ICT as integrative mechanism for the management of inter-organizational processes in the public sector

ICT as integration mechanism for the management of inter- organizational processes in the public sector

Thesis

Course Master’s Thesis Technology & Operations Management Faculty Faculty of Economics and Business

Student Julian Bolink

Student number S3762076

Academic supervisor A.P. Seepma MSc (PhD candidate at Department of Operations) Co-assessor prof. dr. D.P. van Donk

Date 22-6-2020

Word count 11.585

ICT as integrative mechanism for the management of inter-organizational processes in the public sector

Course Faculty

Student

Student number

Academic supervisor Co-assessor

Date

Word count

Master’s

ABSTRACT

Purpose: To date it remains unknown in the literature what the effect of information and communication technology (ICT) is on inter-organizational integration in the public sector context. On the contrary, this effect is already known for private sector context. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to explore the effect of ICT on inter-organizational integration within public service networks and to better understand the role of public sector characteristics in this.

Design/methodology/approach: This study used a case study approach in which a deductive and an inductive approach were combined. For the deductive approach the necessary literature has been consulted. The basis for the inductive approach was formed by six interviews divided over two different public service networks.

Findings: It was found that in both networks the public sector characteristics honesty and transparency are highly valued, since these facilitate openness in information sharing through ICT.

However, it was found that the political factors and cultural differences greatly influence the degree to which these aspects could be expressed. Nevertheless, it was found that ICT still had a positive influence on inter-organizational integration.

Research implications: This study implies that ICT is used as an integrative mechanism in the public sector context.

Keywords: Information systems, Integration, Public sector, Service, Networks, Case studies

1. INTRODUCTION

Over the past decades public organizations have had difficulties with effectively implementing information & communication technology (ICT) systems for the management of intra-organizational processes (Karwan & Markland, 2006; Dawes, 2008; Sandhu, Jain & Ahmad, 2011; Nawi, Rahman &

Ibrahim, 2011). ICT could be defined as technologies which are utilised for gathering, manipulating, accessing, and presenting or communicating information, where these technologies could include hardware, software applications, and connectivity (Toomey, 2001). There are many examples of cases where public organizations have tried to implement ICT except without the desired effect (Consultancy, 2017; Geest, 2012; Kepinski, 2010; Phlippen, 2018; Wijsman, 2019). Since public sector organisations face challenges with the implementation of ICT intra-organizationally this might also affect how ICT is used inter-organizationally. However, how the management of inter- organizational processes through ICT within the public sector emerges is not fully understood yet (Seepma, de Blok & Van Donk, 2020) and will be further explored in this study.

Current literature about ICT in the public sector mainly focusses on the maturity and evolution of ICT in a customer-government relationship setting (Cordella & Iannacci, 2010; Fishenden & Thompson, 2013; Weerakkody et al., 2006; Karwan & Markland, 2006; Cordella & Bonina, 2012; Andersen et al., 2010). However, it does not elaborate specifically on how ICT is used in inter-organizational collaboration (Seepma, de Blok & Van Donk, 2020).

Research shows that in the private sector ICT contributes significantly to effective inter-organizational collaboration (Li et al., 2009; Prajogo & Olhager, 2012; Narasimhan & Kim, 2001; Soliman &

Youssef, 2001). Collaboration, coordination and cooperation are terms that are often used more or less interchangeably to describe integrative efforts between partners in a supply chain, i.e. supply chain integration (SCI) (Prajogo & Olhager, 2012). SCI is a mechanism that is used for the management of inter-organizational processes Leuschner, Rogers & Charvet (2013). SCI could be defined as the degree to which an organization strategically collaborates with its supply chain partners and collaboratively manages intra- and inter-organizational processes (Flynn, Huo & Zhao, 2010, p. 59).

Public organizations collaborate in public service supply chains, also known as public service networks. Within these networks public organizations collaborate towards a common goal and provide a shared service towards the general public. Li et al. (2009) mention that SCI needs to be achieved across organizational boundaries by linking the organization to external suppliers. This could also be

referred to as inter-organizational integration, which recognizes the importance of establishing close, interactive relationships with external organizations in the supply chain (Flynn, Huo & Zhao, 2010).

Besides the relevance of inter-organizational integration in the private sector, ample researches also point out the relevance of inter-organizational integration in the public sector (Yang & Maxwell, 2011;

Karwan & Markland, 2006; Cordella & Tempini, 2015; Pang, Lee & DeLone, 2014; Weerakkody et al., 2006; Yap & Tan, 2012; Gil-Garcia, Pardo & Burke, 2010). Cordella & Tempini (2015) for instance argue in their paper that the need for integration practices within the public sector has increased, which implies that the public sector could also benefit from inter-organizational integration.

Except, to what extend and how inter-organizational integration is influenced by ICT still remains largely unknown, since there has not yet been extensively elaborated on these phenomena in the literature. Nevertheless, there are researchers that have intersections with these phenomena. Pang, Lee

& DeLone (2014) have elaborated on inter-organizational systems integration in the public sector, which is part of ICT and inter-organizational integration. However, they merely provide a proposition on its importance, but do not provide a comprehensive empirical analysis on how ICT affects inter- organizational integration in the public context. Despite the lack of knowledge on the use of ICT as an integrative mechanism in the public sector, it is expected that ICT could also be used as an integrative mechanism in this sector.

However, the way in which this is done might differ from the private sector. This is based on their difference in characteristics, where they differ in terms of goals, environment and in political influences (Willem & Buelens, 2007). Following from the difference in characteristics between the two sectors this study argues that inter-organizational integration with regard to ICT is expected to need different management mechanisms. Therefore this research will contribute to the literature on inter-organizational integration in the public sector. Thereby this research provides insight into how ICT could be used as an integrative mechanism for the management of inter-organizational processes.

Following from the latterly mentioned information the following research question has been developed:

“

How does ICT affect the degree of inter-organizational integration within public service networks?

” This research has an explorative nature in which two different public service networks will be investigated; the educational network and the water safety network. The unit of analysis is inter- organizational relationships, where within each network two of these relationships will be analysed.

Most concepts of inter-organizational integration explicitly acknowledge the existence of two flows through a network; (1) a flow of goods, and of equal importance, (2) a flow of information (Prajogo &

Olhager, 2012). This research will mainly focus on the flow of information, since this is considered the main source of power and authority of organizations in the public sector (Yang & Maxwell, 2011) and since this is strongly related to ICT.

In the next sections the paper will go further in-depth on the theoretical background of the characteristics of the public sector, ICT and inter-organizational integration. Subsequently there will be elaborated on the methodology that is used to answer the portrayed research question. Further this will be followed by the results, discussion of the results and ending with a conclusion.

2. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

Within this chapter the characteristics of the public sector are theoretically discussed to clearly illustrate the difference between the private and public sector. Subsequently different types of public organizations are specified to indicate how ICT and inter-organizational integration may differ across the various types of public organizations. Following, it will be discussed how ICT might be used as an integrative mechanism for inter-organizational processes. Thereby looking at the capabilities of ICT and what is known so far in the private context, which might be relevant for the public context.

Finally, theory is brought together in a research framework that will be used as guidance for data collection and data structuring and analysis.

Leading theories within this chapter are Willem & Buelens (2007), Yang & Maxwell (2011), Cordella

& Tempini (2015), and Prajogo & Olhager (2012). They provide a comprehensive analysis on the characteristics of the public sector and on collaboration within this sector. Next to that, the study of Leuschner, Rogers & Charvet (2013) provides a categorisation of SCI types, which is adopted for identifying the degree of inter-organizational integration in the public sector and how inter- organizational integration might enable SCI through these types subsequently.

2.1 C

Difference between public sector & private organizations

Public organizations differ in several aspects compared to private sector organizations (Willem

& Buelens, 2007; Andrews, Boyne & Walker, 2011). One of the conventional contrasts that is perceived between public and private organizations is the way in which they are owned (Rainey et al., 1976). Private organizations are owned by individual and institutional shareholders, where public organizations are owned collectively by political communities (Andrews, Boyne & Walker, 2011).

The main incentive of shareholders in the private sector is generally of an economic nature, where efficiency and profitability form the main criteria for decision-making in the private sector. In contrast to that, it is widely accepted that one of the key features of public services is that the underlying rationale behind their provision cannot solely be framed in economic terms (Graham, 1994).

Therefore, these criteria are insufficient for generating acceptable and implementable decisions in the public sector (Marsh & Schilling, 1994). Leading decision-making factors in the public sector are political considerations of social justice (i.e. fairness), legitimacy (i.e. honesty), transparency and equity (Laing, 2003; Berman, 1998; Willem & Buelens, 2007; Karwan & Markland, 2006; Marsh

& Schilling, 1994; Cordella & Bonina, 2012). Politics within the public sector is a moral undertaking and efficiency comes second to what is right or good for the social community (Laing, 2003). These differences between public and private sector organizations result in an ambiguity of goals, a difference in environment, and a difference in political influences (Willem & Buelens, 2007).

Public organizations often try to maintain their values through the implementation of a bureaucratic organizational structure (Cordella & Bonina, 2012; Cordella & Tempini, 2015). This is one of the most appearing characteristics in public organizations (Ashworth, Boyne & Walker, 2002).

Bureaucracies have historically been developed as structures with the purpose to increase the efficiency in organizational operations and procedures (Cordella & Tempini, 2015). According to Weber (1958) an ideal bureaucracy is an efficient and fair organization with established administrative regulations and laws (Yang & Maxwell, 2011). However, the formal hierarchical structure of bureaucracy can create barriers that impede information sharing activities of an organization (Creed, Douglas & Miles, 1996; Tsai, 2002). Wheatley (2006) points out that information flows in organizations that have a bureaucratic organizational structure are strictly controlled. As a result, organizational members often have limited access to information, which hampers sharing of information and knowledge (Yang & Maxwell, 2011). This leads to a lack in capabilities to develop integrated solutions to problems (Yang & Maxwell, 2011). Thereby, power and authority are often centralized in higher management levels within a bureaucracy (Hall & Tolbert, 2004; Kim & Lee, 2006). Tsai (2002) also argues that a significant negative impact could be generated by centralization on the degree of knowledge sharing (Yang & Maxwell, 2011).

Different types of public organizations

Some public organizations are more bureaucratic than the other, and some focus for instance more on equity than other public organizations (Willem & Buelens, 2007). Therefore public organizations can be more or less public (Andrews, Boyne & Walker, 2011), which influences the design and subsequently the behaviour of public organizations (Willem & Buelens, 2007). Willem & Buelens (2007) made a distinction between three types of public organizations, namely government institutions, public sector institutions, and state enterprises. Each of these types of organizations is

subject to some degree of governmental regulation, which varies by industry and sector (Andrews, Boyne & Walker, 2011). Government institutions are the federal, regional and local governments, which are institutions that act as agents for the interest and access of the community. Public sector institutions are for instance schools, hospitals and public prisons which are institutions that do not act as agents for the community, but provide access to facilities and work for the whole community. At last, state enterprises operate more similar to private enterprises. Throughout the distinction between the three types of public organizations, government institutions are classified as the most public, public sector institutions as the next most public, and state enterprises as the least public (Willem

& Buelens, 2007).

Brief summary

Public organizations differ from private sector organizations in terms of characteristics, where public organizations mainly value social justice (i.e. fairness), legitimacy (i.e. honesty), transparency and equity (Laing, 2003; Berman, 1998; Willem & Buelens, 2007; Karwan & Markland, 2006; Marsh

& Schilling, 1994). This is enforced by their bureaucratic structure (Cordella & Tempini, 2015). Next to that, there are differences between public organizations in terms of publicness (Willem & Buelens, 2007), which might influence their behaviour towards inter-organizational collaboration.

2.2 ICT

The understanding of inter-organizational relationships and the improvement thereof have become more important over the past decades within the public sector (Suárez, 2011). “Networks have become part of the public sector lexicon” (Suárez, 2011, p. 308), where public organizations collaborate inter- organizationally o reach a common goal for the general public. Inter-organizational relationships within the network are dynamic, complex and difficult to predict and control (Carter, Rogers & Choi, 2015). Therefore, managing these relationships and its inter-organizational processes requires timely and accurate information sharing (Li et al., 2006) and proper operational coordination across inter- organizational relationships (Leuschner, Rogers & Charvet, 2013). With this in mind it is important to manage the information flow throughout the network (Li et al., 2009). This makes ICT a great contributor to the effectiveness and efficiency of inter-organizational collaboration (Zhang & Dawes, 2006).

ICT capabilities

ICTs are not simple tools that straightforwardly allow organizations to increase their productivity.

They comprise properties which enable them to establish the causal connection of the organizational processes, practises and events they mediate (Kallinikos, 2005). ICTs also map the organizational procedures and practices they intend to mediate by coupling pre-defined logical sequences of actions (Luhmann, 2005). Consequentially, the execution of organizational procedures and processes are regulated by ICTs that construct a new set of structured sequences and interdependencies (Cordella &

Tempini, 2015). Thus, ICTs support regulative properties that structure social and organizational orders, which provides a stable and standardized tool for social interaction (Kallinikos, 2005). Thereby ICT manages to achieve a specific outcome which satisfies particular requirements (Kallinikos, 2006).

This happens through selecting, extracting and isolating sequences of operations to be performed from the social world (Kallinikos, 2006). It endeavours to reduce the complexity of the real world by establishing the causal chains which are necessary to produce an output into its functionalities (Cordella & Tempini, 2015).

What is already known is that ICT plays a significant role in integrative supply chain management within the private sector (Prajogo & Olhager, 2012). ICT has the potential to manage the information flow within the network and has the capability to provide links that support communication and collaboration along the same network (Brandyberry, Rai & White, 1999; Li et al., 2006). ICT allows firms to increase the volume and complexity of the information that is necessary to be communicated with their trading partners (Prajogo & Olhager, 2012). Another reason which points out the significance of ICT in integrative supply chain management is that it allows firms to gain real-time network information (Prajogo & Olhager, 2012). This enables firms to manage and control its supply chain activities (Prajogo & Olhager, 2012). Furthermore, ICT could serve as a facilitator for the

alignment of forecasting and scheduling of operations between firms and suppliers (Prajogo &

Olhager, 2012). This allows for a better interfirm coordination (Prajogo & Olhager, 2012). Enhancing the ICT capabilities contribute to a better platform for network partners to engage in network participation, coordination and problem-solving activities (Sheu, Yen & Chae, 2006).

It is expected that ICT will also serve as an enabler for the management of inter-organizational processes in the public sector, however literature has not elaborated on this so far. The adoption of ICTs in public organizations has generally been associated with organizational transformations (Cordella & Tempini, 2015). This is done with the aim to reduce inefficiencies which are generated by bureaucratic burden and enhance policy effectiveness (Cordella & Tempini, 2015). Within this context ICTs in public organizations are deployed using private sector approaches to enhance organizational efficiency and effectiveness and consequently reduce bureaucratic burden (Cordella & Tempini, 2015). However, it remains unknown how ICT is deployed with regard to non-economic values like transparency, equality and trust (Pang, Lee & DeLone, 2014). Further, ICTs are used to support and facilitate coordination and control of bureaucratic organizations which are fundamental organizational functions (Cordella & Tempini, 2015).

ICT as inter-organizational integration mechanism

In order to get a more comprehensive understanding of how ICT could be used as an integrative mechanism, this study will explore these phenomena through the well-accepted lens of Leuschner, Rogers & Charvet (2013). They differentiate three types of SCI (i.e. inter-organizational integration):

Information integration, operational integration, and relational integration. Inter-organizational integration is the strength and scope of connections in network processes across organizations, enabling a better flow of information among network partners (Leuschner, Rogers & Charvet, 2013).

Information integration can be divided into two different aspects: (1) technical aspects, and (2) social aspects (Prajogo & Olhager, 2012). The technical aspects refer to supporting ICT among organizations in the network (Leuschner, Rogers & Charvet, 2013). Thereby the social aspects refer to the coordination of inter-organizational information sharing (Prajogo & Olhager, 2012) and collaborative communication (Leuschner, Rogers & Charvet, 2013). Public organizations should be capable to build on both of these aspects of information integration in order to meaningfully connect with network partners (Prajogo & Olhager, 2012). Thereby, one of the main purposes of information integration is to achieve real-time processing and transmission of information which is required for decision-making in the network (Prajogo & Olhager, 2012). Operational integration refers to work processes, coordinated decision-making and to the collaborative joint activity development among organizations in the network (Leuschner, Rogers & Charvet, 2013). Finally, relational integration builds on the previous two integration types and goes past activities that focus on attitudes (Leuschner, Rogers & Charvet, 2013). It refers to the appropriation of a strategic connection between organizations in the network characterized by long-term orientation, trust and commitment (Leuschner, Rogers & Charvet, 2013).

Strategic network information provides leverages to the network partner for making strategic decisions in their operations (Li et al., 2006).

Inter-organizational integration in the public sector is not an uncommon topic, since ample researchers have pointed out its relevance (Yang & Maxwell, 2011; Karwan & Markland, 2006; Cordella &

Tempini, 2015; Pang, Lee & DeLone, 2014; Weerakkody et al., 2006; Yap & Tan, 2012; Gil-Garcia, Pardo & Burke, 2010). However, since there exists a lack on research regarding inter-organizational integration in the public sector. This research focusses on how ICT could be used as an integrative mechanism and does this by differentiating through the latterly mentioned types of integration by Leuschner, Rogers & Charvet (2013).

2.3 R

:

, ICT & SCI

Given the previous, it is thus known that in the private sector ICT serves as a key enabler for inter- organizational integration. ICT does this through the sharing of important information regarding key business processes for both within and outside an organization’s boundaries (Li et al., 2006). It is expected that ICT will have the same effect on inter-organizational integration in the public sector as it has in the private sector. However, since the public sector is characterised by different values as

opposed to the private sector, this might result in a difference in terms of how ICT is used as an integrative mechanism. This is in line with the proposal for further research of Pang, Lee & DeLone (2014), where they have mentioned the importance to perform further research in exploring the ICT value in terms of non-economic, societal values such as transparency, equality and trust. Current literature is namely predominantly focused on private organizations that aim for the economic value of ICT. Thereby, the way in which these phenomena occur might differ across public organizations, since not all public organizations have the same degree of publicness (Willem & Buelens, 2007). Therefore this research will explore whether there exist any differences between organizations with different degrees of publicness. This will be done by differentiating between three types of public organizations according to Willem & Buelens (2007): government institutions, public sector institutions, and state enterprises (in the order of most to least public). An overview of the relevant phenomena that will be researched in this study is given in figure 1.

Figure 1 – Research framework

3. METHODOLOGY 3.1 R

The main purpose of this study is to identify how ICT could be used as an integrative mechanism within public service networks and to better understand the role of public sector characteristics in this phenomenon. A case study approach is used in order to gain insight into these phenomena. In doing so, this study combines a deductive and inductive approach. It starts deductively as the data collection and data analysis initially builds upon insights from theory, i.e. pre-conceptualized categories of SCI (Leuschner, Rogers & Charvet, 2013) and insights on ICT as well as pre-conceptualized public service characteristics (Laing, 2003; Berman, 1998; Willem & Buelens, 2007; Karwan & Markland, 2006;

Marsh & Schilling, 1994; Cordella & Bonina, 2012). Subsequently, as the aim of this study is to explore how ICT is used as an integrative mechanism in a public context, this study leaves room for finding new concepts, mechanisms and relationships. Thus combining the deductive approach with an inductive approach. Following from this, this case study research is very suitable for the adoption of the theory elaboration perspective (Fisher & Aguinis, 2017), where in this research there will be elaborated on the effect of ICT on inter-organizational integration in the public sector. Thereby, a case study makes it possible to study these phenomena in its natural setting which could result in generating relevant information from the understanding that is gained through investigating the actual practise (Karlsson, 2016; Benbasat, Goldstein & Mead, 1987). Finally, a case study suits this research since the phenomena are not fully understood yet in the public context as opposed to the private context.

Subsequently case study research facilitates exploratory investigations for answering questions regarding these phenomena (Karlsson, 2016; Yin, 1981).

3.2 C

In order to capture how ICT could be used as an integrative mechanism, the unit of analysis has been set to inter-organizational relationships in the public sector. These relationships have been identified within two different public sector networks, the educational network and the water safety network.

Within each network a central organization and two of its network partners have been selected. This means that there are in total four cases of inter-organizational relationships, which is in accordance with the recommended range of 4 to 10 cases for theory building research (Eisenhardt, 1989a). The reason to use multiple cases is to increase the degree of external validity of the research (Karlsson, 2016; Barratt, Choi & Li, 2011).

The chosen central organization for the educational network is a university, with a municipality and a college as two of its network partners. The municipality aims to increase the social return (i.e. hiring and educating people with a distance towards the labour market) within the tenders of the university.

Thereby, the university and the college aim to serve their customers (i.e. students) as good as possible through collaboration on a procurement level. This is done in order to enhance the quality of the services they provide to their customers. The chosen central organization for the water safety network is a water authority (1), with a regional based water authority (2) and a safety region as two of its network partners. Water authority (1) and water authority (2) manage the water resources in the region in its broadest sense. This is done to serve the inhabitants of the region where they are responsible for through for instance the supply of safe drinking water and managing crisis situations (e.g. in case of drought or flooding). Thereby the safety region helps the water authorities to reduce the risk on a crisis regarding water safety and they help to manage crisis situations regarding water safety. This is done with the aim to protect the inhabitants of the region where they are responsible for. An overview of the focal organizations and its network partners has been given in table 1. The organizations are categorised following the proposed categorisation of public sector organisations by Willem & Buelens (2007). This enables to identify any differences or similarities between these categories. Thereby, identifying two different public service networks allows for the detection of whether the findings within each network are idiosyncratic or that they are replicated across the selected network (Eisenhardt, 1991). This allows to investigate whether ICT is used in the same way and to the same degree as an integrative mechanism across each of the inter-organizational relationships (i.e. cases) within and between the two different public service networks.

Table 1 – Selected cases

Organizations Cases Categorization according to Willem & Buelens (2007)

Network

University Public sector institution Educational

- Municipality Case 1 Government institution Societal - College Case 2 Public sector institution Educational

Water authority (1) Government institution Water safety

- Water authority (2) Case 3 Government institution Water safety - Safety region Case 4 Government institution Safety

3.3 D

The data were collected by means of conducting semi-structured interviews. The interviews have been held with the subjects that are responsible for maintaining inter-organizational relationships, since these subjects in general are the most knowledgeable about how the relationships with these partners are shaped. In table 2 an overview of the functions of the interviewees has been provided. The purpose of these semi-structured interviews is to make sure that the high priority questions that have been developed beforehand are answered. A complementary purpose of this type of interview is to build in a certain flexibility to leave room for potential spontaneous situation specific questions. These might significantly contribute to the research in terms of identifying idiosyncrasies (Longhurst, 2010;

Karlsson, 2016). For each interview a predefined interview protocol has been used as a guide, which fosters the reliability and validity of the gathered data (Yin, 2009). The same questions have been asked to each interviewee and several documents have been used in order to triangulate the evidences

(Barratt, Choi & Li, 2011). This serves as a measure to increase the internal validity (Karlsson, 2016).

In Appendix A1 the interview protocol and the interview questions linked to the research specific concepts have been displayed.

Table 2 – Functions of interviewees and their working experience within the company

Organizations Interviewee Function of interviewee Years of experience within the company

University E.1 Procurement manager 9 months

- Municipality E.2 Account manager 21 years

- College E.3 Procurement manager 8 years

Water authority (1) WS.1 Crisis manager 13 years

- Water authority (2) WS.2 Crisis manager 1.5 years

- Safety region WS.3 Crisis manager 7 years

3.4 D

The interviews have been electronically recorded and were subsequently transcribed. Directly after the transcription of the interviews, the transcriptions were sent to the interviewees to invite them to comment on the transcript. This has been done to fill the information gaps in order to reduce the chance on loss of validity and reliability (Karlsson, 2016). In order to increase the transparency of the findings the gathered data has been analysed using the coding method of Miles & Huberman (1984).

This consists out of three phases: data reduction, data display and conclusion-drawing (see chapter 6).

The raw coding has been performed using the software of Atlas.ti. During the data reduction phase the interviews have first been reduced to sentences and quotes, i.e. descriptive codes, that are relevant in relation to inter-organizational ICT, the types of SCI differentiated by Leuschner, Rogers & Charvet (2013) (i.e.: information integration, operational integration and relational integration) and the characteristics of the organization under investigation. This data reduction resulted in first-order codes such as “Characteristics: bureaucracy: organization size” or “Integration: relational integration: long- term orientation”. Subsequently the data has been further reduced into interpretative codes, which form the second-order codes. Finally the interpretative codes have been clustered into patterns, i.e. the third-order codes. An example of how this was done is displayed in table 3. A more comprehensive version of the excerpt of codes can be found in appendix A2.

Table 3 – Example of data reduction (from first-order to second-order to third-order data) Descriptive code

(first-order)

Interpretative code (second-order)

Pattern (third-order) The way you extract information and how

you upload information is not really dependent on the technology, but mainly dependent on the human factor” (WS.1)

The human factor plays a major role for ICT to be effectively utilised for information sharing

Social aspect

One of the limitations in analysing qualitative data is that there is no one right method in performing the data analysis (Miles & Huberman, 1984), whereby the data analysis is subjected to a subjective standpoint on how this is done best. However, during this research there has been strived for a consistent approach of the analysis, which might foster the validity.

4. FINDINGS

It is found that there exists a certain difference in the characteristics that are prevalent between the public service networks which ultimately affect the degree of inter-organizational integration and might have implications for how ICT is used as an integrative mechanism throughout the cases.

Therefore the findings are described per network, following the main theoretical constructs:

- Characteristics of public organizations;

- Inter-organizational integration: information integration, operational integration, relational integration;

- ICT as an integrative mechanism.

In sections 4.1 and 4.2 a within-case analysis per network respectively is presented and in section 4.3 a summary of the findings has been made to display similarities and differences between cases.

4.1 E

The overall findings of case 1 (university & municipality) and case 2 (university & college) are displayed in table 4.

Table 4 – Overall findings educational network

Educational network

Concept Case 1 Case 2

Characteristics

Honesty Honesty

Legitimacy Legitimacy

Equity Equity

Limited transparency Limited transparency

Bureaucratic burden Bureaucratic burden

Information integration

Contact frequency: irregular Contact frequency: every three months Information sharing (Through: mail,

telephone, shared ICT system)

Information sharing (Through: mail, telephone, shared ICT system)

Collaborative communication Low collaborative communication Operational

integration

No operational integration was found to be present.

Integrated work processes

Low coordinated decision-making Low collaborative joint activity development

Relational integration

Trust Limited trust

Medium intensity relationship Low intensity relationship Low strategic connection Low strategic connection Long-term oriented (no documented

agreements)

Long-term oriented (no documented agreements)

ICT

Mail Mail

Telephone Telephone

Shared web-based ICT system Shared web-based ICT system 4.1.1 Characteristics

Case 1 – university & municipality

It is found that the collaboration between the university and the municipality is advice-oriented regarding social return, as indicated by:

“Our collaboration is advice-oriented where the client decides what will be done” (E.2).

Thereby the municipality aims to provide an honest and objective advice which suits the specific tender of the university (E.2). In order to provide accurate advice it is found that transparency is highly valued. However, the degree of transparency regarding the university in terms of sharing their procurement plans is found to be somewhat limited, since:

“I don’t know their procurement plans so I have to wait until they contact me” (E.2).

In order to standardize the social return process it is found that the municipality has set up its own policy plan (E.2).

Case 2 – university & college

Honesty and transparency were found to play a great role in the relationship between the procurement departments of the college and the university in order to gain insight in collaboration opportunities.

However, the degree to which these characteristics could be expressed is found to be highly influenced by political factors. This is indicated by the following:

“The degree to which I can be open is dependent on the board of directors, where I may want to be open in information sharing but can be hampered by the board of directors. Where they might say that I may not share certain information, although it may foster the collaboration with the college. Thus political factors play a certain role” (E.1).

Thereby it is found that the tender law influences their relationship when they want to reach a collaborative tendering goal:

“Due to the tender law and because we are a societal organization, we cannot prescribe towards certain companies” (E.3).

Relevant for both case 1 and 2

What needs to be particularly stressed is that in both of the cases bureaucracy is found to play a significant role, since this influences the characteristics to a certain degree. Although all three organizations are considered large organizations with several management layers, the bureaucratic burden at the college and the municipality is found to be relatively low:

“I think we don’t experience that much bureaucracy. We have relatively much room to initiate things and the communication goes quite fast” (E.2).

However, it is found that at the university the bureaucratic burden was relatively high. Where at the college both the procurement department and the budgets are centralised, the procurement department of the university is also centralised. However:

“[…] the faculties still have autonomy over their budgets, thus the budgets are decentralised” (E.1).

Therefore these faculties have a great degree of autonomy regarding their own procurement procedures (E.1). Thus, if decisions need to be made by the central procurement department that also affect the faculties then there are many opinions that influence that decision. Besides that it is found that the communication lines are long, since information needs to go across many layers within the organization. This hampers the decisiveness (E.1).

4.1.2 Inter-organizational integration & ICT as integrative mechanism Information integration

Case 1 – university & municipality

For case 1 regarding the technical aspect of information integration it is found that most of the collaborative communication and information sharing happens through mail and telephone. Besides that an ICT system is used for information sharing regarding the performance of social return. This is a web-based system which is provided by the municipality to the university and its suppliers. In this system the agreed on social return is recorded, in which the university can real-time monitor the performance of its suppliers which helps the university to coordinate its suppliers (E.1; E.2). Herein the municipality serves as a coach regarding social return towards the suppliers. Thus the ICT system serves as an enabler for collaborative communication. However, it is found that there exists a low inter-operability of that ICT system, since it is a web-based system which cannot be used in the ICT environment of the university (E.1).

Regarding the social aspect of information integration in case 1 it is found that collaborative communication mostly takes place when the university searches contact with the municipality. This is due to the advising role of the municipality towards the university (E.2).

Case 2 – university & college

For case 2 regarding the technical aspect of information integration it is found that collaborative communication and information sharing happens through mail and telephone. Thereby it is found that both organizations make use of the same tendering software through a web-based ICT system. This ICT system facilitates that work processes are calibrated and supports the execution collaborative joint activity development (E.1; E.3). Furthermore this ICT system enables information sharing, where:

“[…] if I want tender something identical then I could make use of their documents and subsequently learn from what they have done”(E.1).

However, this form of collaboration is still greatly underdeveloped (E.1; E.3). Another ICT system that is used for information sharing and collaborative communication is a system regarding the contractual governance of the suppliers of both parties. It is found that this system also facilitates collaborative joint activity development (E.1).

Regarding the social aspect of information integration it is found that confidentiality plays a certain role in information sharing. Sharing confidential information requires trust, which is found to be limitedly present on a political level. This is indicated by:

“A good collaboration starts with openness in information sharing, being prepared to share information with each other. Thereby trust is important where the information that you share is confidentially handled. The trust between the procurement manager of the college and me is good, however in general this is not the same for the trust between the board of directors of the university and the college” (E.1).

Therefore this affects the degree of transparency and honesty in information sharing between the procurement departments of the university and the college (E.1; E.3). This subsequently hampers collaborative communication (E.1; E.3).

Thereby it is found that the degree to which collaborative communication takes place is low since there exists a low contact frequency. This means that the relationship has a relatively low intensity, since:

“The procurement manager of the college and I have agreed that we meet once every three to four months” (E.1).

Operational integration

Case 1 – university & municipality

It is found that regarding social return no operational integration is present.

Case 2 – university & college

Regarding operational integration it is found that the university and the college are responsible for the maintenance of the same terrain. This requires coordinated decision-making and collaborative joint activity development. Thereby it is found that the aforementioned ICT systems are used for coordinated decision-making and also foster collaborative joint activity development (E.1). What is remarkable is that both parties acknowledge that there are significant opportunities to take this operational integration to another level (E.1; E.3), since they:

“[…] are educational institutes, where both institutes need catering, cleaning, energy etc. The difference between those needs are marginal” (E.3).

However it is found that there are several factors that play a role that withhold collaboration in a broader sense from happening. One of these factors is the high bureaucratic burden at the university.

This follows from:

“Since the budgets at the university are not centralised and are spread over the faculties who have authority over their budget, this makes it difficult to equate between the procurement issues of the university and us” (E.3).

Thereby it is found that the political factor is highly influential regarding collaborative joint activity development, since:

“With my predecessor collaborative plans were made with the college, however both board of directors declined the plans because they had different interests” (E.1).

It is found that this is ultimately the result of the political sensitivity regarding whether certain meets are met or not (E.1; E.3).

However, what is maybe more important is that there have not yet been made any solid attempts to understand each other’s interests, as indicated by:

“We have hardly had any contact with each other regarding in what way we can collaborate and we didn’t have the time for that. We don’t see each other enough in order to discuss how we want to collaborate and we don’t know each other’s objectives yet. If we know that then we can see which objectives match and which do not, which is alright” (E.3).

Relational integration

Case 1 – university & municipality

Regarding relational integration in case 1 it is found that the relationship with the municipality is semi- long-term oriented regarding social return, on which the collaboration now exists for three years. Their relationship is still in the development phase, where both parties try to grow towards each other. This eventually enhances their commitment (E.2).

A factor that is found to be hampering the relationship between the university and the municipality is that the municipality is still having difficulties with the ‘complicated structure’ (E.2) of the university, which refers to the bureaucratic burden of the university. This is indicated by:

“We experience some complications in our collaboration due to the complicated structure of the university, where we are asking ourselves what we may do and what not, especially since the faculties all have their own authority and vision” (E.2).

Case 2 – university & college

For case 2 regarding relational integration it is found that their relationship is long-term oriented regarding the maintenance of the terrain where they are mutually responsible for. However, overall commitment is considered low, since both parties acknowledge that there are opportunities for collaboration on many other areas but are not acting towards this yet. Again, the political factor plays a substantial role in this context, where:

“On a procurement management level it is highly favourable to collaborate with each other, since economies of scale and better quality could be reached. However on a board level this is more difficult, since when the university wants something very specific then this is not possible to pursue if the college does not agree with this” (E.1).

Relevant for both case 1 and 2

It is found that ICT indirectly influences the long-term oriented relationship of both cases, where ICT facilitates trust and commitment through transparency in information and subsequently enables for a strategic connection (E.1; E.2; E.3).

“Through information sharing via ICT each other’s information becomes open to each other. This requires trust, which will increase if openness in information sharing is successfully applied over a longer period of time” (E.1).

4.2 W

The overall findings of case 3 (water authority (1) & water authority (2)) and case 4 (water authority (1) & safety region) are displayed in table 5.

Table 5 – Overall findings water safety network

Water safety network

Concept Case 3 Case 4

Characteristics

Honesty Honesty

Legitimacy Legitimacy

Equity Equity

Transparency Transparency

Low bureaucratic burden Low bureaucratic burden Information

integration

Contact frequency: every two weeks Contact frequency: every two weeks Information sharing (Through: mail,

telephone, shared ICT systems)

Information sharing (Through: mail, telephone, shared ICT systems)

High collaborative communication High collaborative communication

Operational integration

Integrated work processes Integrated work processes

High coordinated decision-making High coordinated decision-making Collaborative joint activity

development

Collaborative joint activity development

Relational integration

High trust High trust

Intensive relationship Intensive relationship High strategic connection High strategic connection Long-term oriented (Through: merging

water boarders, policy plan)

Long-term oriented (Through: law, covenant + additional agreements)

ICT

Mail Mail

Telephone Telephone

Shared ICT system water management Shared ICT system crisis management Shared ICT system crisis management Shared ICT system information

management Shared ICT system information

management 4.2.1 Characteristics

Case 3 – water authority (1) & water authority (2) and Case 4 – water authority (1) & safety region Both case 3 and 4 were found to be quite similar in terms of characteristics. In both cases it is found that the crisis managers have a great degree of autonomy, since:

“The responsibility lies for a great part at the work floor, where the work is executed” (WS.1).

The water authorities and the safety region namely have a relatively flat organizational structure with only two management layers (WS.1; WS.2; WS.3). Therefore there exists a relatively low bureaucratic burden, where it is found that one of the only bureaucratic burdens that exist is due to the size of the organizations. Most things namely need to be documented in procedures (WS.1; WS.2; WS.3).

Thereby the communication lines were found to be short, as well as regarding internal communication as external communication (WS.1; WS.2; WS.3).

The political factors were found to enable and support inter-organizational collaboration, where in all layers of the organizations it is acknowledged that inter-organizational collaboration is important in order to manage crisis situations as good as possible. This is indicated by:

“The relationship with water authority (2) is intensive, where the relationship exists on all different levels” (WS.1); “There exists contact on three different levels, on board level, director level and coordinator level” (WS.3).

Therefore characteristics such as honesty, fairness and transparency are highly valued to accurately manage crisis situations (WS.1; WS.2; WS.3).

4.2.2 Inter-organizational integration & ICT as integrative mechanism Information integration

Case 3 – water authority (1) & water authority (2)

For case 3 regarding the technical aspect of information integration it is found that mail, telephone and three different ICT systems are used for information sharing and collaborative communication. One of these ICT systems is an ICT system that:

“[…] is used to exchange information regarding the prediction of the rainfall for the next five days in order to predict the water heights” (WS.1).

This is done in order to forecast whether there may occur a crisis or not, where:

“This ICT system is a decision support system in terms of when to alarm parties and when to perform certain activities regarding water management” (WS.1).

The second system is an information management system in which a vast array of documents, contacts and several other data is shared, as indicated by:

“Microsoft Teams is used within the platform to share information and to hold online meetings with”

(WS.2).

The third ICT system is a national crisis management system (NCMS) which is employed by many different types of crisis organizations, also by water authorities and safety regions (WS.1; WS.2;

WS.3). This system has been made in such a way that it could be used by all those different parties and thus it is very suitable for generic use (WS.1; WS.2; WS.3). This enhances integration opportunities between all these different parties, but goes at the expense of the functionality of the system, reducing effective and efficient use (WS.2). Nevertheless, a beneficial aspect of the system that has been found is that it enables network partners to share information in a real-time fashion, which in turn enables coordinated decision-making:

“Thus when there is a large fire and they begin to fill the system, then we as water authority can monitor what is present in the system and what the state of the situation is. Vice versa the same holds. As soon as they fill the system we can watch along” (WS.1).

Thereby it is found that the NCMS eventually reduces bureaucratic burden, since its antecedent paper version of communicating crisis information was heavily subjected to the bureaucratic burden.

Therefore the NCMS serves as a great enabler for information integration. This is indicated by:

“In the past the crisis management used situational reports instead which were prepared lower in the organization and were subsequently send throughout the organization. This was a lengthy process where sometimes information was often outdated. Therefore this was eventually replaced by NCMS” (WS.2).

However, a disadvantageous aspect of NCMS that is found is that:

“[…] during crisis situations, many parties are involved, where one of the risks is that there might exist an overkill of information. It is a challenge to retrieve the right information. In this way there might go something wrong, but that is inherent to the system. If you acknowledge the risks then there is no problem” (WS.1).

Furthermore, regarding the social aspect of the information integration via NCMS it is found that collaborative communication is made more efficient through a communication strategy, namely the:

“[…] IJD method, which stands for: imaging, judgements and decision-making. In this manner our activity within NCMS is also structured so we can display the information in a logical manner which is generated before or throughout a crisis meeting” (WS.2).

Another social aspect of information integration that is found is that information between organizations is shared in order to prevent that one of the organizations reinvents the wheel. The philosophy behind this is that water authorities are a government organization and thus don’t want the citizen to pay twice (WS.1; WS.2).

Case 4 – water authority (1) & safety region

For case 4 regarding the technical aspect of information integration it is found that mail, telephone and two different ICT systems are used for information sharing and collaborative communication. One of the systems is an information management system which:

“[…] is a sort of shared point environment, used to exchange information. Information that is shared entails for instance meeting documents, crisis plans, telephone numbers, information of other persons which are needed to contact” (WS.1).

The second system is the same NCMS as mentioned in case 3.

Relevant for both case 3 and 4

Regarding the social aspect of information integration it is found that there exist no boundaries regarding information sharing activities in both cases. This can be explained by several factors. Each organization highly values transparency and openness in information sharing (WS.1; WS.2; WS.3).

Thereby there exists no competition between either one of the organizations since they are government organizations and therefore are not profit oriented. Besides that it is found that the role of confidential information is marginal (WS.1; WS.2; WS.3). This is indicated by:

“Everything you can think of is shared between each other” (WS.1), “We don’t have something that we don’t want to share with them” (WS.3).

However, it is found that there is one thing which might form a barrier regarding the social aspect of information integration, which is:

“[…] that you don’t know that the other party has a need for certain information and that you therefore do not provide it” (WS.1).

Regarding the technical aspect of information integration it is found that for both cases the ICT systems have a high inter-operability. Each party namely uses the same ICT system regarding crisis management, i.e. NCMS.

Operational integration

Case 3 – water authority (1) & water authority (2)

Regarding operational integration for case 3 it is found that there are several activities joint collaboratively developed. The water authorities collaboratively develop trainings, education programs, practices through their collaboration in the platform in order to prepare for crisis situations.

Case 4 – water authority (1) & safety region

Regarding operational integration for case 4 it is found that the safety region has a coordinating role regarding collaboratively joint activity developed.

“The safety region makes sure that there are crisis plans, that everybody knows what they must do and they make sure that there are the right people for executing those plans and that those people are professional. They monitor, evaluate and inspect those people.” (WS.3).

Thereby it is found that coordinated decision-making occurs during crisis situations and in the preparation phase of crisis situations, where the safety region asks the water authority for input regarding the development of trainings, education programs and practices (WS.1; WS.3).

“We find it important to know each other well, therefore we have trainings with the water authority to improve the collaboration during crisis situations” (WS.3); “With trainings, when we want to provide a training together, then we think together of a scenario, then we think of how we would react to that scenario and what we will explain to the participants” (WS.3).

Relevant for both case 3 and 4

Thereby it is found that the aforementioned ICT systems support the integrated work processes and the coordinated decision-making to collaboratively develop activities and coordinate decision-making during crisis situations (WS.1; WS.2). This is indicated by:

“During the cold phase we share our work processes and meeting documents via Teams, an information management system and email. This most definitely contributes to integrating our work processes and developing activities together, in which ICT serves as support tool in this.” (WS.1)

Relational integration

Case 3 – water authority (1) & water authority (2)

Several indicators have been found that relational integration is present in case 3. One of these indicators is that the water authorities have a strong long-term orientation, which follows from that:

“There exists a physical relationship with water authority (2) through merging water boarders (WS.1)”;

“With the regional water authorities we work together for as long water authorities exist” (WS.1).

Besides the need for collaboration between water authorities due to merging water boarders there exists no necessity to collaborate to a further extent, since:

“A water authority is a cell, an independent organization that in principle can function independently.

Therefore, everything we do regarding collaboration is of course regarded as profit” (WS.2).

However, it is found that water authorities are highly committed to each other to a broader extent, since among water authorities it is acknowledged that collaboration on a broader basis is highly beneficial. This because most of the activities of water authorities are very similar. Thus when they collaborate they can learn from each other, where:

“Information between organizations is shared in order to prevent that one of the organizations invents the wheel again. The philosophy behind this is that water authorities are a government organization and thus don’t want the citizen to pay twice” (WS.1).

Thereby there exists a collaborative relationship in case 3 through two different platforms of water authorities, one regarding crisis management and one regarding general water authority work processes (WS.1; WS.2). The platform based relationship is grounded in a policy plan that has been set up for the next 5 years concerning for instance collaborative joint activity development (WS.1;

WS.2), which also indicates a long-term oriented relationship.

Another finding that points out the great degree of trust between the water authorities is that they use a strategy where they represent each other at a multi-layer inter-organizational level at safety regions.

This is done in order to spread the load of collaborating with different those safety regions (WS.1;

WS.2). A quote that underpins this mutual trust is:

“If one maintains a bad relationship with a safety region then the other party suffers from that. However this has not happened yet, since the relationship between us is good” (WS.2).

Case 4 – water authority (1) & safety region

Also for case 4 several indicators have been found that relational integration is present. The water authority (1) and the safety region have a strong long-term orientation which follows from that both organizations collaborate since 2010 (WS.1; WS.3). Their relationship has been defined within the law from that year, which obliges them to collaborate together to a certain extent, where:

“Some agreements with the water authorities are defined in law” (WS.3); “The safety region directs the crisis management in the region, which is defined in the law. Therefore they occupy a coordinating role” (WS.1).

Thereby their relationship has been grounded in a standardized law based national covenant. However, it is found that:

“Behind the covenant we have put a sort of list of additional agreements, since the national covenant should stay the national covenant. We may not change anything regarding the national covenant.

Therefore we have made an additional list of agreements to make the collaboration a bit more concrete.”

(WS.3).

This additional list of agreements enhances and displays their mutual commitment (WS.1; WS.2).

Furthermore, besides the in law based nature of the relationship, it is found that relational integration is fostered in terms of commitment. Both parties namely acknowledge the necessity and the benefits of their collaborative relationship, which is indicated by:

“We need each other when there exists a crisis” (WS.1).

Relevant for both case 3 and 4

It is found that in case 3 and 4 ICT serves as an enabler regarding trust, commitment and subsequently for a strategic connection, where ICT provides openness in information and facilitates to gain insight in each other’s work processes (WS.1; WS.2; WS.3). ICT also contributes to the long-term orientation of the water authorities and the safety region, since:

“We have to commit ourselves for a longer period of time to the mutually shared ICT system NCMS”

(WS.2).

This also shows that there exists mutual trust (WS.1; WS.2; WS.3).

4.3

In table 6 a summary of the findings of the educational and water safety network has been provided.

Table 6 shows which elements of the public sector characteristics and inter-organizational integration are present and subsequently how ICT influences the elements of inter-organizational integration.

Similarities that were found are that in each public service network the typical public sector characteristics are present to a certain degree. Thereby it is found that each public service network utilises information, operational and relational integration. Furthermore, within both public service networks it is found that ICT is used to a certain extent as an integrative mechanism, where ICT positively influences inter-organizational integration.

Differences that were found between the two public service networks are that the educational network experiences noticeably more bureaucratic burden than the water safety network. Although it is found that the network partners of the university experience a low bureaucratic burden, it is found that the university itself experiences a noticeably higher bureaucratic burden. Regarding inter-organizational integration it is found that the organizations in the water safety network seem to be more integrated than the organizations in the educational network. This becomes particularly clear regarding operational integration. Thereby it is found that the degree to which the public sector characteristics are expressed in inter-organizational collaboration is dependent on the political factors. Where in this study the political factors were found to have a negative effect in the educational network, they have a positive effect in the water safety network.

Table 6 – Summary of findings

Educational network Water safety network Elements per concept and influencing factors Case 1 Case 2 Case 3 Case 4 Elements per concept

Characteristics

Fairness X X X X

Legitimacy X X X X

Equity X X X X

Transparency X / X X

Bureaucracy X X / /

Inter-organizational integration Information integration

Information sharing X / X X

Collaborative communication / / X X

Inter-organizationally supported ICT X X X X

Operational integration

Integrated work processes | X X X

Coordinated decision-making | / X X

Collaborative joint activity development | / X X

Relational integration

Strategic connection / / X X

Long-term orientation X X X X

Trust X / X X

Commitment / / X X

Influence of ICT on inter-organizational integration Information integration

Information sharing + + + +

Collaborative communication + + + +

Inter-organizationally supported ICT*

Operational integration

Integrated work processes | + + +

Coordinated decision-making | + + +

Collaborative joint activity development | + + +

Relational integration

Strategic connection + + + +

Long-term orientation + + + +

Trust + + + +

Commitment + + + +

Influencing factors on inter-organizational integration

Politics - - + +

Notes: X = present; / = present to a limited degree; | = not present; + = positive influencing factor;

- = negative influencing factor *This aspect already refers to ICT