22/04/23 1

Interorganizational networks governance and performance: Interorganizational networks governance and performance: Quebec solidarity finance network caseQuebec solidarity finance network case

Interorganizational networks governance and performance: Interorganizational networks governance and performance: Quebec solidarity finance network caseQuebec solidarity finance network case

Tassadit ZerdaniTassadit ZerdaniPhD. student: administration joint program (UQAM)

Committee theses members:Committee theses members:Marie J. Bouchard , UQAM, supervisorMarie J. Bouchard , UQAM, supervisorJean Pasquéro, UQAM, member Jean Pasquéro, UQAM, member Martine Vézina, HEC Montréal, memberMartine Vézina, HEC Montréal, member

22/04/23 2

Presentation Outline

Part I: Research Project 1. Research Question2. Question & Research Objectives 3. Methodology

Part II: Conceptualization and Theoretical Framework

1. Interorganizational Networks: which definition? 2. Characteristics of Quebec Solidarity Finance Network3. Concept of ION Governance 4. Concept of ION Performance 5. Suggested Conceptual Framework

Contributions & Conclusion

22/04/23 3

Part I: Research Project

Research Question

• Conflicts within ION; coordination problems (Provan and Kenis, 2005); • Problems to exchange tacit information and protectionism (Mayntz 1993;

Alter, 1990; Glisson and James, 1992; etc) • Difficulties to realise the tasks or the objectives for which they are created

(Inkpen, 1996, Podolny and Page, 1998). • Divergences in term of size, culture and objectives!

Interest to study the interorganizational networks governance, to explore its dimensions and its importance for the network strategic performance.

Networks are the best alternative to market and hierarchy to increase the serviceOffering (Kickert Klijn and koppenjan 1997, Denis WFP Van Raaij, 2006, etc). Also, they are effective tools to manage environmental turbulences and interdependence (Astley and Fombrun, 1983, Ring and Van of Venn, 1994, etc).

However!

22/04/23 ANSER\CASC22/04/23 4

Existing Literature

Previous Research• Network like governance mode of the interorganizational relations

(the reasons of networks, importance, characteristics, types, functioning, etc)

• Dyadic analysis only

Gaps• Factors and mechanisms of governance are not very developed • Little research establishing the link between ION governance and ION

strategic performance; • Absence of empirical studies of collective organizations networks; • ION performance is generally approached from the perspective of the

network’s capacity to develop the organisational performance of its members (few studies on collective network performance

22/04/23 5

Question and Research Objectives

How can the governance of an interorganizational network contribute to its performance?

Comment la gouvernance d’un réseau interorganisationnel peut-elle contribuer à sa performance?

Objectives

Analysis factors influencing the ION governance; Review how the choice of ION governance mode could

influence it strategic performance; Develop a theoretical framework for the governance of an

interorganizational network and its impact on their performance

22/04/23 6

Methodological Framework: Deductive and Inductive Research

Search data where?

How to do data collection?

- Unit of analysis: Quebec solidarity finance network- Case study with many units (Yin, 2003)) - Diversified sample: many different organizations(RISQ, FondAction, Fonds S.FTQ, Caisse d’Économie, Fiducie, etc.)

- Documents analysis (external and internal documents)- Semi-structured interviews (approximately 25 interviews)- Direct observation: at the governance unit level (CA)

Interviews

Observation Documents

• Key organizational members• Research members of CAP finance (ARUC-ÉS)• Support network resource personel

• Research documents• Activity reports• Press releases, etc.

Assist with member meetings

Triangulation

22/04/23 7

Why a collective organizations network case?

General interest mission (Lévesque, 2006) Specific objectives Common issues and challenges (Bernier et al. 2003, Laville, 1999) Voluntary engagement Differences and tensions between partners (Eme, 2006) Hybrid character of organization’s partners Coordination complexity related to differences between partners

(Lamoureux, 1996)

Collective organizations networks are rich & dynamic cases (different players, specific objectives, general interest mission, etc.), in order to supply reflection & to generally enrich the ION

governance theory.

22/04/23 8

Part II: Conceptualisation and Theoretical Framework

I. Interorganizational network (ION): What

definition?

Contractual under-market in a global market (Thorelli, 1986) New governance mode of interorganizational relations (between market and

hierarchy) (Williamson, 1996)) Set of nodes, links, relations and flow (Poulin et al., 2004) Modality to coordinate joint action between autonomous but interdependent

organizations (Provan and Kenis, 2008; Phillips et al., 2000)

Proposed definition:

“Group of heterogeneous and autonomous organizations which work together in order to find synergies and necessary resources to achieve their joint mission of general interest. They intervene in collaboration, in order to support jointly the actions of socio-economic development activities which emerge at local and regional level. This group of organizations is not limited by price or by the hierarchy. However, its partner members are engaged in cooperative actions involving trust, information exchange, reciprocal relationships, routines, values and norms".

22/04/23 9

Types of collective organizations networks

Complementary Alliance Collaboration

Coordination between partners

Formal links (contrast) Formal links (contrast) Informal agreement

Partner autonomy Poor Variable strong

Integration axis Institutional system Pragmatism Ideology (common values )

Coherence Strong Poor (Many small networks)

Strong

Type of network Hierarchical Hierarchical

Community? Associative?

Adapted from White et al., (1992)

Quebec solidarity finance network

22/04/23 10

II. Characteristics of Quebec Solidarity Network

Members • Heterogeneous (Public, private, syndicate, OSBL, etc.)

Type • Plural network• Collaboration network

Conditions and characteristics

• Voluntary adherence• Interdependent and autonomous • Collectives actions• Voluntary engagement of partners • Common mission (general interest)

Purpose • Better participate in general interest services • Be identified by social and economic problems • Look for synergies and required resources • Complementary resources and actions • Look for recognition and legitimacy

Governance • Shared and/or associative? • Central partners as facilitators of the network?

22/04/23 1111

Fondaction - le Fonds de

développement de la CSN pour la coopération et

l’emploi (1996)

Fonds de solidarité FTQ

(1983)

Capital régional et coopératif Desjardins

(2001)

Caisse d’économie

solidaire Desjardins

(1971)

Réseau d’investissement social du

Québec (1997)

Filaction – CSN (2000)

Réseau québécois du

crédit communauta

ire (2000)

Fiducie du Chantier de l’économie

sociale (2006)

Development capital players

Solidarity finance players

SOLIDE (1991)

Intermédiaires

CDÉC, CLD, etc.

Source: M. Mendel, 2009

Quebec solidarity finance network players

Invest. Québec

22/04/23 12

III. Concept of Interorganizational Network Governance

1. Governance • All design process, selection and implementation of common life

rules (Rhodes, 2008). • A means by which the order is realized in a relationship in which

a potential conflict threatens and which could compromise the opportunities to realize mutual gains (Williamson, 1996).

2. ION governance• Metagouvernance (Sorensen and Torfing, 2009) • Metamanagement or piloting (Ehlinger et al., 2007; Alberti,

2001)• Management of the non-hierarchical cooperation (Provan et al.

2005) • Mode to regulate relations between different members of

network (Provan and Kenis, 2008)

22/04/23 13

ION governance (con’t)

3. Objectives

Ensure the effectiveness of the process of coordination, cooperation and conflict resolution, in order to maximize the distribution of benefits between the partners (Coriatt, 2000 and Hendrikse et al., 2008)

Continually find balance between the satisfaction of member’s objectives and the achievement of collective action (Forgues et al., 2006).

Ensure partners commitment in collective action (Provan and Kenis,2008)

Define the global strategy for the network

22/04/23 14

Governance structures

Categories Characteristics Authors

Central Governance (decision power is centralized)

Centralized in leader organization level, called organization «pivot»

- Asymmetry of powers and roles between the organization leader and other organizations’ members of network

- Organization leader provides strategic issues.

- A few direct interactions between partners;

- Reduce the complexity of the network

Jarrilo, (1986); Fréry, (1997et 1993); Assens, (2003) ; Forgues et al., (2006) ; Ehlinger et al., (2007); Langley et al., (2007)

Centralized in the administrative center level (An external entity to the network) (Network administrative organization) (NAO)

- Entity choosen by the members

- Most adopted in the case of local and territorial networks.

- NAO has the structure of CA

- This entity coordinates network strategic activities

Provan et Kenis, (2008); Assen, (2007) Provan et al., (2005); Jones et al., (1997); Humains et Provan (2000)

Community Governance (Distribution of power decision)

Shared governance - There is no governance entity. Partners take jointly strategic decisions and manage collectively all network activities.

- Members interact informally

Assens, (2003) ; Forgues et al., (2006) ; Ehlinger et al., (2007); Provan et Kenis (2008)

Associative governance

- Core of governance (association, corporation, agency, syndicate, etc.) that manages the network

- Members interact informally

- No organization leader

- Community solidarity between members

Provan et Kenis, (2008)

Assens (2003); Venkatraman et Lee, (2004)

4. Modes of ION governance

22/04/23 15

Informal governance Formal governance

Accompagnateur: CAP finance de L’ARUC-ÉS

What are the mechanisms? What are the mechanisms?

Institutionnalisation process

?

Governance of Quebec Solidarity Finance Network?

Associative ?Shared? (Hybrid?)

22/04/23 16

IV. ION Performance Concept

1. Definitions Achieving positive results at the network level. These results

cannot be achieved by a single organization (Provan and Kenis, 2005).

Collective performance at the network level Networks relational performance (its continuity)

2. Factors of ION performance Contextual, structural and contingency factors (existing

studies: mainly the study of Provan and Milward (1995))

Link between ION governance and performance (governance as a factor of performance) (Our study object)

Working hypothesis: standards, values and rules are central as issues?

Which theoretical framework to adopt?

22/04/23 17

V. Proposed Conceptual Framework

1. Integrated reference framework: dimensions from institutional theory; cognitive approach and social capital theory.

2. Why institutional theory? • Institutions ensure network stability and structure behaviour

of their members (Scott, 1992 and 1995). • The network is an organizational field which favours the

process of socialization and development of institutions (Jepperson, 1991; DiMaggio and Powell, 1991)

3. Why the two other approaches? • Development of cognitive abilities of network members during

the time (Napahiet and Ghoshal, 1998); • The concept of social capital is integrated because institutions

occur with interactions between actors and with social cohesions (Scott, 1995)

22/04/23 18

Respect rules

Sharing normes and values

Developing routines

Collectives learning

Network governance

Network as organizational field

Institutionalisation

Institutionalisation

Researching of legitimacy

Developing social capital

Internal institutions of the network

Network performance

General interest

- Strength and stability - Development of capabilities to manage network. – Capacity to manage conflict - Collective actions

- Positive externalities- P. of goods and services

Reference frameworkExternal institutions

22/04/23 19

Perspectives

• By this framework, we want to show that:

o Networks governance is influenced by the institutions developed historically in these networks (values, standards, beliefs, etc.) and by the actions of their partners through their cognitive processes (collective learning) and their social processes (social capital);

o ION governance mode based on these institutional dimensions influence positively their performance.

2. Three articles o Which theoretical perspective for ION governance analysis?

(Theoretical) o Modeling ION governance through Quebec solidarity finance

network (empirical) o Governance as factor of performance of collective organizations

networks (empirical)

22/04/23 20

Conclusion

This research will develop knowledge about collective organizations networks and especially enrich the understanding related to their structures and governance mechanisms;

Propose an analysis framework composed of concepts and dimensions related to the reality of collective organizations networks and important to study other cases of conventional organizations networks;

Present to the leaders (managers) of collective organizations tools to manage the interfaces such as: develop trust and social norms (solidarity, altruism and integrity) in the network; coordinating the elaboration process of collective strategy; facilitating the exchange of information; develop negotiation structures, etc.

22/04/23 21

Your comments and thank you!Your comments and thank you!