Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Social Innovation, Co-operation, and Competition: Inter-organizational Relations for Social Enterprises in the Delivery of Public Services

  • Chapter
Social Innovation

Abstract

Social innovation is seen as a way of developing new approaches to addressing social problems (Phills et al., 2008; Murray et al., 2010). As with innovation in other contexts, collaborative relations are often a factor in successful cases of social innovation, although little is known about how co-operation is built up and maintained. This chapter sets out an argument for understanding how these inter-organizational relationships operate. This is necessary in order to go beyond the empty rhetoric of terms such as ‘partnership’, ‘collaboration’ and ‘co-operation’, and understand how these complex forms of organizing are built and maintained (Hastings, 1996; Atkinson, 1999). There has been much discussion of the need for collaboration (OTS, 2009) and co-operation between organizations is given as a core value of some forms of social enterprises such as co-operatives (Spear, 2000), but very little work has been carried out on understanding the process of building these relationships.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Amin, A., Cameron, A. and Hudson, R. (2002), Placing the Social Economy London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anheier, H. and Kendall, J. (2002), ‘Trust and Voluntary Organisations: Three Theoretical Approaches’, British Journal of Sociology, 53 (3), pp. 343–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson, R. (1999), ‘Discourses of Partnership and Empowerment in Contemporary British Urban Regeneration’, Urban Studies, 36 (1), pp. 59–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Audit Commission (2008), Hearts and Minds: Commissioning from the Voluntary Sector Audit Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J. (1991), ‘Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage’, Journal of Management, 17 (1), pp. 99–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Big Society Network (2010), What is Big Society? http://thebigsociety.co.uk/what-is-big-society/.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burgess, S., Propper, C. and Wilson, D. (2005), ‘Will More Choice Improve Outcomes in Education and Health Care? The Evidence from Economic Research’, Centre for Market and Public Organisation (CMPO).

    Google Scholar 

  • Carmel, E. and Harlock, J. (2008), ‘Instituting the “Third Sector” as a Governable Terrain: Partnership, Performance and Procurement in the UK’, Policy and Politics, 36 (2), pp. 155–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clegg, S., Pitsis, S. T., Rura-Polley, T. and Marosszeky, M. (2002), ‘Governmentality Matters: Designing an Alliance Culture of Inter-organisation Collaboration for Managing Projects’, Organization Studies, 23 (3), pp. 317–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clifford, D., Geyne Rajme, F. and Mohan, J. (2010), ‘How Dependent is the Third Sector on Public Funding?’, TSRC Working Paper 45. Available at http://www.tsrc.ac.uk/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=TiDxGXmS2Ko%3d&tabid=500.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conservative Party (2008), ‘A Stronger Society: Voluntary Action in the 21st Century, Responsibility Agenda’, Policy Green Paper No. 5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conservative Party (2010), Building a Big Society London: Conservative Party.

    Google Scholar 

  • Craig, G., Taylor, M., Wilkinson, M. and Bloor, K. (2002), Contract or Trust: The Role of Compact in Local Governance Bristol, UK: The Policy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Curtis, T. (2008), ‘Finding that Grit Makes a Pearl: A Critical Re-reading of Research into Social Enterprise’, International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 14 (5), pp. 276–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) (2002), Social Enterprise: A Strategy for Success London: Social Enterprise Unit, DTI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dijkstra, P. and Knottnerus, S. (2004), ‘Successful Partnerships for Social Enterprise, Social enterprises in partnership with the public and private sector as a source of inspiration and renewal in local and regional development [online], [accessed 1/12/2010] http://www.deverandering.com/mple/pdf/engcross.pdf.

  • Eikenberry, A. (2009), ‘Refusing the Market: A Democratic Discourse for Voluntary and Nonprofit Organisations’, Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 38, p. 582.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fukuyama, F. (1995), Trust New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gambetta, D. (1988), ‘Can we Trust Trust?’, in D. Gambetta (ed.) Trust: Making and Breaking Cooperative Relations Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 213–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Granovetter, M. (1985), ‘Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness’, American Journal of Sociology, 91 (3), pp. 481–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Granovetter, M. (1985), ‘Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness’, American Journal of Sociology, 91 (3), pp. 481–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Granovetter, M. (1994), ‘Business Groups’, in N. J. Smelser and R. Swedburg (eds) The Handbook of Economic Sociology Princetown, NJ: Princetown University Press, pp. 454–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hardy, C., Phillips, N. and Lawrence, T. (2003), ‘Resources, Knowledge and Influence: The Organisational Effects of Interorganisational Collaboration’, Journal of Management Studies, 40 (2), pp. 289–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hastings, A. (1996), ‘Unravelling the Process of “Partnership” in Urban Regeneration Policy’, Urban Studies, 33 (2), pp. 253–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OTS (2009), Real Help for Communities: Volunteers, Charities and Social Enterprise London: Office of the Third Sector, Cabinet Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huggins, R. (2010), ‘Forms of Network Resource: Knowledge Access and the Role of Inter-firm Networks’, International Journal of Management Reviews, 12 (3), pp. 335–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • IFF Research Ltd (2007), ‘Third Sector Market Mapping’ for the Department of Health, http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_065411.

    Google Scholar 

  • International Co-operative Alliance (ICA) (1994), Draft Statement on Cooperative Identity Geneva: ICA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kotler, P. and Andreasen, R. (1996), Strategic Marketing for Nonprofit Organisations Fifth Edition, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Le Grand, J. and Bartlet, W. (1993), Quasi Markets and Social Policy Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lukes, S. (2005), Power: A Radical Review London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lyon, F. (2006), ‘Managing Co-operation: Trust and Power in Ghanaian Associations’, Organization Studies, 27 (1), pp. 31–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lyon, F. (2009), ‘Measuring the Value of Social and Community Impact’, in Paul Hunter (ed.) Social Enterprise for Public Service: How Does the Third Sector Deliver? London: The Smith Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lyon, F. and Porter, G. (2007), ‘Market Institutions, Trust and Norms: Exploring Moral Economies in Nigerian Food Systems’, Cambridge Journal of Economics doi:10.1093/cje/bem008.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lyon, F. and Sepulveda, L. (2009), ‘Mapping Social Enterprises: Past Approaches, Challenges and Future Directions’, Social Enterprise Journal, 5 (1), pp. 83–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lyon, F. and Smallbone, D. (2003), ‘Joining-up Entrepreneurship Support: Coordination and Partnership amongst Start Up Support Providers in England’, Proceedings of the Regional Studies Association Annual Conference.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mawdsley, E., Townsend, J. and Porter G. (2005), ‘Trust, Accountability and Faceto-face Interactions in North–South NGO Relations’, Development in Practice, 15 (1), pp. 77–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H. and Schoorman, F. D. (1995), ‘An Integration Model of Organizational Trust’, Academy of Management Review, 20 (3), pp. 709–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mocroft, I. and Zimmeck, M. (2004), Central Government Funding of Voluntary and Community Organisations London: Home Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mollering, G. (2005), ‘The Trust/Control Duality: An Integrative Perspective on Positive Expectations of Others’, International Sociology, 20 (3), pp. 283–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mollering, G. (2006), ‘Understanding Trust from the Perspective of Sociological Neo-Institutionalism’, in R. Bachmann and A. Zaheer (eds) Handbook of Trust Research Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, M. (1994), ‘How Difficult is it to Construct Market Relations? A Commentary on Platteau,’ Journal of Development Studies, 30 (4), pp. 818–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murdock, A. (2007), ‘No Man’s Land or Promised Land? The Lure of Local Public Service: Delivery Contracts for Social Enterprise’, Paper presented at the fourth UK Social Enterprise Research Conference, London South Bank University, July.

    Google Scholar 

  • Munoz, S. A. and Tindsley, S. (2008), ‘Selling to the Public Sector: Prospects and Problems for Social Enterprise in the UK’, The Journal of Corporate Citizenship, December.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murray, R., Caulier, G. and Mulgan, G. (2010), The Open Book of Social Innovation The Young Foundation and NESTA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nalebuff, B. and Brandenburger, A. (1996), Co-opetition London: HarperCollins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicholls, A. (2008), ‘Capturing the Performance for the Socially Entrepreneurial Organisation: An Organisational Legitimacy Approach’, in J. Mair, J. Robertson and K. Hockerts (eds) International Perspectives on Social Entrepreneurship Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Council for Voluntary Organisations (NCVO) (2008), ‘Collaboration without Borders: What can UK Organisations Learn about Collaboration from International NGOs?’, available at www.ncvo.org.uk.

  • National Council for Voluntary Organisations (NCVO) (2009), The UK Civil Society Almanac 2009 London: NCVO.

    Google Scholar 

  • HMT (2008), Accelerating the SME Engine London: HM Treasury, http://www.ogc.gov.uk/documents/Accelerating_the_SME_Economic_Engine.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Office of the Third Sector (OTS) (2009), Real Help for Communities: Volunteers, Charities and Social Enterprises London: OTS.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Neill, O. (2002), A Question of Trust Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phills J. A., Deiglmeier, K. and Miller, D. T. (2008) ‘Rediscovering Social Innovation’, Stanford Social Innovation Review Fall 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  • Platteau, J. P. (1994a), ‘Behind the Market Stage where Real Societies Exist, Part I: The Role of Public and Private Order Institutions’, Journal of Development Studies, 30 (3), pp. 533–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Platteau, J. P. (1994b), ‘Behind the Market Stage where Real Societies Exist, Part II: The Role of Moral Norms’, Journal of Development Studies, 30 (4), pp. 753–817.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Portes, A. and Sensenbrenner, J. (1993), ‘Embeddedness and Immigration: Notes on the Social Determinants of Economic Action’, American Journal of Sociology, 98 (6), pp. 1320–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Power, M. K. (2003), ‘Auditing and the Production of Legitimacy’, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 28 (4), pp. 379–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, R., Leonardi, R. and Nanetti, R. (1993), Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reed, M. (2001), ‘Organisation, Trust and Control: A Realist Analysis’, Organisation Studies, 22 (2), pp. 201–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rousseau, D., Sitkin, S. B., Burt, R. S., Camerer, C. (1998), ‘Not so Different after All: A Cross-discipline View of Trust’, Academy of Management Review, 23 (3), pp. 393–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sayer, A. (2004), ‘Restoring the Moral Dimension: Acknowledging Lay Normativity’, mimeo, published by the Department of Sociology, Lancaster University. Available at www.comp.lancs.ac.uk/sociology/papers/sayerrestoring-moral-dimension.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sepulveda, L. (2009) ‘Outsider, Missing Link or Panacea? The Place of Social Enterprise (with)in and in Relation to the Third Sector’, TSRC Working Paper 15. Available at http://www.tsrc.ac.uk/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=DusBIXssUUA%3d&tabid=500.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spear, R. (2000), ‘The Co-operative Advantage’, Annals of Public and Co-operative Economics, 71 (4), pp. 507–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spear, R. (2008), ‘European Perspectives on Social Enterprise’, in P. Hunter (ed.) Social Enterprise for Public Service: How Does the Third Sector Deliver? London: The Smith Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Slyke, D. M. (2007), ‘Agents or Stewards: Using Theory to Understand the Government–Nonprofit Social Service Contracting Relationship’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 17 (2), pp. 157–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westall, A. (2007), ‘How can Innovation in Social Enterprise be Understood, Encouraged and Enabled?’, A Social Enterprise Think Piece for the Office of the Third Sector, London: OTS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, A. (2009), ‘Social Entrepreneurs and Public Service Delivery’, in Paul Hunter (ed.) Social Enterprise for Public Service: How Does the Third Sector Deliver? London: The Smith Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, I. (2008), ‘What does Competition and Collaboration Mean in the Voluntary and Community Sector? Compete or Collaborate’, Seminar jointly organized by the NCVO Third Sector Foresight Project and Performance Hub. Available at http://www.ncvo-vol.org.uk/uploadedFiles/Third_Sector_Foresight/Third_Sector_Foresight_Events/IWCompetitionCollaborationPaper2.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, P. (2002), ‘The Competent Boundary Spanner’, Public Administration 80 (1), pp. 103–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. E. (1993), ‘Calculativeness, Trust, and Economic Organization’, Journal of Law and Economics, 36 (1), pp. 453–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. (2003), Case Study Research: Design and Methods, London: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zucker, L. G. (1986), ‘Production of Trust: Institutional Sources of Economic Structure, 1840–1920’, Research in Organisational Behaviour, 8, pp. 53–111.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Fergus Lyon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Alex Nicholls Alex Murdock

Copyright information

© 2012 Fergus Lyon

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Lyon, F. (2012). Social Innovation, Co-operation, and Competition: Inter-organizational Relations for Social Enterprises in the Delivery of Public Services. In: Nicholls, A., Murdock, A. (eds) Social Innovation. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230367098_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation