123–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolk, A., van Tulder, R., & Kostwinder, E. (2008). Business and partnerships for development. European Management Journal, 26, 262–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koschmann, M. A., Kuhn, R. T., & Pfarrer, M. D. (2012). A communicative framework of value in cross-sector partnerships. Academy of Management Review, 37, 332–354.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kouwenhoven, V. (1993). Public–private partnership: A model for the management of public–private corporation. In J. Kooiman (Ed.), Modern governance: New government–society interactions (pp. 119–130). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lazer, D., & Friedman, A. (2007). The network structure of exploration and exploitation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52, 667–694.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Le Ber, M. J., & Branzei, O. (2009). (Re)Forming strategic cross-sector partnerships relational processes of social innovation. Business & Society, 49, 140–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Le Ber, M. J., & Branzei, O. (2010). Value frame fusion in cross-sector interactions. Journal of Business Ethics, 94, 163–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levina, N., & Vaast, E. (2005). The emergence of boundary spanning competence in practice: Implications for implementation and use of information systems. MIS Quarterly, 29, 335–363.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lingo, E. L., & O’Mahony, S. (2010). Nexus work: Brokerage on creative projects. Administrative Science Quarterly, 55, 47–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lounsbury, M. (2002). Institutional transformation and status mobility: The professionalization of the field of finance. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 255–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lounsbury, M. (2007). A tale of two cities: Competing logics and practice variation in the professionalizing of mutual funds. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 289–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lundin, R. A., & Söderholm, A. (1995). A theory of the temporary organization. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 11, 437–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maaninen-Olsson, E., & Muellern, T. (2009). A contextual understanding of projects—The importance of space and time. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 25, 327–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mair, J., Marti, I., & Ventresca, M. J. (2012). Building inclusive markets in rural Bangladesh: How intermediaries work institutional voids. Academy of Management Journal, 55, 819–850.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manning, S. (2010). The strategic formation of project networks: A relational practice perspective. Human Relations, 63, 551–573.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manning, S., & Sydow, J. (2011). Projects, paths, and practices: Sustaining and leveraging project-based relationships. Industrial and Corporate Change, 20, 1369–1402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manning, S., & von Hagen, O. (2010). Linking local experiments to global standards: How project networks promote global institution-building. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 26, 398–416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyerson, D., Weick, K. E., & Kramer, R. M. (1996). Swift trust and temporary groups. In R. M. Kramer & T. R. Tyler (Eds.), Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research (pp. 166-195). Thousand Oaks, CA, US: Sage Publications.

  • Murphy, M., Perrot, F., & Rivera-Santos, M. (2012). New perspectives on learning and innovation in cross-sector collaborations. Journal of Business Research, 65, 1700–1709.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Rourke, D. (2006). Multi-stakeholder regulation: Privatizing or socializing global labor standards? World Development, 34, 899–918.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Obstfeld, D. (2005). Social networks, the tertius iungens orientation, and involvement in innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50, 100–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Obstfeld, D. (2012). Creative projects: A less routine approach toward getting new things done. Organization Science, 23, 1571–1592.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ocasio, W. (1997). Towards an attention-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 18, 187–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, C. (1990). Determinants of interorganizational relationships: Integration and future directions. Academy of Management Review, 15, 241–265.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (1978). The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. New York: Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phills, J. A., Deiglmeier, K., & Miller, D. T. (2008). Rediscovering social innovation. Social Innovation Review, 6, 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pratt, M. G. (2009). From the editors: For the lack of a boilerplate: tips on writing up (and reviewing) qualitative research. Academy of Management Journal, 52, 856–862.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rangan, S., Samii, R., & Van Wassenhove, L. (2006). Constructive partnerships: When alliances between private firms and public actors can enable creative strategies. Academy of Management Review, 31, 738–751.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reinecke, J., Manning, S., & Von Hagen, O. (2012). The emergence of a standards market: Multiplicity of sustainability standards in the global coffee industry. Organization Studies, 33, 789–812.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ring, P. S., & Van de Ven, A. H. (1994). Developmental processes of cooperative interorganizational relationships. Academy of Management Review, 19, 90–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rivera-Santos, M., & Rufin, C. (2010). Odd couples: Understanding the governance of firm-NGO alliances. Journal of Business Ethics, 94, 55–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rufin, C., & Rivera-Santos, M. (2012). Between commonweal and competition: Understanding the governance of public–private partnerships. Journal of Management, 38, 1634–1654.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sakarya, S., Bodur, M., Yildirim-Öktem, Ö., & Selekler-Göksen, N. (2012). Social alliances: Business and social enterprise collaboration for social transformation. Journal of Business Research, 65, 1710–1720.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seitanidi, M. M., Koufopoulos, D. N., & Palmer, P. (2010). Partnership formation for change: Indicators for transformative potential in cross sector social partnerships. Journal of Business Ethics, 94, 139–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Selsky, J. W., & Parker, B. (2005). Cross-sector partnerships to address social issues: Challenges to theory and practice. Journal of Management, 31, 849–873.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Selsky, J. W., & Parker, B. (2010). Platforms for cross-sector social partnerships: Prospective sensemaking devices for social benefit. Journal of Business Ethics, 94, 21–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siggelkow, N. (2007). Persuasion with case studies. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 20–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stadtler, L., & Probst, G. (2012). How broker organizations can facilitate public–private partnerships for development. European Management Journal, 30, 32–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Starkey, K., Barnatt, C., & Tempest, S. (2000). Beyond networks and hierarchies: Latent organizations in the U.K. television Industry. Organization Science, 11, 299–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A. (1978). Negotiations: Varieties, contexts, processes, and social order. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A. (1984). Social worlds and their segmentation processes. Studies in Symbolic Interaction, 5, 123–139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sturdy, A. (1997). The consultancy process—An insecure business? Journal of Management Studies, 34, 389–413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sydow, J., & Windeler, A. (1998). Organizing and evaluating interfirm networks—A structurationist perspective on network process and effectiveness. Organization Science, 9, 265–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thornton, P. H., & Ocasio, W. (1999). Institutional logics and the historical contingency of power in organizations: Executive succession in the higher education publishing industry 1958–1990. American Journal of Sociology, 105, 801–843.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uzzi, B. (1997). Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, 35–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Huijstee, M. M., Francken, M., & Leroy, P. (2007). Partnerships for sustainable development: A review of current literature. Environmental Sciences, 4, 75–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vurro, C., Dacin, M. T., & Perrini, F. (2010). Institutional antecedents of partnering for social change: How institutional logics shape cross-sector social partnerships. Journal of Business Ethics, 94, 39–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waddock, S. (1991). A typology of social partnership organizations. Administration & Society, 22, 480–516.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waddock, S. (2010). From individual to institution: On making the world different. Journal of Business Ethics, 94, 9–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • WEF (2002). Global health initiative. Private sector intervention case example. The DCSA HIV/AIDS project. Geneva: World Economic Forum. Available at: http://www.weforum.org/pdf/Initiatives/GHI_HIV_CaseStudy_DCSA.pdf. Accessed 8 Mar 2013.

  • Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wijen, F., & Ansari, S. (2007). Overcoming inaction through collective institutional entrepreneurship: Insights from regime theory. Organization Studies, 28, 1079–1100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Windeler, A., & Sydow, J. (2001). Project networks and changing industry practices—Collaborative content production in the German television industry. Organization Studies, 22, 1035–1060.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the editor Alex Michalos and three anonymous reviewers for their very constructive comments on an earlier version of the manuscript. We are also very grateful to Marc Lavine, Juliane Reinecke, and the Organizations and Social Change Research Group at the College of Management, University of Massachusetts Boston, for their helpful feedback and suggestions.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Management, University of Massachusetts Boston, 100 Morrissey Boulevard, Boston, MA, 02125, USA

    Stephan Manning

  2. Austrian Development Agency (ADA), Zelinkagasse 2, 1010, Vienna, Austria

    Daniel Roessler

Authors
  1. Stephan Manning
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Daniel Roessler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stephan Manning.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Manning, S., Roessler, D. The Formation of Cross-Sector Development Partnerships: How Bridging Agents Shape Project Agendas and Longer-Term Alliances. J Bus Ethics 123, 527–547 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1853-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1853-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation