Scholars have long recognized the growing importance and prevalence of collaboration in inter-organizational networks that consist of three or more partner organizations (Huxham, 2003; Huxham & Vangen, 2000b; MĂźller-Seitz & Sydow, 2012; Sydow & Windeler, 1998).
Strategy researchers argue that organizations engage in inter-organizational networks (networks , for short) to secure competitive advantage (Dyer & Singh, 1998). They also contend that todayâs competition increasingly takes place among blocks of allied firms rather than among single, isolated companies (Gomes-Casseres, 1996; Vanhaverbeke & Noorderhaven, 2001).
Public policy experts additionally submit that networks composed of a variety of government, nonprofit, and business organizations are essential for tackling collective action problems, such as integrated health , migration, environmental protection, or poverty alleviation (Kenis & Provan, 2006). Solutions for these issues necessarily âsit within the inter-organizational domainâ (Huxham & Vangen, 2000b, p. 1159) and can be addressed effectively only if several organizations collaborate. Many governments around the world therefore seek to improve their effectiveness and efficiency by transforming the structures of their service delivery from hierarchies and markets toward networks (Crosby & Bryson, 2010; Currie, Grubnic, & Hodges, 2011; Currie, Lockett, & Suhomlinova, 2009; Huxham & Vangen, 2000b; Kenis & Provan, 2006; Kickert, Klijn, & Koppenjan, 1997).
In view of the rising importance and prevalence of network -based collaboration both within and across the private and public sector , it is quite astonishing how little we know about how member organizations actually practice leadership in the networks in which they are engaged. Huxham and Vangen (2000b) notice that with few notable exceptions âthe literature on collaborationâincluding that on private sector alliances âhas had little to say about leadership. Some texts make passing reference to leaders , but the concept is rarely discussed in detailâ (p. 1160). In a similar vein, Crosby and Bryson (2010) observe that âleadership language and scholarship have been remarkably scarce in the academic literature on collaborationâ (p. 212).
One reason may be that previous research has focused on leadership between people, in groups or within organizations , neglecting more complex inter-organizational contexts such as supply networks , publicâprivate partnerships , regional clusters, and other inter-organizational innovation systems (Sydow, Lerch, Huxham, & Hibbert, 2011).
Regardless of the causes, there seems to be a growing need for advancing research and theory on the practice of leadership in inter-organizational networks . Leadership is understood here as the exertion of influence in order to make things happen, often despite a lack of formal authority (Huxham, 2000; Huxham & Vangen, 2000b; MĂźller-Seitz & Sydow, 2012). Leadership is widely seen as a critical ingredient for effective collaboration in networks (e.g., Bryson, Crosby, & Stone, 2015; Chrislip & Larson, 1994; Crosby & Bryson, 2005; Huxham & Vangen, 2000b, 2005; MĂźller-Seitz, 2012; MĂźller-Seitz & Sydow, 2012; Provan, Fish, & Sydow, 2007; Vangen & Huxham, 2003). Crosby and Bryson (2010) argue that âleadership work is central to the creation and maintenance of cross-sector collaborations that advance the common goodâ (p. 212). Provan et al. (2007) suggest that âit is imperative that network researchers understand how whole networks operate, how they might best be structured and managed, and what outcomes might result. At present, network researchers in business, public management , and health care services have only a marginal understanding of whole networks, despite their importance as a macro-level social issue. Enhancing this knowledge is clearly a challenge that researchers in all sectors must take seriouslyâ (p. 512). Sydow, SchĂźssler, and MĂźller-Seitz (2016) similarly contend that forming networks is not only a strategic but also a leadership issue, calling for reflexivity in the leadership of networks.
This book reports on a study designed to address this challenge and meet the need and opportunity for more theory in this area. It aims at theoretically conceptualizing and empirically describing the practice of reflexive leadership in the context of networks .
Research Question and Research Issues
This study explores the following research question: How do member organizations practice leadership in a reflexive way in the networks in which they are involved? This research question entails five research issues.
First, there is a need to adopt a dynamic view on leading in networks . Theory building on networks has mainly focused cross-sectional analyses (Ahuja, Soda, & Zaheer, 2012; Bizzi & Langley, 2012; Lorenzoni & Lipparini, 1999). Although longitudinal research has become more common in recent years, we still know very little about the dynamics of leading in networks. As Clegg, Josserand, Mehra, and Pitsis (2016) note, âthe question of the management of network dynamics, while crucial, remains under-researchedâ (p. 281). Provan and Kenis (2008) therefore argue for more systematic research on how leadership in networks emerges and changes over time . Lorenzoni and Lipparini (1999) similarly suggest that there is âstill a strong need for better theories on network evolution and changeâ (p. 318).
Second, there is a need to study the interplay between leadership practice and network effectiveness . Raab and Kenis (2009) argue that scholars need to develop network theories that are able to explain the emergence, functioning, effectiveness, and failure of networks . Regarding leadership practice , they suggest explaining network effectiveness by observing the actions of...