Barros de Oliveira, N R (2013) A theory of coordination voids in dynamic inter-organisational relationships: a study of social housing projects in England. PhD thesis, London School of Economics and Political Science, UK.
Abstract
Inter-organisational relationships are at the heart of economic activity and the benefits of inter-organisational collaboration are widely reported. However, theoretical understanding of how inter-organisational relationships are coordinated and why they encounter coordination problems remains limited. I address these questions through a study of seven social housing projects in England, completed between 2008 and 2011. Drawing on the richness of data from over 3,900 pages of minutes from meetings and project reports, I integrate social network analysis techniques (SNA) used to map dynamic inter-organisational relationships with content analysis, through which I explore coordination-related aspects. Surprisingly, coordination proved not to be (directly) related to administrative mechanisms. Instead, I show that coordination stems from the interplay between administrative mechanisms and the structure of the inter-organisational relationships, as shown by two theoretical mechanisms: organising and relating. The former captures the finding that the use of contracting fosters hierarchy, while the latter shows that monitoring organisations foster density of inter-organisational relationships. I discover that inter-organisational relationships are coordinated through the juggling of these mechanisms over time. Furthermore, my analysis demonstrates that coordination problems stem from: contractual bottlenecks and organisational expertise-driven homophily. Interestingly, this exposes a tension between mechanisms intended to aid coordination and the manifestation of coordination problems. Theorising on this tension, I am led to a framework of coordination voids – discontinuities in the fabric of inter-organisational relationships resulting from mechanisms intended to aid coordination, but in fact hampering coordination under certain conditions. I discuss a set of theoretical contributions to the strategic management and organisational and management theory, alongside a methodological contribution. I conclude my discussion of the contributions of this thesis by drawing practical implications for managers and policy-makers. I hope that my study will stimulate a research agenda on the coordination of inter-organisational relationships, preferably one that also engages with societal challenges.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | collaboration; content analysis; contracting; coordination; England; housing projects; management theory; network analysis; policy; social network analysis; strategic management |
| Index terms: | coordination, social housing, heart, economic activity, monitoring, density, network analysis, England, management theory, collaboration, strategic management, housing project, social network analysis, drawing, content analysis, theorizing, manager, research agenda |
| Subjects: | data science, data analysis and analytics, technical documentation, control systems, management, analytical methods, economic analysis, practitioner, housing and residential development, research management, Geography, medical science and clinical practice, research methods |
| Topics: | Geographical Context, Health and Safety, Design Practice, Urban Studies, Site Management, Organizational Design, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Roles and Professions |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here