ABSTRACT

Scholars often view conflict management in governance networks as a consensus-seeking practice in which managers attempt to resolve disputes and advance collective network goals. In contrast, this article uses a power-based perspective to explore how different power strategies – adversarial and cooperative – may be applied to manage conflict and disagreements in networks. Using qualitative empirical evidence from two Israeli governance networks, it postulates these strategies lead to different types of network administrative organizations (NAOs) – exclusive and inclusive – which may enhance or obstruct inter-organizational collaboration. The article uses the case studies to evaluate the ensuing implications for networks‘ endurance, legitimacy, and performance.

摘要

学者们经常将治理网络中的冲突管理视为一种寻求共识的做法，在这种做法中，管理者试图解决争端并推进集体网络目标。相比之下，本文使用基于权力的视角来探讨如何应用不同的权力策略——对抗性和合作性——来管理网络中的冲突和分歧。使用来自两个以色列治理网络的定性经验证据，它假设这些策略会导致不同类型的网络管理组织 (NAO)——排他性和包容性——可能会增强或阻碍组织间的合作。本文使用案例研究来评估随后对网络的持久性、合法性和性能的影响。