Module 5: Group Discussion Responses
vduglas2
Module5GroupDiscussionresponses.docxLillian Clark Haddock ( She/Her)
TuesdayMar 21 at 11:40pm
Coming into this module, I really only knew of the concept of "networks and networking" as it related to a very personal sphere of connections a person could have when it came to professional connections. Through these articles, I now know that these levels of connections can be on that personal level, but when working in public administration, it is usually on a level that reaches across different organizations, as O'Toole mentioned in their article. I can see how this function is necessary for the proper function of government because what would organizations actually amount to if they operated completely in their own bubble? Through networking and having the ability to connect with different entities, there is a path that communication can travel along as it is needed. This is, of course, particularly important in maintaining a healthy relationship with other organizations and governments. I often deal with Shelby County as an everyday part of my job. Without a partnership with them, we would not be able to handle functions like building inspections due to the small size of our government. This partnership is basically what allows us to function as a government should. As I always seem to be in this course, I was very surprised to learn that there is research dedicated to this topic that is based on networks and their deep importance to this field.
Mar 20, 2023Mar 20 at 8:45am
A few things stood out to me in module 5 are, the difficulty of collaboration in times of crisis, the 'hybridity' of collaborative governance, and the inherent tensions that come into play between differing networks and governance systems.
The Wang, Qi, and Ran article about private-led COVID response efforts stood out for a number of reasons. First, it shows that collaborative governance doesn't always have to be publicly-initiated. As times of iris can leave governments in-flexible in terms of collaboration and autonomy to make a decision. In addition to elaborating on this strategy, they present 4 conditions that lead to successful private-led collaborative governance; consistent goals and trust, capability, institutional flexibility, and short-term effectiveness. I found these to be goals to aspire to in public and private sector work. This relates to Klijn's paper on the 'hybridity' of governance and how the right mix of DBFM(O) determines the effectiveness of the collaborative relationship and the outcomes that it produces. Provan's paper touches on three key tensions that arise commonly throughout collaborative governance networks; efficiency vs. inclusiveness, internal vs. external legitimacy, and flexibility vs. stability. I think being able to navigate these issues is crucial to being a successful leader in the public sector as they not only allow one to reflect inward but also on the network as a whole.
One potential critique would be using China as an example of 'private' led collaborative governance. While their examples are valid and would translate elsewhere in the world, it's not outside the realm of possibility that privately led initiatives in China are orchestrated by the public sector.
What are some other inherent conflicts that you see in your day-to-day?
