Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Network Leadership Webinar | "Unpacking Goal-Directed Networks" with Angel Saz-Carranza

In this third webinar of the Network Leadership Series, Professor Angel Saz-Carranza will explore the question of how formal networks of organizations, created to reach a collective goal (also known as goal-directed networks), work to support the overarching network goals. Goal-directed networks often create a separate organizational unit to broker and administer the network as a whole called Network Administrative Organizations (NAOs).
The webinar will answer questions like:
How organizational units lead and broker the work of network members to ensure that the network as a whole achieves a collective network goal. finds the direction it needs, aligns the activities of its members, and helps them stay committed and ready to collaborate
How leadership strategies are different when the work is not internal to a single organization
Drawing from the work of immigration coalitions in the U.S. as examples of an important type of network, Saz-Carranza unpacks the leadership dynamics of formal goal-directed networks. These network member organizations join together to accomplish a common goal that is different from each organizational member but that contributes to advance their individual missions.

  • Login to see the comments

Network Leadership Webinar | "Unpacking Goal-Directed Networks" with Angel Saz-Carranza

  1. 1. February 2016 Webinar 3 Network Leadership Webinar Series Today’s Presenter: Angel Saz-CarranzaToday’s Presenter: Angel Saz-Carranza
  2. 2. Angel Saz-Carranza
  3. 3. Unpacking Goal-Directed Networks Angel Saz-Carranza
  4. 4. Agenda • Goal-directed networks & Network administrative organizations (NAOs) • NAO leadership of goal-directed networks: – The study & key tension – The practices • Ongoing research
  6. 6. Emergent out of serendipitous interaction Kilduff and Tsai, 2003 Goal-directed networks Social Networks Interorganizational Networks Encompasses ‘‘groups of three or more legally autonomous organizations that work together to achieve not only their own goals but also a collective goal’’ (Provan and Kenis, JPART, 2008, 231).
  7. 7. Goal-directed networks Emergency Task Forces
  8. 8. Network Broker? — Centrality / Formalization + Coordination activities Member interaction Power balance Formalization of form Cost Shared Decentralized Multilateral Symmetrical Low Distributed Lead- member Centralized (lead-member) Bilateral (via lead-member) Asymmetrical Medium Concentrated NAO Centralized (NAO) Bilateral (via NAO) Symmetrical High Distributed (Provan, Kenis 2008)
  9. 9. QUESTIONS?
  11. 11. Midwest Network [$1.690.218 // 20] Four “exceptional” cases West Network [$195.000 // 16] National Network [$290.000 // 30] East Network [$2.167.560 // 164]
  12. 12. East Network Arab- American Support Center Alianza Dominicana, Inc. … Catholic Charities- Diocese Asian Americans for Equality City Mayor’s Office & Council NAO
  13. 13. Focus: the unity-diversity tension • Small group collaboration (Smith and Berg 1987) • Organizations (Lawrence and Lorsch, ASQ, 1967; Mintzberg 1983) • Interorganizational relationships – RDT & diversity (Rethemeyer and Hatmaker 2008; Huxham and Beech 2003). – Overembeddedness & trust  Information & structural holes (Brass et al. 2004; Burt 1992; Coleman 1990; Uzzi 1997). – Ospina and Saz-Carranza, A&S, 2010 Leadership activities Address unity-diversity tension Collective action
  14. 14. Unity/Diversity tension • “Every day we have to face that contradiction, that paradox…it's stressful because then it's the same diversity and richness that gives us threat and at the same time gives us a lot of strength. [MwN]” • Premises 1. Diversity within the network is necessary for network effectiveness 2. Unity of the network is necessary for network effectiveness 3. Diversity and unity undermine each other
  15. 15. Unity/Diversity tension •Diversity •Organizational characteristics •Organizational culture •Organizational sub-issues* •Cultural-national* •Geographic base* •Unity •Meta-objective / vision •Identity / Experiences / Problems •Value of diversity •Premise 3a: Diversity and unity may easily undermine each other
  16. 16. QUESTIONS?
  18. 18. Managing the unity/diversity paradox Bridging: mediating member differences Network Domain Framing: setting the stage for action. Frame basic agreements and procedures (structure, process, and culture) Capacitating: constructing the right community. Contribute to enhance the networks’ or the members’ capacity (strategic recruitment & building member capacity)
  19. 19. Bridging diversity • “[It] is important [that] you don’t force it, because when you try to force it, then it won’t work. Networks have to be managed in a natural manner. [National Network]” • “I call them up before and I just feel them out and just see what your sort of thoughts are so I can be sort of mentally prepared for it. [East Network]” •Open process avoids “exit” (Hirschman 1970) by members •Open process must be managed to avoid diversity turning into disunity (Gray 1995) •No control over the outcome; but oversight of the process. •Intraorganizational management is about decision making (Simon 1976) Network management is about bridging decision-making
  20. 20. Framing unity • Procedures and routines – A multi-layered cake [Midwest N.]; – Organic structure [East N.] – E.g. McCain-Kennedy Bill • Rules, norms, values – “we shall overcome [Midwest N.]” – “un pueblo sin fronteras [National N.]” – “si se puede [West N.]” – chants demanding immigrant rights in front of City Hall [East N.] •Board (Member orgs.) •NAO •Organizational member staff •Constituents •Integrates members at all levels: incr. complexity, incr. unity •Unifies around vision, identity, and value of diversity (Hogg and Terry, AMJ, 2000) •Generates common meaning-making •Important in fragmented settings.
  21. 21. Capacitating • “I think it [managing successfully] all starts off when an organization applies to be part of the network. [National N.]” • “Networks have to give back results, such as training and resources, to member groups. [East N.]” •Selection consistent with U/D dimensions. •Network-level Working group-level •Must deliver network gains but also organization-specific advantages (Inkpen and Tsang, AMA, 2007) •Directly affects how members re-evaluates network.
  22. 22. Conclusion *Bridging: mediating member differences *Framing: setting the stage for action *Capacitating: constructing the right community  Unity: *Identity *Value of diversity *Main goal Diversity: *Member organizational characteristics *Member sub-issues *Member national culture  Ability to carry out collective action Leadership activities Address unity-diversity tension Collective action
  23. 23. QUESTIONS?
  24. 24. ONGOING WORK 3
  25. 25. Ongoing work • NAO structures • Strategy development in goal–directed networks: who’s boss?
  26. 26. StaffStaff Plenary / General Board [unanimity] Plenary / General Board [unanimity] Members NAO Simple type Working Groups
  27. 27. StaffStaff Governance Board [EU votes] Governance Board [EU votes] Members Working Groups NAO DirectorDirector European Energy Agency Executive Board [EU votes] Executive Board [EU votes] Scientific Committee Scientific Committee
  28. 28. Principal and agent • Being at the service of the institution implies convincing those who have the power. You need to walk one step ahead [of the members], but only one step, not 20 kilometers; otherwise you become irrelevant. • He was always well aware he worked for the Council…The first truly brilliant decision he takes is … to realize that behaving as a [European] foreign minister... will not work… He maneuvered using that sixth sense of his without ever crossing a member state’s red line.
  30. 30. February 2016 Webinar 3 Network Leadership Webinar Series Today’s Presenter: Angel Saz-CarranzaToday’s Presenter: Angel Saz-Carranza