Based on a comparative case study of six cross-sector partnerships (CSPs) in global health, we illustrate how a CSP’s aim to address a social issue on the basis of products influences the governance of collective action within the partnership and beyond, at the field level. We show how such product focus, through specialization, influences a CSP’s structures and interaction culture and, as a reflection of the partners’ underlying logics, generates different CSP-field effects. Specifically, if conceived as self-contained and without considering (...) the implications for other field players and programs, a product focus may expedite collective action within the CSP, but spur fragmentation and disruption at the field level. Conversely, if designed to strengthen field capacity and integration at the product-field interlinkages, a product focus may take longer to form but helps avoid the above field effects. On this basis, we advance theory on CSPs’ product focus as a multilevel coordination mechanism and elaborate on the implications for designing product-based CSPs. (shrink)

Many challenges to economic and social well-being require close collaboration between business, government, and civil-society actors. In this context, the involvement of multiple companies rather than a single company may enhance such cross-sector social partnerships’ outcomes. However, extant literature cautions about the tensions arising from companies’ competitive interests and the detrimental effects on the CSSP’s social outcome. Similarly, studies analyzing simultaneous collaboration and competition suggest shielding off competitive elements from the collaboration. Based on insights into two multi-company CSSPs, we conversely (...) find that government and NGO partnership managers deliberately leveraged competition through the CSSP design. They used similar segmentation mechanisms to enhance CSSP contributions, but differed in the way they integrated collaborative and competitive elements, leading to sustained corporate commitment in one CSSP and unmet promises in the other. These insights expose the paradoxical nature of coopetition at the interface of social and economic goals, and advance current research by indicating competition’s positive effects and the respective partnership design implications. On this basis, our study helps reveal and better understand sustainability-related tensions and opportunities at the inter-organizational level. (shrink)

The proliferation of public–private partnerships for development as an answer to many public challenges calls for careful evaluation. To this end, tailored frameworks are fundamental for helping understand the PPPs’ impact and for guiding corrective adjustment. Scholars have developed frameworks focusing on the partners’ relationships, the order of effects, and the distinction between outputs and outcomes. To capture a PPP’s complexity and multiple linkages with its environment, we argue that a thorough evaluation should adopt a stakeholder-oriented approach and consider the (...) costs and benefits that a PPP implies for them—especially as taxpayers’ money is involved. For this purpose, we build on a stakeholder-oriented evaluation framework from the nonprofit business partnership literature. In line with our broad evaluation conception, we extend it with the manifold ripple effects that PPPs for development have and include the time dimension for the links between different PPP stages and related outcomes to become clearer. Applying this framework to an illustrative case, we highlight important direct and especially indirect stakeholder outcomes, which a narrow evaluation would omit, point to the challenges involved in the evaluation endeavor, and identify interesting future research areas. (shrink)

Partnerships can play an important role in addressing environmental concerns and fostering environmental improvement. In this context, we argue that a more elaborate understanding is needed of how partners intend to reach beyond the partnership boundaries and target stakeholders at the firm, industry, supply-chain, or societal levels. As environmental improvement is intertwined with the process of change, we build on the theory of planned change to explain how the focus on selected partnership mechanisms may help partners anticipate and overcome barriers (...) when targeting environmental improvement at these different levels. We test our framework, using a sample of 566 environmental partnerships formed in the USA, and provide rich insights into how partners intend to reach beyond the partnership boundaries. From a practical perspective, these insights may inform corporate managers’ decision to configure environmental partnerships in terms of the target group and suitable partnership mechanism. From a theory perspective, the study helps develop a more systematic understanding of what partners intend to do and when partnerships may provide benefits in addressing level-specific change barriers. These insights provide a first step in positioning partnerships in the broader context of environmental change and encourage future research to move from the intentions to the actual outcomes. (shrink)

Multi-stakeholder partnerships have become a major driver to attain the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. However, managing MSPs is difficult because of the multiple complexities they involve. We seek to contribute to a better understanding of how MSPs cope with these complexities by exploring the MSP scope. In our study of four global health MSPs, we find that a function-oriented scope in terms of focusing on a single intervention helped filter the relevant external and internal complexities, whereas an issue-oriented scope (...) focused on addressing the health issue with multiple interventions magnified the complexities. As a result, the latter MSPs became overwhelmed and self-absorbed, while the former MSPs managed to remain outward-looking and sustain their collaborative energy and support. On this basis, we identify three mechanisms through which the MSP scope either helped or hampered the ability to cope with complexity, and we discuss the theoretical and practical implications for MSPs addressing the SDGs. (shrink)

This dissertation abstract and the reflection commentary present the work done by Dr. Lea Stadtler. Comprising four articles, the dissertation explores the challenge of designing successful public–private partnerships for development and contributes to the discourse on partnerships and business engagement in society. Article I adopts the company perspective and develops a conceptual framework for interest alignment in PPPs for development. Based on a theoretical analysis, Article II examines the role that different structures play in handling common design challenges. Articles III (...) and IV are empirical: The former analyzes how partners cope with tensions occurring on the PPP’s boundaries, while Article IV explores the roles of broker organizations, which increasingly facilitate the partnering process of PPPs for development. This extended dissertation abstract introduces the dissertation’s research focus and summarizes each article’s research question, methods, and main findings. The reflection commentary in the appendix discusses the author’s views of her dissertation journey as a junior scholar and the research process. (shrink)

We seek to advance place-sensitive theory on cross-sector partnerships (CSPs) by investigating how partners cope with difficult place characteristics that affect their collaboration. To this end, we conduct an in-depth case study of a disaster relief CSP in which the partners had to cope with what we label _place intensity_ of disasters, as well as with what emerged as _place diversity_ of pre-/post-disaster contexts. Our findings illustrate the collaborative effects of these different place contexts and reveal two practices of _CSP (...) place work_ by which the partners sought to leverage their cross-fertilizing potential: They used the pre-/post-disaster contexts to anticipate and prepare for the place intensity and conveyed such intensity to pre-/post-disaster contexts to manage the place diversity and sustain the collaborative commitment. These insights advance CSP research, first, by outlining places’ agentic forces and exposing their different collaborative effects. Second, by introducing practices of cognitive and emotional CSP place work, we show how partners may integrate places into their CSP management to better handle their adverse effects. (shrink)