Skip to main content

Cross-Sector Social Interactions and Systemic Change in Disaster Response: A Qualitative Study

Journal of Business Ethics volume 150, pages 357–384 (2018)Cite this article

Abstract

The United States National Preparedness System has evolved significantly in the recent past. These changes have affected the system structures and goals for disaster response. At the same time, actors such as private businesses have become increasingly involved in disaster efforts. In this paper, we begin to fill the gap in the cross-sector literature regarding interactions that have systemic impacts by investigating how the simultaneous processes of systemic change and intensifying cross-sector interaction worked and interacted in the context of the preparedness system. We examine these inter-linkages through a qualitative study in the setting of Hurricane Sandy. Drawing from systems theory, we develop a grounded model that provides an explanation for the system change and highlights how cross-sector interaction relates to the changes observed in the system.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Notes

  1. While we refer to systems theory already in the introduction and discuss the theory in detail in the theoretical background section, it is useful to note that the theory was not chosen as a theoretical frame for our grounded theory (GT) study before data collection. Instead, consistent with the GT approach, insights from systems theory were only integrated to the emerging grounded model as part of theory integration. Yet, similar to other scholars (e.g., Nag et al. 2007), we discuss the theory before data presentation for greater reader-friendliness.

  2. In addition to systems theory and cross-sector interaction and social mechanisms literatures, there are additional theories and literatures that are highly relevant to our findings and grounded model, including the institutional change (Smets et al. 2012), crisis response and management (Moynihan 2009), and humanitarian operations (Day et al. 2012) literatures.

References

  • Anderson, P. J., Blatt, R., Christianson, M. K., Grant, A. M., Marquis, C., Neuman, E. J., et al. (2006). Understanding mechanisms in organizational research: Reflections from a collective journey. Journal of Management Inquiry, 15(2), 102–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Associated Press. (2013). Report: Sandy was USA’s 2nd-costliest hurricane. USA Today. Retrieved February 12, 2013 from http://www.usatoday.com/story/weather/2013/02/12/hurricane-sandy-weather-katrina/1912941/.

  • Austin, J. E. (2000). Strategic collaboration between nonprofits and businesses. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 29(1), 69–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Austin, J. E. (2014). Foreword. In M. M. Seitanidi & A. Crane (Eds.), Social partnerships and responsible business: A research handbook (pp. xxvii–xxviii). London: Routledge.

    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(5), 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(6), 929–968.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baur, D., & Schmitz, H. P. (2012). Corporations and NGOs: When accountability leads to co-optation. Journal of Business Ethics, 106(1), 9–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berger, I. E., Cunningham, P. H., & Drumwright, M. E. (2004). Social alliances: Company/nonprofit collaboration. California Management Review, 47(1), 58–90.

    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(June Supplement 2), 223–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blake, E. S., Kimberlain, T. B., Berg, R. J., Cangialosi, J. P., & Beven, J. L. (2012). Tropical cyclone report: Hurricane Sandy. Miami, FL: National Hurricane Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowen, F., Newenham-Kahindi, A., & Herremans, I. (2010). When suits meet roots: The antecedents and consequences of community engagement strategy. Journal of Business Ethics, 95(2), 297–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryson, J. M., Crosby, B. C., & Middleton Stone, M. (2015). Designing and implementing cross-sector collaborations: Needed and challenging. Public Administration Review, 75(5), 647–663.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bucci, S. P., Inserra, D., Lesser, J., Mayer, M. A., Slattery, B., Spencer, J., et al. (2013). After Hurricane Sandy: Time to learn and implement the lessons in preparedness, response, and resilience. Washington, DC: The Heritage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calton, J. M., Werhane, P. H., Hartman, L. P., & Bevan, D. (2013). Building partnerships to create social and economic value at the base of the global development pyramid. Journal of Business Ethics, 117(4), 721–733.

    Article  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(July), 85–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2014). Basics of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cornelius, N., & Wallace, J. (2010). Cross sector partnerships: City regeneration and social justice. Journal of Business Ethics, 94(1), 71–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crane, A. (2010). From governance to Governance: On blurring boundaries. Journal of Business Ethics, 94(July), 17–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahan, N. M., Doh, J. P., Oetzel, J., & Yaziji, M. (2010a). Corporate-NGO collaboration: Co-creating new business models for developing markets. Long Range Planning, 43(2–3), 326–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahan, N. M., Doh, J., & Teegen, H. (2010b). Role of nongovernmental organizations in the business–government–society interface: Special issue overview and introductory essay. Business and Society, 49(1), 20–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, G., & Marquis, C. (2005). Prospects for Organization Theory in the Early Twenty-First Century: Institutional Fields and Mechanisms. Organization Science, 16(4), 332–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Day, J. M., Melnyk, S. A., Larson, P. D., Davis, E. W., & Whybark, D. C. (2012). Humanitarian and disaster relief supply chains: A matter of life and death. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 48(2), 21–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Bakker, F. G. A., Den Hond, F., King, B., & Weber, K. (2013). Social movements, civil society and corporations: Taking stock and looking ahead. Organization Studies, 34(5–6), 573–593.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delk, J. (2017). Former FEMA chief: It’s not about climate change anymore, ‘it’s about climate adaptation’. The Hill. Retrieved September 8, 2017 from http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/349785-former-fema-director-its-not-about-climate-change-its-about-climate.

  • Denk, N., Kaufmann, L., & Carter, C. R. (2012). Increasing the rigor of grounded theory research—A review of the SCM literature. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 42(8/9), 742–763.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Devinney, T. M. (2009). Is the socially responsible corporation a myth? The good, the bad, and the ugly of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Perspectives, 23(2), 44–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Emerson, K., Nabatchi, T., & Balogh, S. (2012). An integrative framework for collaborative governance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 22(1), 1–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • FEMA. (1992). Federal response plan. Washington, DC: FEMA.

    Google Scholar 

  • FEMA. (1999). Federal response plan (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: FEMA.

    Google Scholar 

  • FEMA. (2015a). National preparedness goal, second edition—What’s new. Washington, DC: FEMA.

    Google Scholar 

  • FEMA. (2015b). Whole community. Washington, DC: FEMA. Retrieved from www.fema.gov/whole-community-0. Accessed 10 Dec 2015.

  • FEMA. (2015c). Hurricane Katrina: 10 years later. Washington, DC: FEMA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forrester, J. W. (1958). Industrial dynamics: A major breakthrough for decision makers. Harvard Business Review, 36(4), 37–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geels, F. W. (2002). Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: A multi-level perspective and a case-study. Research Policy, 31(8), 1257–1274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gillespie, N., & Dietz, G. (2009). Trust repair after an organization-level failure. Academy of Management Review, 34(1), 127–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New York: Aldine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hedström, P., & Swedberg, R. (1998). Social mechanisms: An introductory essay (pp. 1–31). Social mechanisms: An analytical approach to social theory.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, A. J. (2003). Linking social systems analysis to the industrial ecology framework. Organization & Environment, 16(1), 66–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Homeland Security. (2004). National response plan. Washington, DC: Homeland Security.

    Google Scholar 

  • Homeland Security. (2008). National response framework. Washington, DC: Homeland Security.

    Google Scholar 

  • Homeland Security. (2011a). National preparedness system (1st ed.). Washington, DC: Homeland Security.

    Google Scholar 

  • Homeland Security. (2011b). National preparedness goal (1st ed.). Washington, DC: Homeland Security.

    Google Scholar 

  • Homeland Security. (2013). National response framework (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: Homeland Security.

    Google Scholar 

  • Homeland Security. (2015). National preparedness goal (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: Homeland Security.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kapucu, N. (2008). Culture of preparedness: Household disaster preparedness. Disaster Prevention and Management: An International Journal, 17(4), 526–535.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kast, F. E., & Rosenzweig, J. E. (1972). General systems theory: Applications for organization and management. Academy of Management Journal, 15(4), 447–465.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koliba, C. J., Mills, R. M., & Zia, A. (2011). Accountability in governance networks: An assessment of public, private, and nonprofit emergency management practices following Hurricane Katrina. Public Administration Review, 71(2), 210–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolk, A., van Dolen, W., & Vock, M. (2010). Trickle effects of cross-sector social partnerships. Journal of Business Ethics, 94(1), 123–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kourula, A., & Laasonen, S. (2010). Nongovernmental organizations in business and society, management and international business research: Review and implications from 1998 to 2007. Business and Society, 49(1), 35–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laasonen, S., Fougère, M., & Kourula, A. (2012). Dominant articulations in academic business and society discourse on NGO–business relations: A critical assessment. Journal of Business Ethics, 109(4), 521–545.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lanaj, K., Hollenbeck, J. R., Ilgen, D. R., Barnes, C. M., & Harmon, S. J. (2013). The double-edged sword of decentralized planning in multiteam systems. Academy of Management Journal, 56(3), 735–757.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Le Ber, M. J., & Branzei, O. (2010). (Re)forming strategic cross-sector partnerships: Relational processes of social innovation. Business and Society, 49(1), 140–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manning, S., & Roessler, D. (2014). The formation of cross-sector development partnerships: How bridging agents shape project agendas and longer-term alliances. Journal of Business Ethics, 123(3), 527–547.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McLachlin, R., & Larson, P. D. (2011). Building humanitarian supply chain relationships: Lessons from leading practitioners. Journal of Humanitarian Logistics and Supply Chain Management, 1(1), 32–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montgomery, A. W., Dacin, P. A., & Dacin, M. T. (2012). Collective social entrepreneurship: Collaboratively shaping social good. Journal of Business Ethics, 111(3), 375–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moog, S., Spicer, A., & Böhm, S. (2015). The politics of multi-stakeholder initiatives: The crisis of the Forest Stewardship Council. Journal of Business Ethics, 128(3), 469–493.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moynihan, D. P. (2009). The network governance of crisis response: Case studies of incident command systems. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 19(4), 895–915.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, M., Arenas, D., & Batista, J. M. (2015). Value creation in cross-sector collaborations: The roles of experience and alignment. Journal of Business Ethics, 130(1), 145–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nag, R., Corley, K. G., & Gioia, D. A. (2007). The intersection of organizational identity, knowledge, and practice: Attempting strategic change via knowledge grafting. Academy of Management Journal, 50(4), 821–847.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, T. (1951). The social system. Glencoe: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Purdy, J. M. (2012). A framework for assessing power in collaborative governance processes. Public Administration Review, 72(3), 409–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quarshie, A. M., Salmi, A., & Leuschner, R. (2016). Sustainability and corporate social responsibility in supply chains: The state of research in supply chain management and business ethics journals. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 22(2), 82–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rauer, J., & Kaufmann, L. (2015). Mitigating external barriers to implementing green supply chain management: A grounded theory investigation of green-tech companies’ rare earth metals supply chains. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 51(2), 65–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rein, M., & Stott, L. (2009). Working together: Critical perspectives on six cross-sector partnerships in Southern Africa. Journal of Business Ethics, 90(May Supplement 1), 79–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ritvala, T., Salmi, A., & Andersson, P. (2014). MNCs and local cross-sector partnerships: The case of a smarter Baltic Sea. International Business Review, 23(5), 942–951.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rivera-Santos, M., & Rufín, C. (2010). Odd couples: Understanding the governance of firm–NGO alliances. Journal of Business Ethics, 94(1), 55–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rueede, D., & Kreutzer, K. (2015). Legitimation work within a cross-sector social partnership. Journal of Business Ethics, 128(1), 39–58.

    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(12), 1710–1720.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Santana, M., & Gillespie, P. (2017). Puerto Rico’s west side: Few signs of FEMA. CNN. Retrieved September 29, 2017 from http://edition.cnn.com/2017/09/29/us/puerto-rico-aguadilla/index.html.

  • Saz-Carranza, A., & Longo, F. (2012). Managing competing institutional logics in public-private joint ventures. Public Management Review, 14(3), 331–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scherer, A. G., & Palazzo, G. (2011). The new political role of business in a globalized world: A review of a new perspective on CSR and its implications for the firm, governance, and democracy. Journal of Management Studies, 48(4), 899–931.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, A., Wickert, C., & Marti, E. (2016). Reducing complexity by creating complexity: A systems theory perspective on how organizations respond to their environments. Journal of Management Studies. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12206.

    Google Scholar 

  • Segarra, L.M. (2017). Florida official: If you don’t evacuate, nobody will be there to answer your 911 call. Time. Retrieved September 9, 2017 from http://time.com/4934796/florida-official-if-you-dont-evacuate-nobody-will-be-there-to-answer-your-911-call/.

  • Seitanidi, M. M., & Crane, A. (Eds.). (2014). Social partnerships and responsible business: A research handbook. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seitanidi, M. M., Koufopoulos, D., & Palmer, P. (2010). Partnership formation for change: Indicators for transformative potential in cross sector social partnerships. Journal of Business Ethics, 94(1), 139–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seitanidi, M. M., & Lindgreen, A. (2010). Editorial: Cross-sector social interactions. Journal of Business Ethics, 94(1), 1–7.

    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(6), 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(1), 21–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Senge, P. M., Cambron-McCabe, N., Lucas, T., Smith, B., & Dutton, J. (2012). Schools that learn (updated and revised): A fifth discipline fieldbook for educators, parents, and everyone who cares about education. New York: Crown Business.

    Google Scholar 

  • Senge, P. M., Lichtenstein, B. B., Kaeufer, K., Bradbury, H., & Carroll, J. S. (2007). Collaborating for systemic change. MIT Sloan management review, 48(2), 44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simo, G., & Bies, A. L. (2007). The role of nonprofits in disaster response: An expanded model of cross-sector collaboration. Public Administration Review, 67(S1), 125–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skelcher, C., & Sullivan, H. (2008). Theory-driven approaches to analysing collaborative performance. Public Management Review, 10(6), 751–771.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smets, M., Morris, T. I. M., & Greenwood, R. (2012). From practice to field: A multilevel model of practice-driven institutional change. Academy of Management Journal, 55(4), 877–904.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stadtler, L. (2016). Scrutinizing public–private partnerships for development: Towards a broad evaluation conception. Journal of Business Ethics, 135(1), 71–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sterman, J., Oliva, R., Linderman, K., & Bendoly, E. (2015). System dynamics perspectives and modeling opportunities for research in operations management. Journal of Operations Management, 39, 1–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, K., & Holley, P. (2017). Texans’ do-it-ourselves rescue effort defines Hurricane Harvey. Washington Post. Retrieved September 2, 2017 from https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/texans-do-it-ourselves-rescue-effort-defines-hurricane-harvey/2017/09/02/f41bb8ee-8f2f-11e7-8df5-c2e5cf46c1e2_story.html?utm_term=.66af6609b2f0.

  • Tate, W. L., Dooley, K. J., & Ellram, L. M. (2011). Transaction cost and institutional drivers of supplier adoption of environmental practices. Journal of Business Logistics, 32(1), 6–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tomasini, R. M., & Van Wassenhove, L. N. (2009). From preparedness to partnerships: Case study research on humanitarian logistics. International Transactions in Operational Research, 16(5), 549–559.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tracey, P., & Phillips, N. (2016). Managing the consequences of organizational stigmatization: Identity work in a social enterprise. Academy of Management Journal, 59(3), 740–765.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • United Nations. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development. New York: United Nations.

    Google Scholar 

  • Valente, M. (2012). Theorizing firm adoption of sustaincentrism. Organization Studies, 33(4), 563–591.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Tulder, R., Seitanidi, M. M., Crane, A., & Brammer, S. (2016). Enhancing the impact of cross-sector partnerships. Journal of Business Ethics, 135(1), 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vangen, S., Hayes, J. P., & Cornforth, C. (2015). Governing cross-sector, inter-organizational collaborations. Public Management Review, 17(9), 1237–1260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Von Bertalanffy, L. (1968). General system theory: Foundations, development, applications. New York: George Braziller.

    Google Scholar 

  • Von Bertalanffy, L. (1972). The history and status of general systems theory. Academy of Management Journal, 15(4), 407–426.

    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(July), 39–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waddell, S. (2011). Global action networks: Creating our future together. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Waddock, S. A. (1988). Building successful social partnerships. Sloan Management Review, 29(4), 17–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waddock, S., Meszoely, G. M., Waddell, S., & Dentoni, D. (2015). The complexity of wicked problems in large scale change. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 28(6), 993–1012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolfgramm, R., Flynn-Coleman, S., & Conroy, D. (2015). Dynamic interactions of agency in leadership (DIAL): An integrative framework for analysing agency in sustainability leadership. Journal of Business Ethics, 126(4), 649–662.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yaziji, M., & Doh, J. (2009). NGOs and corporations: Conflict and collaboration. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zadek, S. (2014). Cross-sector partnerships: Prototyping twenty-first-century governance. In M. M. Seitanidi & A. Crane (Eds.), Social partnerships and responsible business: A research handbook (pp. 382–387). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

First, we would like to thank our informants for sharing their stories with us. In addition, we appreciate the helpful comments and feedback we received from the review team and the following individuals: Wesley Helms, Arno Kourula, Kristiina Mäkelä, Jonatan Pinkse, Asta Salmi, Eleanor Westney, and Zhaohui Wu.

Funding

This study was funded by the Foundation for Economic Education in Finland (Liikesivistysrahasto) and The Dr.h.c. Marcus Wallenberg Foundation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Business and Management, Lappeenranta University of Technology, P.O. Box 20, 53851, Lappeenranta, Finland

    Anne M. Quarshie

  2. Rutgers Business School, Rutgers University, 1 Washington Park, Newark, NJ, 07102, USA

    Rudolf Leuschner

Authors
  1. Anne M. Quarshie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rudolf Leuschner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anne M. Quarshie.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Appendix

Appendix

List of interviews

Interview sample

Interview number

Organization code

Organization subcategory

Informant(s)

Interview type

Interview mode

Interview length (min)

1

NPO A

NGO

INF-001

Individual

Face-to-face

60

2

NPO B

NGO

INF-002

INF-003

Small group

Face-to-face

100

3

NPO C

NGO

INF-004

Individual

Face-to-face

75

4

NPO C

NGO

INF-005

Individual

Face-to-face

75

5

NPO D

FBO

INF-006

INF-007

Small group

Face-to-face

70

6

NPO E

FBO

INF-008

Individual

Face-to-face

90

7

NPO F

FBO

INF-009

Individual

Face-to-face

130

8

NPO G

LTRG

INF-010

INF-011

INF-012

INF-013

INF-014

Small group

Face-to-face

80

9

NPO H

LTRG

INF-015

INF-016

Small group

Face-to-face

60

10

NPO I

LTRG

INF-017

INF-018

Small group

Face-to-face

70

11

GOV J

GOV

INF-019

INF-020

Small group

Face-to-face

130

12

GOV K

GOV

INF-021

Individual

Face-to-face

70

13

GOV L

GOV

INF-022

Individual

Face-to-face

60

14

PSO M

UTILITY

INF-023

Individual

Face-to-face

70

15

PSO M

UTILITY

INF-024

Individual

Face-to-face

75

16

PSO N

UTILITY

INF-025

Individual

Face-to-face

70

17

PSO O

UTILITY

INF-026

Individual

Phone

35

18

PSO P

UTILITY

INF-027

Individual

Face-to-face

70

19

PSO Q

RETAILER

INF-028

Individual

Phone

45

20

PSO R

RETAILER

INF-029

Individual

Phone

40

  1. Acronyms: NPO, nonprofit organization; NGO, nongovernmental organization (here disaster response or recovery organization); FBO, faith-based organization (a subcategory of nonprofit organizations); INF, informant; LTRG, long-term recovery group (a subcategory of nonprofit organizations; county-based coalitions of nonprofit and sometimes public organizations); GOV, government organization; PSO, private sector organization; UTILITY, utility firm; RETAILER, retail firm

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Quarshie, A.M., Leuschner, R. Cross-Sector Social Interactions and Systemic Change in Disaster Response: A Qualitative Study. J Bus Ethics 150, 357–384 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3860-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3860-z

Keywords

  • Cross-sector social interaction
  • Qualitative research
  • Systemic change