This document discusses action research processes and the development of cooperative networks involving firms, municipalities, and training centers, with a focus on shared leadership in policy networks experiencing conflict. It emphasizes the importance of openly addressing conflicts to facilitate regional development and outlines the need for engaged governance in collaborative efforts. The document concludes that the emergence of shared leadership is a gradual process requiring clear power distribution and active participation from regional actors.

1. Writingfrom actionresearchprocesses
Action Research:
Explanation and Developing new projects,
Pamplona, 5th April, 2016
Maria José Aranguren, Orkestra
Miren Larrea, Orkestra

2. Structure of the presentation
• The organizational context for action
research
• Writing from action research processes
2

3. Problemdefinitionand researchquestions:
where do they comefrom?
• Develop a network for cooperation between
firms, municipality and agency and training
centers (framework agreement with the
development agency)
• How does shared leadership emerge in a policy
network in a situation of conflict?
3

4. What is shared leadership?Theory, practice
and praxis
4
Andersen, S. S. (1997) Case-Studier Og Generalisering : Forskningsstrategi Og Design. Bergen-
Sandviken: Fagbokforlaget.
Asheim, B., Coenen, L. and Moodysson, J. (2007) Constructing Knowledge-Based Regional Advantage:
Implications for Regional Innovation Policy. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and
Innovation Management, 7: 140–155.
Boschma, R. A. and Iammarino, S. (2009) Related Variety, Trade Linkages and Regional Growth in
Italy. Economic Geography, 85: 289-311.
Braczyk, H.-J., Cooke, P. and Heidenreich, M. (1998) Regional Innovation Systems. London: UCL Press.
Brookes, S. and Grint, K. (2010) A New Public Leadership Challenge? In The New Public Leadership
Challenge, (eds.) S. Brokes and Grint, K.: 1-15. Palgrave Macmillan.
Brunsson, N. (2002) The Organisation of Hypocrisy. Talk, Decisions, and Actions in Organisations.
Wiley.
Conger, J. A. (1989) The Charismatic Leader: Behind the Mystique of Exceptional Leadership. San
Franciso: CA: Jossey-Bass.
Cooke, P., Boekholt, P. and Tödtling, F. (2000) The Governance of Innovation in Europe. Regional
Perspectives on Global Competitivness. London: Pinter.
Cooke, P. and Leydesdorff, L. (2006) Regional Development in the Knowledge-Based Economy: The
Construction of Advantage. Introduction to the Special Issue. Journal of Technology Transfer,
31: 5-15.
Cox, J. F., Pearce, C. L. and Perry, M. L. (2003) Toward a Model of Shared Leadership and Distributed
Influence in the Innovation Process. In Shared Leadership. Reframing the Hows and Whys of
Leadership, (eds.) C. L. Pearce and Conger, J. A.: 48-76. Thousand Oak: Sage.
Doyle, M. E. and Smith, M. K. (2001) 'Shared Leadership’, the Encyclopedia of Informal Education
European Commission (2006) Constructing Regional Advantage: Principles - Perspectives - Policies.
Dg Research. Brussels.
Fletcher, J. K. and Käufer, K. (2003) Shared Leadership. In Shared Leadership. Reframing the Hows
and Whys of Leadership, (eds.) C. L. Pearce and Conger, J. A.: 21-47. Thousand Oak: Sage.
Isaksen, A. and Karlsen, J. (2010) Different Modes of Innovation and the Challenge of Connecting
Universities and Industry: Case Studies of Two Regional Industries in Norway. European
Planning Studies, 18: 1993-2008.
Javidan, M. (1998) 'Core Competence: What Does It Mean in Practice'? Long range planning, 31: 60-
71.
Karlsen, J. (2010) Regional Complexity and the Need for Engaged Governance. Ekonomiaz 74: 91-111.
Karlsen, J., Isaksen, A. and Spilling, O. R. (2011) The Challenge of Constructing Regional Advantages in
Peripheral Areas. The Case of Marine Biotechnology in Tromsø, Norway. Entrepreneurship &
regional development, 23: 235-257.
Kenis, P. and Schneider, V. (1991) Policy Networks and Policy Analysis. Scrutinizing a New Analytical
Toolbox. In Policy Networks, Empirical Evidence and Theoretical Consideration, (eds.) B.
Marin and Mayntz, R.: 25-59. Boulder: CO: Westview press.
Koppenjan, J. F. M. (2007) Consensus and Conflict in Policy Networks: To Much or Too Little? In
Theories of Democratic Network Governance (eds.) J. Torfing and Sørensen, E. Basingstoke:
Palgrave Macmillian.
Martin, R. and Sunley, P. (2003) Deconstructing Clusters: Chaotic Concept or Policy Panacea? Journal
of Economic Geography, 3: 5–35.
Navarro, M. (2010) Los Sistemas Regionales De Innovación. Una Revisión Crítica. Ekonomiaz, 70: 25-
59

5. Case: Transition from hierarchy to network
in local development
• Ezagutza Gunea (EG) is one of the pioneering policy networks
in the Basque Country, created in 2002
• The network is composed by the two municipal councils in
the county, the local development agency, 6 training centers
in the area, 15 ‘large firms’ with between 50 to 350
employees (representing around 90% of this size of
manufacturing firms in the area) and 12 ‘small firms’ with
between 10 and 50 employees (2.600 employees in total)
• Management board
5

6. 1.EGhasasubstantialautonomyinsideIraurgiLantzen(thisway,the
managementboardpositioneditselfinsidetheagencycontext,butunderlinedits
autonomy)
2. Forthemanagementofnetworks,flatstructuresarebetterthanhierarchies
3. AflatstructurerequiresreinforcingtheroleoftheManagementBoard
4. Inordertodeepentheirparticipation,themembersoftheboardcandeal
someissuesworkingdirectlywiththestaff
5.Thisapproachtoworkingrequiresmorecoordinationofthestaffmembers 6
Administration Board
of the agency
Management
Board of EG Director of agency
and EG
Coordinator of EG
Staff of EG
Work Groups
(2,3)
(2,3,4)
(2,3)
(2,3)
(5)
Administration Council
of the agency
Management Board
of EG
Director EG
Staff EG
Assistants to
staff
Work
Groups
1
2
3

7. Shared leadershipcapabilitiesin different types
of situationsof consensusand conflict
Consensus Conflict
Explicit
1. Explicit consensus
“We agree and make it public in the
network”
3. Explicit conflict
“We let the others know we
disagree”
Implicit
2. Implicit consensus
“We tacitly agree, but do not make
any actions to make the agreement
public”
4. Implicit conflict
“We disagree tacitly, but we do
not make any actions so that the
disagreement becomes known”
7
Socialization capability: ability to socialize the members of a network so that they feel that the network is
important for them and that they will work for achievement of common goals.

8. Conclusions of the chapter
• Conflicts must not be avoided, in a long term perspective
hiding conflict can hamper necessary regional
development
• Conflicts must be made explicit and discussed
• Shared leadership is activated by making conflict explicit
and searching for consensus
• Emergence of shared leadership takes time. It is not a
matter of deciding to create the network but of :
• policy makers assuming they are distributing power
• regional actors assuming participation requires taking that power
and the responsibility it involves
8

9. • Engagement of the researcher with the process: do we decide
what we write about?
• The roles of insiders and outsiders
• Discovering what we learnt
• The decission of being action researchers in other fields
• The challenge of analytical frameworks becoming the result of
the process
9
Conclusions on the writing process
of the chapter