Suchergebnisse

Abstract Purpose Building on the literature of hybrids in the context of public organizations, this paper aims to discuss under which conditions hybrids can adequately provide "critical services", a subset of public services characterized by their simultaneous exposure to externalities, socio-economic cohesion and legitimacy concerns. Design/methodology/approach The authors collect indications from two stylized examples, prisons and defense, to develop propositions as a step toward assessing the potential role of hybrids as alternatives to direct public provision or full privatization in the delivery of critical services. Findings This paper examines the conditions under which hybrid arrangements outperform the polar cases of public bureaus and full privatization in the delivery of a specific subset of public goods that the authors identify as "critical services". Originality/value The authors suggest that there might be comparative advantages in relying on hybrid arrangements rather than the usual solutions of fully private or fully governmental provision. However, they also submit that these advantages are conditional to the capacity of hybrids to reconcile competing interests to achieve socio-economic cohesion, to combine capabilities dispersed among partners to benefit from positive externalities and to satisfy legitimacy concerns with respect to the role of government. ; 1 International cooperation in the defense industry is illustrative: the European NH-90 helicopter exists in 23 versions in order to satisfy different functions prioritized by participating governments. 2 We are aware that critical services can be used to sustain the dominance of local elites at the expense of oppressing significant portions of the wider society (North, Wallis, & Weingast, 2009). This is particularly true in autocratic regimes with lower accountability standards. In these institutional settings, the private participation in critical services can generate an opposite effect compared to what we propose and social cohesion ...

Communication is a key factor in containing a pandemic. Fragmented information may affect people's perceptions and behaviors, especially in times of governmental miscommunication, potentially jeopardizing efforts aimed at containing the spread of the disease. To test whether and how people have been sensitive to broken information during the COVID-19 pandemic in Brazil, we performed a randomized survey experiment on a sample of 571 respondents. We found that more pessimistic or more optimistic fragmented messages about the pandemic have no overall significant average effect on perceptions and planned behavior of the respondents. The exploratory analyses showed that particular sociodemographic groups are more sensitive to these fragmented messages. While less educated people react to more pessimistic messages with an increased likelihood to intensify prevention measures, people aged 60 or older – the high-risk group for COVID-19 complications – react to more optimistic messages with a reduced probability to intensify prevention measures. Besides providing insights to the public administration literature on disaster management, the results reinforce the need for governments to consistently centralize communication efforts to guarantee that people are equipped with complete and accurate information to form their perceptions and adequate their behaviors towards a health crisis. ; En un intento por contener una pandemia, la comunicación puede ser la clave del éxito o el fracaso. La información fragmentada puede afectar las percepciones y los comportamientos de las personas, especialmente en tiempos de mala comunicación del gobierno, lo que puede socavar sus esfuerzos de colaboración para prevenir la propagación de la enfermedad. Para testar si las personas son sensibles a la información fragmentada durante la pandemia de COVID-19 en Brasil, utilizamos un experimento aleatorio con 571 encuestados. Nuestros resultados indican que los mensajes rotos, más pesimistas o más optimistas, con respecto a la pandemia no tienen un efecto medio significativo en las percepciones y los comportamientos planificados de los encuestados. Sin embargo, en un análisis más exploratorio, nuestros resultados muestran que ciertos grupos sociodemográficos son más sensibles a dicha información fragmentada. Mientras que las personas con un bajo nivel de educación reaccionan a mensajes más pesimistas con una mayor probabilidad de intensificar las medidas preventivas, las personas mayores (de 60 años o más), que conforman el grupo riesgo de complicaciones resultantes del nuevo coronavirus, reaccionan a mensajes más optimistas con una gran reducción en la posibilidad de que intensifiquen las medidas preventivas. Además de contribuir a la literatura sobre gestión de desastres, nuestro trabajo refuerza la necesidad de que los gobiernos centralicen los esfuerzos de comunicación para garantizar que las personas reciban información completa y precisa para formar sus percepciones y adaptar sus comportamientos a una crisis de salud pública. ; Na tentativa de conter uma pandemia, comunicação pode ser a chave para o sucesso ou para o fracasso. Informações fragmentadas podem afetar as percepções e comportamentos das pessoas, especialmente em tempos de má comunicação governamental, potencialmente minando os seus esforços colaborativos para impedir a disseminação da doença. Para testar se e como as pessoas se apresentam sensíveis a informações quebradas durante a pandemia da COVID-19 no Brasil, usamos um experimento aleatório junto a 571 respondentes. Nossos resultados apontam que mensagens quebradas, mais pessimistas ou mais otimistas, com relação à pandemia não têm um efeito médio significante nas percepções e comportamentos planejados dos respondentes. Numa análise mais exploratória, no entanto, nossos resultados mostram que certos grupos sociodemográficos são mais sensíveis a tais informações quebradas. Enquanto pessoas com baixo nível de escolaridade reagem a mensagens mais pessimistas com um aumento na chance de elas intensificarem medidas de prevenção, pessoas mais velhas (com 60 anos ou mais) – que compõem o grupo de risco para complicações decorrentes do novo coronavírus – reagem a mensagens mais otimistas com uma grande redução na chance de elas intensificarem medidas de prevenção. Além de contribuir com a literatura de gestão de desastres, nosso trabalho reforça a necessidade de governos centralizarem esforços de comunicação, de forma a garantir que as pessoas estejam munidas com informações completas e precisas para formarem suas percepções e adequarem seus comportamentos a uma crise de saúde pública.

Abstract Communication is a key factor in containing a pandemic. Fragmented information may affect people's perceptions and behaviors, especially in times of governmental miscommunication, potentially jeopardizing efforts aimed at containing the spread of the disease. To test whether and how people have been sensitive to broken information during the COVID-19 pandemic in Brazil, we performed a randomized survey experiment on a sample of 571 respondents. We found that more pessimistic or more optimistic fragmented messages about the pandemic have no overall significant average effect on perceptions and planned behavior of the respondents. The exploratory analyses showed that particular sociodemographic groups are more sensitive to these fragmented messages. While less educated people react to more pessimistic messages with an increased likelihood to intensify prevention measures, people aged 60 or older - the high-risk group for COVID-19 complications - react to more optimistic messages with a reduced probability to intensify prevention measures. Besides providing insights to the public administration literature on disaster management, the results reinforce the need for governments to consistently centralize communication efforts to guarantee that people are equipped with complete and accurate information to form their perceptions and adequate their behaviors towards a health crisis.

Purpose
Building on the literature of hybrids in the context of public organizations, this paper aims to discuss under which conditions hybrids can adequately provide "critical services", a subset of public services characterized by their simultaneous exposure to externalities, socio-economic cohesion and legitimacy concerns.


Design/methodology/approach
The authors collect indications from two stylized examples, prisons and defense, to develop propositions as a step toward assessing the potential role of hybrids as alternatives to direct public provision or full privatization in the delivery of critical services.


Findings
This paper examines the conditions under which hybrid arrangements outperform the polar cases of public bureaus and full privatization in the delivery of a specific subset of public goods that the authors identify as "critical services".


Originality/value
The authors suggest that there might be comparative advantages in relying on hybrid arrangements rather than the usual solutions of fully private or fully governmental provision. However, they also submit that these advantages are conditional to the capacity of hybrids to reconcile competing interests to achieve socio-economic cohesion, to combine capabilities dispersed among partners to benefit from positive externalities and to satisfy legitimacy concerns with respect to the role of government.

Abstract Purpose Building on the literature of hybrids in the context of public organizations, this paper aims to discuss under which conditions hybrids can adequately provide "critical services", a subset of public services characterized by their simultaneous exposure to externalities, socio-economic cohesion and legitimacy concerns. Design/methodology/approach The authors collect indications from two stylized examples, prisons and defense, to develop propositions as a step toward assessing the potential role of hybrids as alternatives to direct public provision or full privatization in the delivery of critical services. Findings This paper examines the conditions under which hybrid arrangements outperform the polar cases of public bureaus and full privatization in the delivery of a specific subset of public goods that the authors identify as "critical services". Originality/value The authors suggest that there might be comparative advantages in relying on hybrid arrangements rather than the usual solutions of fully private or fully governmental provision. However, they also submit that these advantages are conditional to the capacity of hybrids to reconcile competing interests to achieve socio-economic cohesion, to combine capabilities dispersed among partners to benefit from positive externalities and to satisfy legitimacy concerns with respect to the role of government.

Purpose – Building on the literature of hybrids in the context of public organizations, this paper aims to discuss under which conditions hybrids can adequately provide "critical services", a subset of public services characterized by their simultaneous exposure to externalities, socio-economic cohesion and legitimacy concerns. Design/methodology/approach – The authors collect indications from two stylized examples, prisons and defense, to develop propositions as a step toward assessing the potential role of hybrids as alternatives to direct public provision or full privatization in the delivery of critical services. Findings – This paper examines the conditions under which hybrid arrangements outperform the polar cases of public bureaus and full privatization in the delivery of a specific subset of public goods that the authors identify as "critical services". Originality/value – The authors suggest that there might be comparative advantages in relying on hybrid arrangements rather than the usual solutions of fully private or fully governmental provision. However, they also submit that these advantages are conditional to the capacity of hybrids to reconcile competing interests to achieve socio-economic cohesion, to combine capabilities dispersed among partners to benefit from positive externalities and to satisfy legitimacy concerns with respect to the role of government

Les festivals citoyens constituent un formidable laboratoire pour l'étude de la gouvernance collaborative, ces événements étant omniprésents et caractérisés par des partenaires publics et privés, engagés dans une activité conjointe. Nous allons analyser les modèles actuels de gouvernance collaborative en prenant pour exemple le carnaval de Salvador, au Brésil, afin de déterminer s'ils s'appliquent au contexte des grands festivals citoyens. Notre analyse qualitative, qui s'appuie essentiellement sur le modèle d'Ansell et Gash (2008), indique que certaines constructions des modèles de gouvernance collaborative sont présentes. Nos résultats font toutefois apparaître d'autres facteurs ayant une influence sur le processus de collaboration, comme les relations informelles et le fondement du processus décisionnel. Nos résultats indiquent aussi que la confiance, un facteur habituellement considéré comme nécessaire à l'action collaborative, est sans doute moins importante que ne le laissent entendre les théories habituelles. Remarques à l'intention des praticiens Les grands festivals citoyens sont un formidable laboratoire pour l'étude de la collaboration interorganisationnelle, ces événements faisant habituellement intervenir une série d'acteurs publics et privés, qui travaillent de manière interdépendante. Notre étude fait apparaître certains facteurs qui n'ont pas été abordés dans les précédentes recherches et qui influencent la dynamique de la collaboration. Nous observons que les interactions répétées entre les experts techniques peuvent favoriser les réseaux de collaboration informels (et effectifs) et permettre d'éviter les problèmes engendrés par les conflits politiques. Les fondements sur la base desquels les décisions sont prises sont aussi des facteurs importants pour améliorer la collaboration. Nous constatons que la confiance, un facteur habituellement considéré comme nécessaire à l'action collaborative, est sans doute moins importante que ne le laissent entendre les théories habituelles.

Civic festivals offer an exceptional laboratory for the study of collaborative governance because these events are ubiquitous and are characterized by public and private partners engaged in joint activity. Using the Carnival festival of Salvador, Brazil, as an example, we analyze the current models of collaborative governance to determine whether they apply to the context of large civic festivals. Drawing primarily on Ansell and Gash's (2008) model, our qualitative analysis shows that some constructs of collaborative governance models are present. However, our results uncover other factors affecting the collaboration process such as informal relationships and the basis of decision-making. Our results also suggest that trust, a factor commonly argued as necessary to collaborative action, may be less critical than received theories suggest. Points for practitioners Large civic festivals are a unique laboratory for studying inter-organizational collaboration because these events normally involve a myriad of public and private actors working in an interdependent fashion. Our study reveals some factors not covered by previous research that influence the dynamics of collaboration. We observe that repeated interactions between technical experts can foster informal (and effective) networks of collaboration and circumvent the problems generated by political disputes. The bases on which decisions are taken are also important factors to enhance collaboration. We found that trust, a factor commonly argued as necessary to collaborative action, may be less critical than received theories suggest.

PurposeThis paper explores how public buyers' capabilities promote collaboration with private suppliers to obtain enhanced performance in complex projects.Design/methodology/approachThe authors conducted two case studies on the procurement of complex military projects by the Brazilian armed forces involving public buyers and private suppliers. The authors followed the Gioia methodology to inductively analyze data from interviews, official documents, media articles and project meeting notes.FindingsThe authors identified public procurement capabilities that are antecedents of collaborative trust-based relationships with suppliers in complex public-private projects. The authors unpack these capabilities in three subsets: abilities to manage the bidding and contracting process, to handle relationships with prominent stakeholders, such as audit control bodies and to manage knowledge acquired within and across current and past projects. By developing these capabilities, public buyers can build collaborative trust-based relationships with suppliers, which enable the conciliation of operational performance (i.e. on-time delivery, budget and scope compliance) and policy goals (i.e. inclusion of local suppliers in supply chains).Originality/valueThe authors extend the literature on the enablers of trust and collaboration in buyer-supplier relationships by providing a detailed account of which capabilities are necessary on the buyer side in complex projects, especially when accountability standards create barriers for collaborative practices. The authors also reinforce the importance of the operations and supply chain management scholarship in policy debates by showing how buyer-supplier interactions can create value in complex projects with public and private sectors.