Treating Networks Seriously: Practical and Research-Based Agendas in Public Administration
Author(s): Laurence J. O'Toole, Jr.
Source: Public Administration Review, Vol. 57, No. 1 (Jan. - Feb., 1997), pp. 45-52
Published by: Blackwell Publishing on behalf of the American Society for Public
Administration
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/976691
Accessed: 13/03/2009 22:26
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=black.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the
scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that
promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Blackwell Publishing and American Society for Public Administration are collaborating with JSTOR to
digitize, preserve and extend access to Public Administration Review.
http://www.jstor.org
Practical
and
in
Administradon
Public
Research-Based Agendas
ofGeorgia
Laurence
J.O'Toole,
Jr.,TheUniversity
toface the
How wellequippedaretoday's
publicadministrators
notchallenges
theyconfrontfromtheinvolvement
of businesses,
and evenclientsin complex
for-profits,otherunitsofgovernment,
Not verywell,ifjudgedbythe
patternsofprogramoperations?
the
and scholarshaveincorporated
extentto whichpractitioners
networkconceptand its implicationsinto theirown work.Discussionsin thefield containlittleto helppracticingmanagers
cope
with networksettings.Infact, conventional
theorymayactually
whenappliedinappropriately
to network
be counterproductive
contexts.Andyet, thesearraysare nowconsequential
and becomso.Practitioners
ing increasingly
needto beginto incorporate
the
networkconceptinto theiradministrative
efforts.Thechallenge
thatilluminatesthisneglected
for scholarsis to conductresearch
aspectof contemporary
administration.Theauthorsketches
a set
of agendasthatofferprospects
for helpingto addressthisneed.
PublicAdministration
Review* January/February
1997,Vol.57,No.1
Publicadministration'
increasingly
takesplaceinsettingsof networked
actorswhonecessarily
relyon
eachotherandcannotcompelcompliance
on the
partof therest. Yetthestandard
writings
to which
mostadministrators
turnforadviceto improve
performance
devoterelatively
littleattention
to acting
in suchsituations.(Examples
effectively
include
Hill, 1992;Levine,Peters,andThompson,1990;
andWamsley
etal.,1990.)
Networksarestructuresof interdependence
involvingmultipleorganizations
or partsthereof,
whereoneunitis notmerely
theformalsubordinate
of theothersinsomelarger
hierarchical
arrangement.
Networks
exhibit
somestructural
stability
butextend
beyondformallyestablished
linkagesandpolicylegitimated
ties. The notionof networkexcludes
mereformalhierarchies
andperfectmarkets,
butit
a verywiderangeof structures
includes
in between.
Theinstitutional
gluecongealing
tiesmay
networked
includeauthority
bonds,exchangerelations,and
coalitions
basedon commoninterest,allwithina
structure.
In networks,
singlemultiunit
administratorscannotbe expected
to exercise
decisive
leverage
inlarger
byvirtueof theirformal
position.Influence
networks
is moredifficult
to document,
and
predict,
modelthanit is in relatively
simpletwo-or threepartyrelationships.
workon publicadministration
Scholarly
hasproceededfordecades
fromtheseminal
contributions
of
Herbert
Simon(1976)andothers,whoargued
that
can "pushback"the decision-making
hierarchy
- converting
weaknesses
experienced
byindividuals
theirhumanlimitations
(likeselectiveperception)
into organizational
strengths.This resultis not
andit is thechallenge
inevitable,
of themanager
to
craftthecontexts
in whichothersmustmakedecisionsso thattheywillhavewhattheyneedto make
soundchoices
efficiently.
45
Partof the taskis arrangingthe hierarchyso thateachsubunit
can pay attentionto itself and its near neighborswhile largely
offload
ignoringthe restof the world,even the restof the organization.
"Neardecomposability,"which hierarchypermits,works (for
Simon)becauseof an assumptionaboutthe worldin whichorganizationsoperate:that complextaskscan usuallybe dividedup
into small,relativelyindependentcomponentsthatcan be treated
separatelywhile still contributingto the overallobjective(1976,
69). Latertheoristsnoted that this assumptionis probablytoo
strong. Certainlyhierarchycan bringsome efficiencyadvantages growthindustry.Morethoroughgoingformsof privatization
are
evenif the strictassumptiondoesnot hold.2
commonplace,despitethe periodicexpose,scandal,and disapIf, however,the issueswith which publicmanagersare being pointment. Public-private
partnerships
vary in severalrespects,
askedto dealareincreasingly
whatRittelandWebber(1973) have but they typicallyinvolvegovernmentand profit-driveninterests
called"wickedproblems"-challengesthat cannotbe handledby joined to increasethe scale and visibilityof programefforts,to
dividingthem up into simplepiecesin nearisolationfromeach increasesupportfor projects,and to leveragecapitalto enhance
other-then alternative
formsof organizingmustbe moresuitable. feasibility,speed,or effectiveness.Indeed,they often involvenot
No clearlyappropriateorganizational
form, or set of forms,has merelyone privateorganization
but a rangeof them. Manyforms
attractedgeneralsupport. Matrixorganizations,flexiblework of entrepreneurial
governmentefforttoutedby Osborneand Gaegroups,andinteragencycoordinating
committeesareall structural bler (1992) involveformsof networkingnot adequatelycaptured
responsesto certainformsof "wickedness."
But thereis no com- in aggregate
dataon intergovernmental
programs
andcontracting.
prehensive
theoryto suggesthow to managesuchorganizedeffort.3
The extentof interunitpatternsis considerable.Suchstructures
To the extentthatpublicproblemshaveacquiredcharacteristics
of ofteninvolvewebsof public,not-for-profit,
andbusinessorganizawickedness,this articlesuggeststhatadministrators
arenow either tionsin crosscutting
configurations.
Evenat the international
level,
operatingwith inappropriateorganizationalmodelsor adapting agreements
on issuessuchasenvironmental
qualityhavebeentransconventionalstructuresto meet the more challengingdemands. latedinto policyin manynations,anddomesticprogrammanagers
Versionsof networkdevelopmentmay be underway.What does find themselveslinkedin multileveland cross-national
webs"from
the evidencesuggest?
thenegotiatingtableto theshopfloor"(Hanf,1994).
Recenttrends,includingprivatization,
reinvention,budgetcutting, andinitiativesfromthe RepublicanCongress,areunlikelyto
stop or appreciably
slow the phenomenon. Pressuresto offload
directserviceprovisionwhile also assumingpolicy responsibility
The dataregarding
the importanceof networkedactionin pub- catalyzefurthernetworkingthroughmore complexpatternsthat
lic administration
arenot conclusive.Mostof the evidenceis indi- aim at splittingor sharinglaborand responsibility.This point is
rect;however,if it indicatestrends,it is fairlyconvincing.Further- obviouswhenconsideredin the contextof some recentpolicyinimore, as demonstratedin the next section, the kinds of forces tiatives, such as the proposalsfor reformingU.S. health care.
currentlyencouragingthe expansionand proliferation
of networks Sometimesoverlooked,however,areless-conspicuous
instances
rangefarbeyondthosetypicallysketchedby economistsor organi- suchas the roleplayedby intermediary
institutionsin serviceprozationtheorists.
visionnetworksforanyvoucher-style
policyinitiative.
Kettlpointsout that directfederalspendingfor single-agency
programoperationsaccountsfor a smallsliceof the hugenational
budget(1993, 61-62). At otherlevelsof government,evenwith
cutbacksin federalaid, intergovernmental
programsmakeup a
A contestablethesiscan be suggested:Complexnetworksare
sizeableproportionof the total. This conclusionis especiallyclear not only relativelycommon, they are also likely to increasein
when one countsstate, local, interlocal,interstate,and nongrant numberand importance.Why? The discussionof wickedpolicy
efforts- includingintergovernmental
regulation.Whatis omit- problemssuggestsone reason,and additionalforcesseem to be at
ted by these measuresis a congeriesof programsinvolvingmore workas well. Policiesdealingwith ambitiousor complexissuesare
subtlearrays. "In additionto the huge role that state and local likelyto requirenetworkedstructuresfor execution,and complex
governmentsplay in the 'Washingtonbureaucracy,'
almostevery issueswill continueto be on the policyagenda. Indeed,and this
majorfederaldomesticpolicydirectlyinvolveseitherprivatecon- point can be considereda secondinfluence,the limitationsoften
tractors,or non-profitorganizations,
or both"(DiIulioand Kettl, establishedon the reach of direct governmentalintervention
1995, 17). It is worthwhile,therefore,to surveya broaderrangeof encourageratherthandampennetworkedapproaches.Preferences
collaborative
efforts.
for limited,liberalgovernmentin the contextof widespreadsupTheseeffortsencompassseveralcategories.First,governments portfor actionencouragecomplex,networkedmechanismsforseroftenseekto executetheireffortsvia structures
of interagency
col- vice deliveryand management-extendingthe reachof governlaboration.Second,the roleof not-for-profit
organizations
is large ment programswhile looseningthe immediatemanagerialgrasp.
and growing. Third,the frequencyandvarietyof linkswith for- Settingambitiousobjectivesin contextsof dispersedpowermakes
profitfirmsis impressive,and governmentcontractingremainsa networkingimperative
forprogrammanagers.
to
Pressures
direct
service
provision
while
aloassumingpolicy
responsibility
catalyzefurther
networking
more
through
complexpatterns
that
at
aim
splitting
orsharing
labor
andresponsibility.
WhyTreatNetworksSeriously?
SomeEvidence
TheGrowingImportance
of Networks
46
PublicAdministration
Review* January/February
1997, Vol. 57, No. I
Despite
sentiments
and
certain
to
efforts
contrary
unwind
theemergence
thenetwork
spring,
ofnetworks
in
public
isnotapassingfad.
management
eralinfluencesappearto be at workto encouragefurtherexpansion. Forall this admittedlyspottyevidence,therehas been relativelylittleimpacton scholarship
in the field. The dominantpicture,as seen in courses,texts, and standardtheories,is that of a
universecenteredaroundthe individualagencyand its management. Accordingly,thereis plentyof work to be done to adapt
whatwe thinkwe knowto the emergingnetworkedworld.
Third, political imperativeselicit networkingbeyond what
mightbe necessitated
by policyobjectives.Thisvenerablepointis
hammeredhome in numerousstudiesof individualprograms(see
the classictreatmentin PressmanandWildavsky,1984). LegislaTreatingnetworksseriouslyhasnot beena priorityin the world
tive coalitionbuildinghas its administrative
as man- of publicadministration.Still, the theme has not been ignored
counterpart
agersandothersbeginthe arduousprocessof execution.Adminis- altogether.4Some administrators
have noted the prominenceof
trators often must balance technical needs for clear and networksin their operatingsetting and have begun to consider
concentrated
programauthoritywith politicaldemandsfor inclu- implicationsfor practice.Researchers,
too, havestartedto devote
sion andbroaderinfluence.
effortto topicsthat can enhancescholarlyunderstanding
of netFourth,as informationhasaccumulated
second-order worksandpublicmanagement.
regarding
programeffects,effortshavebeenmadeto institutionalize
the conWhatimplicationsfollowfroma recognitionof the importance
nections.Witnessthe growthof interagency
committeesandadvi- of networksto the conductof publicadministration?
The covera portionof the agendasfor the field.
sorycommissions(Light,1995). Fifth,layersof mandatesconsti- agebelowaddresses
tute anotherpressurefor networkedmanagement.Instruments
such as crosscuttingregulations(appliedto manyprograms,like
The PracticalAgenda
civilrightsor environmental
sanctions(penalrules)and crossover
ties in one fieldfor compliancefailuresin another)escalatecoordiUltimately,the most importantquestionregardingnetworks
nationrequirements.Transportation
is the pragmaticone: So what? What
programmanagerscopewith and publicadministration
the rightsof the disabled,protectionof endangeredspecies,and differencedoesit makein practiceif administrators
aresituatedin
energy conservation,not simply transportationefficiencyand complexstructuresof networkedinterdependence?
The answeris
effectiveness,multimodalbalance,and land use. An inevitable not obvious.Importantpartsof the responsemustbe informedby
researchthatis onlyjust beginning.However,just as the assumpconsequenceis the developmentof networkedconnections.
Relatedtrendsalsooperatewithina policyfield. In densepoli- tion of formalhierarchyprovidedcluesregardinghow to manage
cy spaceslikehousingor economicdevelopmentor welfare,differ- in an earlierera,the distinctivefeaturesof networkstructures
offer
ent programshavedifferentintents,fundingsourcesandpriorities, someverypreliminary
hintsforpractice.
mandatedcriteria,and targetedstakeholders.(Policyspacesare
First,standardnostrumsof publicadministration
probablydo
densewhen a numberof initiativesoccupya givensectorof gov- not apply. Managersin networkedsettingsdo not supervisemost
ernmentaleffort.) Achievingsomethingmeaningfulin any one of thoseon whomtheirown performance
relies,monitoringchannels are typicallydiffuseand unreliable,and common organizaprogrammustmeanadaptingto several.
For all these reasons,it is reasonableto expectan increasein tionalcultureexercisesa limitedand indirectinfluence. In netpublic administrativenetworking. Milwardand Provan(1993) workarrays,severalsetsof organizational
needsmustsomehowbe
haveusedthe evocativeandvaguelythreatening
imageof the "hol- incorporatedinto streamsof action without compromisingprolow state"to characterize
whatthey regardas the increasingly
net- gramsto the point of incoherence.Perhapsmost important,networkedcharacter
of publicmanagement(seealsoMilward,1996). worksthemselvesaresufficientlycomplexthattheirimpacton perin the comingyearswill facefunda- formanceis somewhatunpredictable
They arguethat practitioners
for all involved.Managingin
mentalchallengesto achievingthe traditionally
importantnorms this worldimpliessignificantadjustmentof the conventionalwisof efficiency,effectiveness,
andaccountability.
responsiveness,
dom. Indeed,the very notion of managementmay have to be
The case for a networkedfuture should not be made too modified.Neededformsof management
maybe counterintuitive.
strongly.Someformsof policychange,suchas initiativesto "hive Thatis, actionguidedby the hierarchy
assumptionis likelyto lead
off" publicinstitutionsor sell largequantitiesof publicassetsin not justto ineffectualbut to counterproductive
outcomes.
the market,would signal a form of simplification. Similarly,
The injunctionis not merelyto learnbargainingskills. In the
administrativereorganizationscould reducecross-institutional world of networks,the resultsof dyadicnegotiations(between
interdependence
for selectedpolicysectors. It is possiblethough publicorganization
and its contractedagent,for instance)maybe
perhapsnot likelythatsomecurrentreformssuchas the Unfunded decisivelyinfluencedby backgroundor defaultconditionsestabMandateControlAct of 1995 mayslowthe growthsubstantially. lishedthroughdecisionsamongpartieselsewherein the network(a
Despitecontrarysentimentsand certaineffortsto unwindthe socialservicescoordinating
council,a consolidationamongprivate
networkspring,the emergenceof networksin publicmanagement firmsin the service-provision
sector).
is not a passingfad. Data suggestthatthesearrayshaveexpanded
The practicalagendawouldseemto include,then, the followbeyondthe smallclustersthathavebeenthe focusof discussionin ing points as first stepsfor public administrators
operatingin a
intergovernmental
management
andcontractadministration.Sev- networkedworld:
Practical
andResearch-Based
Agendas
Practicaland Research-Based
Agendasin PublicAdministration
47
1. Administrators
shouldnot assumethattheypossessauthority;
influence.
givingdirectives
mayactually
weaken
alltheevidence
that
networks
areimportantfor
of theirnet2. Administrators
shouldconductregular
self-surveys
of theirprincipal
to makea roughinventory
work(s)
contingen- public
most
administration,
ofthediscussion
ofthis
ciesandalliances.Theyneedto be alertto thefactthattheir
networks
mayextendbeyondtheset of immediate
interaction subject
has
been
vague.
administrators
shouldsuppartners.Fornetwork
surveillance,
portboundary-spanning
units,whichcanbeamongthefirstto these developmentshavenot penetratedvery much of the work
becutin toughtimes.
beingdone on publicmanagement.A few importantexceptions
to identifycoor- arediscussedbelow.
shouldlookforopportunities
3. Administrators
comdinationpointsforthefullsetof actorsin thenetwork:
Beyondtheseconceptualissues,but closelyrelatedto them,lies
thatservemostinterests a set of fundamental
monground,practices,
or procedures
tasksrequiringsustainedattention.
descriptive
in thearray.
At leastthreekindsof effortsarewarranted:
represented
(1) determiningwhat
4. Administrators
shouldconsider
twoadditional
linesof potential networks,and what kinds of networks,can be found in today's
influence:
administrative
settings;(2) examiningthe historicaldimensionof
a. Actwithinthenetwork
to movetheclusterof actorstoward networkformationand development;and (3) exploringthe array
of program
in theinterests
success.Useinfor- of networksin a broadlycomparative
cooperation
perspective.
of preferred
mationto heightenthesalience
choices;
convey The firsttask,describingwhatis out therein the worldof conknowledge
abouthowcooperation
canserveinterests
of the temporarypublicadministration,
is morechallengingthanmaybe
andfocusparticipants'
others;honorconfidences;
percep- apparent. The systematicinformationneeded to ascertainthe
tionsonelements
crucial
forsuccess.Network
managementprominenceof networksis not now available.Carefulaccountsof
involves
tryingto buildtrustamongtheparticipating
parties the full arrayof nationalprogramsfor theirnetworkfeaturesand
the worldsof most middlemanagersfor network-based
(O'Toole,
1995).
behavior,
b. Actto alterthe network
structure
towarda morefavorableforexample,needto be a partof the researchagenda.Whatvariaon program
out- tions can be documented?Whatfurtherconceptualdevelopment
array.The influenceof suchstructures
comesis not well understood.However,someobvious would seem to be suggested?What do these findingsmean for
pointscanbe used:findwaysto shiftnetwork
membershipmanagers?Whatproportionsof theirtime andresourcesarespent
toward
moresupportive
locatekeyalliesatcrucial in the networkas opposedto the hierarchy?Whatdistinctivetasks
coalitions;
to heighten doestheirnetworkinginvolve?
nodes;tryto alteragreements
amongtheparties
to limit
program
andbufferwell-functioning
salience;
arrays
Second,describingnetworksin historicaltermscan offerideas
andcomplexity.
uncertainty
regarding
the causes,as well as consequences,
of networks.There
Howto turnnetwork
asit develops,
intopractical, has beensome disagreement,
knowledge,
often implicit,overexplanationsfor
usefulinformation
is the nubof the issue. Preliminary
studies the emergenceof such structures.Europeansocialscientists,in
havebegunto raisethequestion
of management
in a net- particular,have claimedbroadlythat increasednetworkingis a
practice
workedworld.Forexample,
Stoker(1991)offerssuggestions
for consequenceof challengesfound in "latewelfarestates"(Scharpf,
thatruncounterto old chestnuts
practice
of managerial
lore. He 1977; Offe, 1984).5 Othersclaimthat networksarenot particuarguesconvincingly
thatthe complexity
anduncertainty
in net- larlynew. Onlycarefulhistoricalresearchandmorecontemporary
workscan presentimposingbarriersto programsuccess. He longitudinalstudiescanhopeto shedlighton the issue(seeAnsell,
thatonewayof lowering
believes
thesebarriers
is to usearrays
with 1993,foran interestingexample).
existingunitsthatsharea historyof cooperation
andsometrust,
Finally,mostAmericanadministrative
hasrestricted
scholarship
ratherthanto createneworganizations
(asis oftenproposed)
that itselfto the contextof the UnitedStates. Comparativeinvestigamustforgelinksanddevelopnetworkunderstandings
fromthe tions, however,are essentialfor scientificadvance(Dahl, 1947).
groundup (seealsoMandell,1990;Agranoff,1991;O'Toole, Provocative
researchon networksis conductedabroadand largely
1995).
ignoredin the U.S. publicadministration
community. German
Thesecontributions
aremerebeginnings.Moreusefuland socialscientistslink networksto welfarestate demands. Dutch
extensive
adviceis largelydependent
practical
on progress
along publicpolicyandmanagement
scholarsexplorequestionsof "steerseveral
related,
albeitdistinct,linesof research.
Themostimpor- ing" when programsoperatein networkcontexts (Hufen and
tantof thesecannowbeoutlined.
Ringeling,1990). Britishscholarsemphasizenetworksfor policy-
For
makingand implementation.Otherliteratures,
suchas studiesof
also
corporatism,
bear
on
the
network
agenda.
Do
nationalvariaThe Conceptualand DescriptiveAgenda
tionsin networkcharacteristics
signalimportantfeaturesof policy
Forall the evidencethatnetworksareimportant
for public and managementprocesses?Answeringsuch questionsrequires
mostof the discussion
administration,
of this subjecthasbeen systematiccross-national
inquiry.
vague.Helpfulstartshavebeenmadein otherfields.Inparticular,
andpublicchoicespecialists
sociologists
havedeveloped
richconceptualizations
regardingnetworks(Cook and Whitmeyer,1992; The Agendafor EmpiricalTheory
Knokeand Kuklinski,1982; Ostrom, 1990; Parks,1985). But
48
If the publicadministrative
worldis networked,how does this
PublicAdministration
Review* January/February
1997, Vol. 57, No. 1
advantages
asidefromrigor.It putsthe set of interdependencies
in
I
the
public
administrative
world
isnetworked,
how
does the foreground,not individualactorsor organizations.The full
constellation
of actors,preferences,
andstructurematters.
This emphasison the networkas a wholealsopertainsto some
recentworkofferinginsightfulnetworkanalysis.ProvanandMilward(1995) providean exampleof how theorybuildingfor public
administration
mightbe guidedby the propositionthat networks
of managerial shouldbe takenseriously.Theyhaverecentlycompletedan intenfact bearon demands,behaviors,and determinants
of networksas causal sive, four-citystudy of serviceimplementationnetworksfor the
success?Thissubjectrequiresa consideration
forcesin the administrative
setting,particularly
regardingeffects severelymentallyill. The arraysconsistin eachcaseof manyorgaon the traditionalconcernsof publicadministration,
suchas effi- nizationslinkedin complex,functionallyspecificpatterns. This
andresponsibility.
workmarksone of the firsteffortsto assessnetworkperformance
ciency,effectiveness,
equity,responsiveness,
withinPublicAdministration.
Some administra- and to link performance
Contributions
with structuralfeaturesof the networks
tive scholarshavebeenwrestlingduringthe lastseveralyearswith themselves.Networkperformance
is explainedhereby the degrees
theoreticalquestions bearingon networks. Progresshas been and typesof integration,externalcontrol,stability,and environuneven. The primeinitiativeswith relevanceto publicmanage- mentalresourcemunificenceof the arrays. Provanand Milward
ment in networkshavebeeneffortsto explorepolicyimplementa- demonstrate
thatat leastin somepolicyfields,an adequateundertion, studiesusing game theoryto model networkedstructures, standingof administrative
cannotbe achievedwithperformance
of linksbetweennetworkproperties out theorybuildingat the networklevelof analysis.
andsomerecentinvestigations
andservice-delivery
Contributions
outputs.
from OtherFields. The precedingsubsection
The field of policy implementationhas tended to focus on shows that networks have been treated seriously by some
thatits scholars researchers
withinpublicadministration.But mostof the theoretiinterorganizational
instances,so it is not surprising
havebeengrapplingwith the networkissue. Research
fromthe so- calworkhasbeendevelopedby scholarsspecializingin othersocial
calledbottom-upperspectivehas beenhelpfulin emphasizing
the sciences.
importanceof networkedactionand showingthatsucharraysare
One line of researchderivesfrom sociology,where network
not necessarilyless effective than unitary institutions. This analysishas been underdevelopment.Some effortshaveapplied
hasbeenlesshelpful,however,in the suchapproaches
approachto implementation
to investigate
policynetworks(e.g.,Pappi,Knoke,
andSabatier,1990). and Bisson, 1993), althoughtheir use for public administration
developmentof empiricaltheory(Mazmanian
Therehavebeenexceptions(forinstance,Hullwith Hjern,1987), hasyet to emerge. Somewhatmorefamiliarmay be the resource
but additionalworkis required.
dependence/exchange
perspective.Thisworkhasprovenusefulfor
Some researchby implementationtheoristsand others has understanding
patternsof serviceprovision. Moreadaptationto
focused on game theory for understandingnetworkedsettings the networkleveland to publicadministration
could provehelp(Stoker,1991). Lynn(1993) has usedgametheoryto modelmul- ful.
tileveldynamicsin socialserviceagencies(seealsoKoremenosand
Potentiallyimportanttheoreticalwork has been developing
Lynn, 1996). Unfortunately,it cannot reallybe said that this from economicsas well. One varietyis game theory,discussed
approachmodelsnetworks;Lynntreatsoccupantsof differentlev- above.Anotheris transaction
costseconomics,whichis beginning
els in the same hierarchyas the interdependentplayers. The to receive attention in public administration (Maser, 1986;
approachdoes include clients, so the analysisdemonstratesthe Thompson, 1993; and Horn, 1995). A third is public choice,
potentialfor largerconstellations.However,it might be argued where provocativework is being done by scholarslike Elinor
that thesemodelsaremisspecifiedin the oppositefashionthan is Ostrom(1990), who has combineda public-choiceperspective
the case for conventionaltreatments.Most analystsassumethat with the analytical
strengthof gametheoryto modelnonhierarchimanagersoccupyrungsin a hierarchical
ladderanddownplayhori- cal collective action efforts involving multiple actors, diverse
zontalties,whereasLynntreatsverticalinteractions
as if theycon- arrangements,and varyingconditions. She has combinedthis
sist of bargainingamongformalequals,thusignoringthe inherent workwith a massivereviewof evidenceregardingcommon-pool
powerdifferential.
resourcemanagement
aroundthe world,with the aim of building
The broaderpoint is that formalmodelsof networkedaction robustinductivetheory. In a complementary
effort,she has initimustcombineboththe verticalelementsof hierarchy
andthehori- ated an experimentalprojectto seek answersto how individuals
zontal components of functionally induced interdependence self-organize
to solvecollective-action
problems(Ostrom,Gardner,
(O'Toole,1993). As suggestedbelow,someworkbasedin public andWalker,1994). Findingsindicatethatsuccessfulnetworkperchoice has also offeredways of approachingthe modelingissue, formanceis relatedto such featuresas group size and stability
but here, too, the perspectiveis limited by the omissionof any (smallerand morestableclustersare,ceteris
paribus,moresuccesshierarchical
component.At a minimum,hierarchies
embeddedin ful), long-term perspectives,and levels of trust in the array
or complicatingthe networkgamemightbe includedby modeling (Ostrom,1990, 211). AlthoughOstromhaslittle interestin publinks between the networkgame and one or more others (the lic administration
perse, thisworkoffersinsightsinto the kindsof
employmentgame, the promotiongame, the agencygame) in circumstances
in whichmorecomplex,networkedpatternsmight
whichsuperiorshold manymorecardsthando subordinates.
deliverdesiredoutputsover extendedperiodsof time (for more
Despite its weaknessesas an approach,game theory offers directtiesto publicadministration,
seeTang,1991).
thisfact
bear
ondemands,
and
behaviors,
determinants
of
managerial
success?
Practicaland Research-Based
Agendasin PublicAdministration
49
NeedswithinPublicAdministration
Specialties.Treatingnet- conditions?Whatcan and shouldbe the implicationsfor public
worksseriouslyalso meansreconsidering
manyotherperspectives management?Basicissuesof publicinterest,the roleof the state,
thathavebeenbroughtto bearon the administrative
task. Justas andethicalactionaswellasthe normsto be usedas assessment
crithe specialtyof organizational
behavior,for example,has analyzed teriamay all haveto be reconsidered.The issueis not so much
the microlevelbehavioraldimensionsof management,
it is appro- whetherthe criteriaand issuesstill apply. Rather,the verymeanpriateto considerhow a microanalysis
of networkaction might ings of the normativestandardsare calledinto question. What
proceed. In particular,in what ways does this behaviordepart does accountability
amountto in thoroughlynetworkedsettings?
fromexpectations
derivedfromwithin-agency
approaches?
Treatingnetworksseriouslycompelsa respecification
of normative
Otherspecialtiescan also be informedby the propositionthat concepts and a reexaminationof the fundamentalsof public
networksshouldbe treatedseriously.Numerousresearch
issuesfor administrative
ethicsandpolitics.
humanresourcemanagementarepromptedby the networkphenomenon. In a recent article, "The Network Society,"Peter
Implications
forResearch
Drucker(1995) documentsthe continuingtrendtowardemployment both in governmentand elsewhereof contractors,
part-time
Someof the dearestramifications
for research
can be highlightemployees,and temporaries. As Druckernotes (8), "relations ed as thefollowingsuggestions:
betweenorganizations
themselvesarechanging... fast. The most 1. Undertakesystematicresearchto explorethe descriptivequesvisibleexampleis 'outsourcing,'
in whicha company,hospital,or
tions on the networkagenda. How muchof managers'time,
governmentagencyturnsoveran entireactivityto an independent
effort,and contingencieslie in or aredevotedto networkconfirmspecializing
in thatkindof work."The theme,in effect,is the
texts? Which kindsof managers,in which governmentsand
personnelmanagementcorollaryof the "hollowingof the state."
policyfields?Whatshiftscan be documented?Whatdo manWhathappensto theoriesof workmotivationwherepublicmanagersactuallydo to dealwith and seek influencewithin their
agersfind themselvessupervisinga changingcastof temporaryor
network(s)?
contractemployeesratherthancareercivilservants?How do man- 2. Shiftunitsand/orlevelsof analysisto the network. This sugagersbuild consensus and support in a literalgovernmentof
gestioncould undergirdany of severalapproaches.Research
strangers,to borrowHeclo's(1977) term originallycoined for a
aimedat investigating
programs,policyproblems,or relatively
muchmorelimitedstratum?Whataboutmanagerial
goalsof repstabledustersof organizations
mightbe apropos,dependingon
resentativeness
andthe buildingof a distinctiveagencyculture?6
the research
question.Scholarship
aimedat exploringadminisForpublicbudgetingandfinancenetworkedpublicadministratrationat the intersectionof relatedand well-definedpolicy
tion raisesnew questionsand requirestheoreticalreformulation. fieldsis alsolikelyto be productive.
An obvioustopic is theory regardingfiscalinstrumentssuch as 3. Addressbothconceptualandtheoreticalagendasby identifying
contracting, loans and loan guarantees, debt, and in-kind
dimensionsof networkstructurethat mayhelp to explainand
exchanges.Most of thesetopicshavemadeinroadsin the literamediateprogramand servicedeliveryresults. In particular,
ture, but solid theoryremainsscarce. Furthermore,
ideasabout
developand test theoreticalideasthat emphasizenetworkfeahow the structureof resourceflowsinfluencespublicmanagement
turesin explainingprogramor servicedeliveryresults.Do cerand decision-makingare also needed (Porter,1973; Provanand
tain strategiesand tacticsof networkmanagementas practiced
Milward,1995).
by publicadministrators
seemto be relatedto successfulresults
fromthe standpointof the managers'
responsibilities?
4. To concentrateemphasison some highlynetworkedcontexts,
The Normative Agenda
devoteattentionto thosepolicyproblemsthat exhibitmarked
Thereis a need for scholarshipon normativeissues. Unfortudeviationfromthe stableand nearlydecomposable
issuesformnately,despitethe crucialcharacter
of thissubject,the presentartiing the strongestjustification for hierarchy. Examplesof
cle can do no more than suggestthat it be considereda central
promisingresearchtargetsincludeinternational
programs,selftopicforfuturework.
and community-organized
efforts,and complexpublic-private
Normativetheoryis a subjectthat has hardlybeen introduced
initiatives.
into the networksdialogueas of yet. Thereis a doubleironyhere. 5. Addressperennialissuesof normativetheorywith a sensitivity
The fieldof ethicaltheoryhasdevotedverylittleattentionto orgato the networktheme. This suggestionincludesconsidering
nizationalas opposedto individualethicalquestions,so ethicistsin
howto translate
someof the mostenduringnormativeconcepts
publicadministration
typicallyrelyeitheron analysesdesignedfor
into notionsthathavemeaningin theselargerarrays.
quitedifferentsettingsthanthosefacingpublicmanagers,or they
mustworkfromthe few effortsaimedparticularly
at the bureaucraticcontext(Burke,1986;Thompson,1980).
Even the scarcework done on public-organizational
settings
If the theses in this articleare accepted-that networksare
mayhavelimitedbearingon the networkedworldof manypublic increasinglybecomingimportantcontextsfor publicadministramanagers.Takethe topicof diffusionof responsibility,
a matterof tion andthatnetworkedsettingsaredifferentin respectsthatmatconcernfor public-sectorethicists. Do networkscatalyzetenden- terforthe conductof administration-thenthe set of agendasoutcies for furtherdiffusion,or do they encouragemoreresponsible lined here must be consideredsalient. Public administration
conduct and consciousness? What kinds of networks? Under what shouldattendto severaltypesof network-focused
researchefforts,
Conclusion
50
PublicAdministration
Review* January/February
1997, Vol. 57, No. I
a void in scholarship.Each
or redressing
eachaimedat addressing
agendaimpliessustained,creative,and systematicresearch.Each
and realistic,albeit
can help to craftthe basisof a more-informed
complex,publicadministration.
LaurenceJ. O'Toole,Jr., is a professorin the Departmentof
Political Science and a researchassociate in the Institute of
Communityand AreaDevelopmentat the Universityof Georgia. He is author,coauthor,or editor of six books and many
articleson publicadministrationand publicpolicy. His current
researchfocuses primarilyon issues of intergovernmentaland
interorganizationalpolicy implementation, and he has contributedwidelyto studieson environmentalpolicy and management.
Acknowledgement
An earlierversionof this articlewaspresentedat the PublicAffairsWorkshop,RobertM. LaFolletteInstituteof PublicAffairs,the
andthe refereesfor PARaregrateful26 April1995. Helpfulcommentsby theworkshopparticipants
Universityof Wisconsin-Madison,
ly acknowledged.
Notes
aretreatedsynonymously
andpublicadministration
1. Publicmanagement
5.
here.
that
treatments
demonstrating
2. Note, however,recentrigoroustheoretical
patcannotbe expectedto reachstable,efficientproduction
hierarchies
holds(seeMiller, 6.
of neardecomposability
ternsevenwhentheassumption
1992).
3. Fora recentdiscussionof this set of issues,includingsomeinstitutional
seeChisholm(1995).
policyproblems,
forill-structured
implications
4. Recently,the themehasbecomemoreprominent(Skok,1995;LaPorte,
for the
1996;Milward,1996). It is to be hopedthatthesearguments
will be folfor administration
of the networkphenomenon
importance
work.
andscholarly
practical
lowedbyadditional
emergesas teninterdependence
Offe (1984)wouldsaythatnetworked
developin the broaderpoliticaleconomy.Netsionsandcontradictions
workscanbea wayof tryingto stitchtogethertherendingsocialfabric.
dynamicsmaybe helpful,as well,to identify
Modelinghumanresource
of recruitment,
mobility,andpromotionastheydevelchannels
persistent
op andchangein complexsettings. Foran attemptto employvacancy
contextquite
in a personnel
chainanalysisto identifysuchcharacteristics
seeUrban(1989).
publicadministration,
unlikethatfoundforAmerican
References
VUGA.
Pastand Present
Agranoff,Robert(1991). "HumanServicesIntegration:
Review51 Hull,Chris,withBennyHjern(1987). HelpingSmallFirmsGrow.London:
PublicAdministration
in PublicAdministration."
Challenges
CroomHelm.
1-11.
(November/December):
for CluesaboutPublicManagement:
Ansell,Christopher(1993). "FrenchWorkersbetweenPartiesandUnits, Kettl,DonaldF. (1993). "Searching
SlicingtheOnionDifferentWays."In BarryBozeman,ed., PublicManof Chicago.
1872-1922."Ph.D.diss.,University
TheStateoftheArt. SanFrancisco:
55-68.
Baltimore:
JohnsHopResponsibility.
Jossey-Bass,
Burke,JohnP. (1986). Bureaucratic
agement:
Analysis.NewburyPark,
Knoke,D., andJ. H. Kuklinski(1982). Network
Press.
kinsUniversity
CA:Sage.
Chisholm,Donald (1995). "ProblemSolvingand InstitutionalDesign."
of a
Barbara,
and LaurenceE. Lynn,Jr. (1996). "Leadership
Research
and Theory
5 (October):451- Koremenos,
Journalof PublicAdministration
StateAgency:AnAnalysisUsingGameTheory."In DonaldF. Kettland
491.
Baltimore:
H. BrintonMilward,eds., TheStateof PublicManagement.
to SocialStruc(1992). "TwoApproaches
Cook,K. S. andJ. M. Whitmeyer
Press,213-240.
JohnsHopkinsUniversity
AnnualReviewofSocioloTheoryandNetworkAnalysis."
ture:Exchange
LaPorte,Todd R. (1996). "ShiftingVantageand ConceptualPuzzlesin
gy 18:109-127.
Networks."Journalof Public
ThreeProbUnderstandingPublicOrganizational
Dahl,RobertA. (1947). "TheScienceof PublicAdministration:
Research
6 January),
andTheory,
49-74.
Administration
Review
7 winter:1-11.
lems."PublicAdministration
DiIulio,JohnJ., Jr. and DonaldF. Kettl(1995). FinePrint:TheContract Levine,CharlesH., B. GuyPeters,andFrankJ. Thompson(1990). Public
Glenview,IL:Scott,
FedRealities
Administration:
Challenges,
Choices,Consequences.
andtheAdministrative
withAmerica,
Devolution,
ofAmerican
Brown.
Foresman/Little,
DC:CenterforPublicManeralism.Report95-1, March.Washington,
andtheDifGovernment:
Federal
Hierarchy
Light,PaulC. (1995). Thickening
Institution.
agement,Brookings
Institution.
Washington,
DC:Brookings
Journal
Drucker,PeterF. (1995). "TheNetworkSociety."TheWallStreet
fusionofAccountability.
as a CollectiveGood:A
E.,Jr.(1993). "PolicyAchievement
Lynn,Laurence
Europe.
30 March,8.
In BarryBozeman,
on Managing
SocialPrograms."
Perspective
ManStrategic
of Environmental
Context
Hanf,KennethI. (1994). TheInternational
TheStateof theArt. SanFrancisco:
Jossey-Bass,
The
ed., PublicManagement:
from theNegotiatingTableto theShopFloor. Breukelen,
agement
Press.
NijenrodeUniversity
108-133.
Netherlands:
DC: Brook- Mandell,MyrnaP. (1990). "NetworkManagement:
StrategicBehaviorin
Washington,
of Strangers.
Heclo,Hugh(1977). A Government
the PublicSector."In RobertW. Gageand MyrnaP. Mandell,eds.,
ings Institution.
Armonk,NY:M.
Policiesand Networks.New
for ManagingIntergovernmental
Strategies
Hill,LarryB., ed. (1992). TheStateofPublicBureaucracy.
York:Praeger,
E. Sharpe.
29-53.
of PublicAdministration:Maser,StevenM. (1986). "Transaction
In
Costsin PublicAdministration."
Horn, MurrayJ. (1995). ThePoliticalEconomy
University
Choice
in thePublicSector.NewYork:Cambridge
Institutional
andGovernmental
DonaldCalista,ed., Bureaucratic
Reform.Greenwich,
Press.
CT:JAI,55-72.
The Hague: Mazmanian,
andPublic
Hufen,Hans,andArthurRingeling(1990). Beleidsnetwerken.
(1990). Implementation
Daniel,andPaulA. Sabatier
Practical
andResearch-Based
Agendas
in PublicAdministration
51
Policy.Rev.ed. Washington,
DC:University
Pressof America.
Porter,DavidO. (1973). ThePoliticsofBudgeting
FederalAid:
Resource
MobiMiller,GaryJ. (1992). Managerial
Dilemmas:
ThePoliticalEconomy
lizationbyLocalSchool
of HierDistricts.BeverlyHills,CA:Sage.
archy.Cambridge:
Cambridge
University
Press.
Pressman,
Jeffrey,andAaronWildavsky(1984). Implementation.
3rd ed.
Milward,
H. Brinton,ed. (1996). Symposium
on "TheHollowState:CapacBerkeley:
University
of California
Press.
ity,ControlandPerformance
in Interorganizational
Settings."Journalof Provan,KeithG., andH. BrintonMilward(1995). "APreliminary
Theory
PublicAdministration
Research
andTheory
6 (April):193-313.
of NetworkEffectiveness:
A Comparative
Studyof FourMentalHealth
Milward,H. BrintonandKeithG. Provan(1993). "TheHollowState:PriSystems."
Administrative
Science
40 (March):
Quarterly
1-33.
vateProvisionof PublicServices."In HelenIngramandS. R. Smith, Rittel,HorstW. J., andMelvinWebber(1973). "Dilemmas
in a General
eds., PublicPolicyfor Democracy.
Washington,DC: BrookingsInstituTheoryof Planning."
PolicySciences
4 (June):155-169.
tion,222-237.
Scharpf,
FritzW. (1977). "PublicOrganization
andtheWaningof theWelOffe,Claus(1984). Contradictions
of theWelfare
State.JohnKeane,ed. LonfareState:A Research
Perspective."
European
JournalofPoliticalResearch
don:Hutchinson.
5: 239-278.
Osborne,David,andTed Gaebler(1992). Reinventing
Government:
Howthe Simon,Herbert
A. (1976). Administrative
Behavior.
3rded. New York:Free
Entrepreneurial
Spiritis Transforming
thePublicSector.Reading,MA:
Press.
Addison-Wesley.
Skok,JamesE. (1995). "PolicyIssueNetworksandthe PublicPolicyCycle:
Ostrom,Elinor(1990). Governing
the Commons.Cambridge:
Cambridge
A Structural-Functional
Framework
for PublicAdministration."
Public
Press.
University
Administration
Review
55 (July-August):
325-332.
Ostrom,Elinor,RoyGardner,
andJamesWalker(1994). Rules,Games,
and Stoker,Robert(1991). Reluctant
Partners.Pittsburgh,
PA: Universityof
Common-Pool
Resources.
AnnArbor:University
of MichiganPress.
Pittsburgh
Press.
O'Toole,Laurence
J., Jr. (1993). "Multiorganizational
PolicyImplementa- Tang,ShuiYan(1991). "Institutional
Arrangements
andtheManagement
of
tion:SomeLimitations
and Possibilities
for RationalChoiceContribuCommon-PoolResources."PublicAdministration
Review51 Januarytions." In FritzW. Scharpf,ed., Gamesin Hierarchies
andNetworks.
February):
42-51.
Frankfurt
amMain/Boulder,
CO:CampusVerlag/Westview,
1-39.
Thompson,DennisF. (1980). "Moral
of PublicOfficials:
Responsibility
The
, (1995). "Rational
ChoiceandPolicyImplementation:
ImplicaProblemof ManyHands."American
PoliticalScience
Review74 (DecemtionsforInterorganizational
NetworkManagement."
American
Reviewof
ber):905-916.
PublicAdministration
25 (March):
43-57.
Thompson,Fred(1993). "Matching
Responsibilities
withTactics:AdminisPappi,FranzUrban,DavidKnoke,and SusanneBisson(1993). "InformatrativeControlsandModernGovernment."
PublicAdministration
Review
tion Exchange
in PolicyNetworks."In FritzW. Scharpf,ed., Gamesin
53 (July-August):
303-318.
Hierarchies
and Networks.Frankfurt
am Main/Boulder,
CO: Campus Urban,Michael(1989). AnAlgebraof SovietPower:EliteCirculation
in the
Verlag/Westview,
287-313.
Belorussian
Republic,
1966-86 Cambridge:
Cambridge
Press.
University
Parks,RogerB. (1985). "Metropolitan
Structure
andSystemicPerformance:Wamsley,
GaryL.,RobertN. Bacher,CharlesT. Goodsell,PhilipS. KronenTheCaseof PoliceServiceDelivery."In KennethI. HanfandTheoA.J.
berg,JohnA. Rohr,CamillaM. Stivers,OrionF. White,andJamesF.
Toonen,eds., PolicyandImplementation
in Federal
and UnitarySystems.
Wolf (1990). Refounding
PublicAdministration.
NewburyPark,CA:
Dordrecht:
Martinus
Nijhoff,161-191.
Sage.
52
PublicAdministration
Review* January/February
1997,Vol.57,No. I