Advanced search
1 file | 2.70 MB

Governance of sport and physical activity policy implementation networks: key determinants, configurations and processes

(2016)
Author
Promoter
(UGent) and (UGent)
Organization
Abstract
The governance of sport and physical activity can be considered a ‘wicked problem’ because of its high interdependency of factor and actors, its social complexity and the absence of a single solution to deal with it. One possible way to cope with wicked problems is the network approach. Notwithstanding large amounts of research on interorganizational networks, some research topics only generated disagreement among researchers and still some blind spots remain. In sport and physical activity literature, research on collaborative networks and on how governments administer manage and govern sport and physical activity is very rare. Therefore, there is a need to strengthen the network collaboration orientation in health promotion and sport research. This research aims to contribute to the existing body of empirical research on whole network effectiveness by elaborating the relative importance of antecedents and processes on network effectiveness, studying the equifinality of network effectiveness, and analysing the effects of underlying processes of power and dependency on network governance. Results of the first study of thirteen networks showed that the most successful networks possessed formal agreements, did not have a metropolis in their operation area, experienced positive effects of the reorganization, included partners with political and exposure motives, showed high levels of commitment, could count on a high quality staff that maintained personal contact with others in the network and that were tightly governed by the network administrative organization. Further study of these networks, using configurational comparative methods, revealed that determinants of network collaboration for sport and PA are interrelated. This implies, for instance, that environmental challenges can be addressed by certain structural network features and network governance. It was also shown that as long as network governance is tailored to the network structure, which in turn fits with the environment, network effectiveness can be reached in different ways. Network governance is thus an essential element in achieving network effectiveness. The third study, which dugs deeper into the characteristics and processes of network governance, demonstrates that network decision-making and coordination is influenced by power imbalances and dependencies. The results showed a dominance of a lead organization. Although collaborating in networks with power imbalances and dependencies entails some risks and challenges, such as power abuse, obstruction of decision-making or exclusion of potential network partners, the network can still be governed effectively. This study showed that when the powerful organizations are committed to the collaboration and enjoy proper levels of trust of the other network partners the collaboration can succeed. Four strategies were distinguished that helped the lead organization to build legitimacy and trust in the network; leveraging expertise and knowledge; engaging in collaborative goal setting; establishing a task force; and engaging in co-optation tactics. Overall this research has attributed to the public network literature and to the knowledge of collaborative networks for sport and PA policy. The take-away message for network managers is that collaborative networks for sport and PA policy implementation seem to benefit from a centralized governance. To obtain network success, a clear goal-setting, partners’ motivations and general commitment to the network are crucial. Finally, it is important that network partners and representatives feel at ease in the collaboration despite power imbalances and dependencies.

Downloads

  • (...).pdf
    • full text
    • |
    • UGent only
    • |
    • PDF
    • |
    • 2.70 MB

Citation

Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:

Chicago
Lucidarme, Steffie. 2016. “Governance of Sport and Physical Activity Policy Implementation Networks: Key Determinants, Configurations and Processes”. Ghent, Belgium: Ghent University. Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences.
APA
Lucidarme, S. (2016). Governance of sport and physical activity policy implementation networks: key determinants, configurations and processes. Ghent University. Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent, Belgium.
Vancouver
1.
Lucidarme S. Governance of sport and physical activity policy implementation networks: key determinants, configurations and processes. [Ghent, Belgium]: Ghent University. Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences; 2016.
MLA
Lucidarme, Steffie. “Governance of Sport and Physical Activity Policy Implementation Networks: Key Determinants, Configurations and Processes.” 2016 : n. pag. Print.
@phdthesis{8049506,
  abstract     = {The governance of sport and physical activity can be considered a {\textquoteleft}wicked problem{\textquoteright} because of its high interdependency of factor and actors, its social complexity and the absence of a single solution to deal with it. One possible way to cope with wicked problems is the network approach. Notwithstanding large amounts of research on interorganizational networks, some research topics only generated disagreement among researchers and still some blind spots remain. In sport and physical activity literature, research on collaborative networks and on how governments administer manage and govern sport and physical activity is very rare. Therefore, there is a need to strengthen the network collaboration orientation in health promotion and sport research. This research aims to contribute to the existing body of empirical research on whole network effectiveness by elaborating the relative importance of antecedents and processes on network effectiveness, studying the equifinality of network effectiveness, and analysing the effects of underlying processes of power and dependency on network governance. Results of the first study of thirteen networks showed that the most successful networks possessed formal agreements, did not have a metropolis in their operation area, experienced positive effects of the reorganization, included partners with political and exposure motives, showed high levels of commitment, could count on a high quality staff that maintained personal contact with others in the network and that were tightly governed by the network administrative organization. Further study of these networks, using configurational comparative methods, revealed that determinants of network collaboration for sport and PA are interrelated. This implies, for instance, that environmental challenges can be addressed by certain structural network features and network governance. It was also shown that as long as network governance is tailored to the network structure, which in turn fits with the environment, network effectiveness can be reached in different ways. Network governance is thus an essential element in achieving network effectiveness. The third study, which dugs deeper into the characteristics and processes of network governance, demonstrates that network decision-making and coordination is influenced by power imbalances and dependencies. The results showed a dominance of a lead organization. Although collaborating in networks with power imbalances and dependencies entails some risks and challenges, such as power abuse, obstruction of decision-making or exclusion of potential network partners, the network can still be governed effectively. This study showed that when the powerful organizations are committed to the collaboration and enjoy proper levels of trust of the other network partners the collaboration can succeed. Four strategies were distinguished that helped the lead organization to build legitimacy and trust in the network; leveraging expertise and knowledge; engaging in collaborative goal setting; establishing a task force; and engaging in co-optation tactics.
Overall this research has attributed to the public network literature and to the knowledge of collaborative networks for sport and PA policy. The take-away message for network managers is that collaborative networks for sport and PA policy implementation seem to benefit from a centralized governance. To obtain network success, a clear goal-setting, partners{\textquoteright} motivations and general commitment to the network are crucial. Finally, it is important that network partners and representatives feel at ease in the collaboration despite power imbalances and dependencies.},
  author       = {Lucidarme, Steffie},
  language     = {eng},
  pages        = {X, 234},
  publisher    = {Ghent University. Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences},
  school       = {Ghent University},
  title        = {Governance of sport and physical activity policy implementation networks: key determinants, configurations and processes},
  year         = {2016},
}