252 research outputs found
Negotiation theory and application in the business environment
No full textThis chapter introduces different theoretical approaches to negotiation and provides an explanation of these differing frameworks. While the action of a negotiation centres on the background research undertaken and what happens at the negotiation table, there is a need to know what principles and assumptions are informing these activities. Theories offer a way of understanding the underlying structures, processes and relationships of negotiation. Further, negotiation theories also assist with focusing attention on the 'basis of the bargain' and provide a standpoint from which to judge offers and counter-offers during the\ud
negotiation
The two faces of competition: which is the best for the social services sector?
No full textWhat impact does competition have on the social services sector? Does it help or hinder our ability to serve the needs of Australia\u27s most vulnerable? Today’s contribution comes from Professor Robyn Keast, who is the Chair of Collaborative Research Network Policy and Planning for Regional Sustainability, and located at the Southern Cross University
Juggling competing public values : resolving conflicting agendas in social procurement in Queensland
No full textOrganisations within the not-for-profit sector provide services to individuals and groups government and for-profit organisations cannot or will not consider. This response by the not-for-profit sector to market failure and government failure is a well understood contribution to society by the nonprofit sector. Over time, this response has resulted in the development of a vibrant and rich agglomeration of services and programs that operate under a myriad of philosophical stances, service orientations, client groupings and operational capacities. In Australia, these organisations and services provide social support and service assistance to many people in the community; often targeting their assistance to clients facing the most difficult of clients with complex problems.
Initially, in undertaking this role, the not-for-profit sector received limited sponsorship from government, relying on primarily on public donations to fund the delivery of services. (Lyons 2001). Over time governments assumed greater responsibility in the form of service grants to particular groups: ‘the worthy poor’. More recently, government has engaged in widespread procurement of services from the not-for-profit sector, which specify the nature of the outcomes to be achieved and, to a degree, the way in which the services will be provided. A consequence of this growing shift to a more marketised model of service contracting, often offered-up under the label of enhanced collaborative practice, has been increased competitiveness between agencies that had previously worked well together (Keast and Brown, 2006). One of the challenges which emerge from the procurement of services by government from third sector organisations is that public values such as effectiveness, efficiency, transparency and professionalism can be neglected (Jørgensen and Bozeman 2002), although this is not always the case (Brown, Furneaux and Gudmundsson 2012). While some approaches to the examination of social procurement - the intentional purchasing of social outcomes (Furneaux and Barraket 2011) - assumes that public values are lost in social procurement arrangements (Bozeman 2002; Jørgensen and Bozeman 2002), alternative approach suggest such inevitability is not the case. Instead, social procurement is seen to involve a set of tensions (Brown, Potoski and Slyke 2006) or a set of trade offs (Charles et al. 2007), which must be managed, and through such management, public values can be potentially safeguarded (Bruin and Dicke 2006).
The potential trade-offs of public values in social procurement is an area in need of further research, and one which carries both theoretical and practical significance. Additionally, the juxtaposition of policies – horizontal integration and vertical efficiency – results in a complex, crowded and contested policy and practice environment (Keast et al., 2007),, with the potential for set of unintentional consequences arising from these arrangements. Further the involvement of for-profit, non-profit, and hybrid organisations such as social enterprises, adds further complexity in the number of different organisational forms engaged in service delivery on behalf of government.
To address this issue, this paper uses information gleaned from a state-wide survey of not-for-profit organisations in Queensland, Australia which included within its focus organisational size, operational scope, funding arrangements and governance/management approaches. Supplementing this information is qualitative data derived from 17 focus groups and 120 interviews conducted over ten years of study of this sector. The findings contribute to greater understanding of the practice and theory of the future provision of social services
Evaluating network arrangements: toward revised performance measures
No full textAs public problems have become more and more complex, there has been a realization that individual government agencies, working alone, can no longer handle these wicked issues. Instead, there has been a growing emphasis on replacing categorical or program-based funding arrangements with more integrated efforts. These efforts have been the focus of recent work on collaborative endeavors involving a variety of network arrangements. The difficulty has been that although these types of collaborative efforts are increasing in number, a related growing concern is whether such arrangements have been any more effective than those involving single-agency efforts. As a result, interest has increased in evaluating these types of efforts. However, the evaluation measures used are those that apply to individual organizations, rather than network arrangements that often include not only representatives of public sector organizations but also representatives of nonprofit and private organizations as well as individuals and groups representing community interests. New ways are needed of evaluating performance in these network arrangements
Big, bigger, best? the impact of reforms on the not-for-profit sector in Queensland
No full textOrganisations within the not-for-profit sector provide services to individuals and groups that government and for-profit organisations cannot or will not consider. The not-for-profit sector has come to be a vibrant and rich agglomeration of services and programs that operate under a myriad of philosophical stances, service orientation, client groupings and operational capacities. In Australia these organisations and services are providing social support and service assistance to many people in the community; often targeting their assistance to the most difficult of clients. Initially, in undertaking this role, the not-for-profit sector received limited sponsorship from government. Over time governments assumed greater responsibility in the form of service grants to particular groups: ‘the worthy poor’. More recently, they have entered into contractual service agreements with the not-for-profit sector, which specify the nature of the outcomes to be achieved and, to a degree, the way in which the services will be provided. A consequence of this growing shift to a more marketised model of service contracting, often offered-up under the label of enhanced collaborative practice, has been increased competitiveness between agencies that had previously worked well together (Keast and Brown, 2006). Another trend emerging from the market approach is the entrance of for-profit providers. These larger organisations have higher levels of organisational capacity with considerable organisational slack to allow them to adopt new service roles. Shaped almost as ‘shadow governments’ they appear to be a strong preference for governments looking for greater accountability of outcomes and an easier way to control the interaction with the conventional not-for-profit sector. The question is will governments’ apparent preference for larger organisational arrangements lead to the demise of the vibrancy of the not-for-profit sector and impact on service provision to those people who fall outside of the remit of the new service providers? To address this issue, this paper uses information gleaned from a state-wide survey of not-for-profit organisations in Queensland, Australia which included organisational size, operational scope, funding arrangements and governance/management approaches. Supplementing this information is qualitative data derived from 17 focus groups and 120 interviews conducted over ten years of study of this sector. The findings contribute to greater understanding of the practice and theory of the future provision of social services
Participatory Evaluation: A Missing Component in the Social Change Equation for Public Services
No full textA series of social, economic and political forces have highlighted inadequacies in many current welfare practices and arrangements leading to a growing consensus that the welfare system needs to be reformed. However, social change in human service organisations generally, and child welfare services in particular, has proven to be difficult to achieve and sustain. A greater engagement of these agencies and their workers in the planning and implementation of reforms has been presented as a key strategy to overcome this resistance and achieve mutually satisfying service outcomes. This paper argues that participative evaluation models that deliberately and genuinely involve personnel and external agencies in understanding and assessing the reform process can contribute to the enhanced uptake of social change initiatives. Drawing on the experiences of a current, Queensland child welfare reform initiative, underpinned by a strong participatory evaluation component, the paper provides some preliminary evidence of a shift in service practice and orientation in both local community and departmental operational levels. The paper concludes with some insights into the implications of the change process for both community and government actors
The role of organisational capacity in the knowledge-based transformation of Brisbane, Australia
No full textPurpose - The cumulative impacts of the knowledge economy together with the emerging dominance of knowledge-intensive sectors, have led to an unprecedented period of socio-economic and spatial restructuring. As a result, the paradigm of knowledge-based urban development (KBUD) has emerged as a development strategy to guide knowledge-based economic transformation (Knight, 1995; Yigitcanlar, 2007). Notwithstanding widespread government commitment and financial investment, in many cases providing the enabling circumstances for KUBUD has proven a complicated task as institutional barriers remain. Researchers and practitioners advocate that the way organisations work and their institutional relationships, policies and programs, will have a significant impact on a regions capacity to achieve KBUD (Savitch, 1998; Savitch and Kantor, 2002; Keast and Mandell, 2009). In this context, building organisational capacity is critical to achieving institutional change and bring together all of the key actors and sources, for the successful development, adoption, and implementation of knowledge-based development of a city (Yigitcanlar, 2009).
Design/methodology/approach - There is a growing need to determine the complex inter-institutional arrangements and intra-organisational interactions required to advance urban development within the knowledge economy. In order to design organisational capacity-building strategies, the associated attributes of good capacity must first be identified. The paper, with its appraisal of knowledge-based urban development, scrutinises organisational capacity and institutional change in Brisbane. As part of the discussion of the case study findings, the paper describes the institutional relationships, policies, programs and funding streams, which are supporting KBUD in the region.
Originality/value - In consideration that there has been limited investigation into the institutional lineaments required to provide the enabling circumstances for KBUD, the broad aim of this paper is to discover some good organisational capacity attributes, achieved through a case study of Brisbane.
Practical implications - It is anticipated that the findings of the case study will contribute to moving the discussion on the complex inter-institutional arrangements and intra-organisaational interactions required for KBUD, beyond a position of rhetoric
Evaluating the effectiveness of interorganizational relations through networks: developing a framework for revised performance measures
No full textAlthough networks are a growing phenomenon there is no definitive way to determine if they are a more effective means of policy development and service delivery. The difficulty is that networks have been assessed based on traditional measures while ignoring the importance of process variables and their impact on outcomes in networks. Furthermore, networks can be complex arrangements, operating within and across layers of interaction with diverse member expectations and goals. Therefore, in addition to using traditional performance measures to determine some aspects of the effectiveness of networks, this article proposes that different types of evaluation processes are needed to incorporate the complex and unique characteristics of networks. A combined framework that incorporates multiple perspectives in effectiveness that is based on the different types, levels of analysis and stages of development of networks is therefore presented
Is the public sector ready to collaborate? human resource implications of collaborative arrangements
No full textRelational governance arrangements across agencies and sectors have become prevalent as a means for government to become more responsive and effective in addressing complex, large scale or ‘wicked’ problems. The primary characteristic of such ‘collaborative’ arrangements is the utilisation of the joint capacities of multiple organisations to achieve collaborative advantage, which Huxham (1993) defines as the attainment of creative outcomes that are beyond the ability of single agencies to achieve. Attaining collaborative advantage requires organisations to develop collaborative capabilities that prepare organisations for collaborative practice (Huxham, 1993b). Further, collaborations require considerable investment of staff effort that could potentially be used beneficially elsewhere by both the government and non-government organisations involved in collaboration (Keast and Mandell, 2010). Collaborative arrangements to deliver services therefore requires a reconsideration of the way in which resources, including human resources, are conceptualised and deployed as well as changes to both the structure of public service agencies and the systems and processes by which they operate (Keast, forthcoming).
A main aim of academic research and theorising has been to explore and define the requisite characteristics to achieve collaborative advantage. Such research has tended to focus on definitional, structural (Turrini, Cristofoli, Frosini, & Nasi, 2009) and organisational (Huxham, 1993) aspects and less on the roles government plays within cross-organisational or cross-sectoral arrangements. Ferlie and Steane (2002) note that there has been a general trend towards management led reforms of public agencies including the HRM practices utilised. Such trends have been significantly influenced by New Public Management (NPM) ideology with limited consideration to the implications for HRM practice in collaborative, rather than market contexts. Utilising case study data of a suite of collaborative efforts in Queensland, Australia, collected over a decade, this paper presents an examination of the network roles government agencies undertake. Implications for HRM in public sector agencies working within networked arrangements are drawn and implications for job design, recruitment, deployment and staff development are presented.
The paper also makes theoretical advances in our understanding of Strategic Human Resource Management (SHRM) in network settings. While networks form part of the strategic armoury of government, networks operate to achieve collaborative advantage. SHRM with its focus on competitive advantage is argued to be appropriate in market situations, however is not an ideal conceptualisation in network situations. Commencing with an overview of literature on networks and network effectiveness, the paper presents the case studies and methodology; provides findings from the case studies in regard to the roles of government to achieve collaborative advantage and implications for HRM practice are presented. Implications for SHRM are considered
- …
