Cross-sector collaboration in cities

Learning journey or blame game

Bibliographic Data

ID12397882
AuthorsSantiago Pulido-Gómez (0000-0001-9028-6468, Ph.D. Candidate in Education, Harvard University , Cambridge, MA 02138), J De Jong (0000-0002-3041-7793, Emma Bloomberg Senior Lecturer in Public Policy and Management, Harvard Kennedy School , Cambridge, MA 02138), Jan W Rivkin (C. Roland Christensen Professor of Business Administration, Harvard Business School , Boston, MA, 02163)
Year2025
Volume35
Issue2
Pages117-132
Publication date2025-01-07
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueJournal of Public Administration Research and Theory (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1053-1858 • E-ISSN: 1477-9803
PublisherOxford University Press (OUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1093/jopart/muae026
OpenAlexW4406159838
LanguageEN
Citations received4
References cited49

The success of cross-sector collaborations (CSCs) in cities is mixed, and important questions remain about what distinguishes effective from ineffective collaborations. This comparative case study examined nine CSCs in three US cities, focusing on three public policy areas: education, economic development, and public safety. Nine group interviews, 110 individual interviews, and analysis of archival documents revealed common patterns that allow us to build grounded theory about the roots of CSC success. We propose that how a collaboration responds to setbacks plays a crucial role. Success arises in collaborations that respond to setbacks with a process of mutual learning, in which participants anticipate each other’s actions, devise new ways of apportioning labor, and approach problems collectively. In contrast, failure follows when setbacks lead collaborations into a process of mutual blaming. No single mode of network governance is especially associated with success, but more successful collaborations tend to be characterized by adaptability concerning governance mode. Mutual learning appears to be facilitated by a few key actions: building on prior relationships, relying on trusted key participants, engaging with the community, using data to advantage, and investing in joint problem-solving. Our findings suggest that collaborative leaders in public, private, and nonprofit organizations should emphasize these key actions to enable collaboration and facilitate mutual learning

Blame · Sociology · Innovative Approaches in Technology and Social Development · Psychology · Social Psychology

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access