Old Dominion University ODU Digital Commons School of Public Service Theses & Dissertations School of Public Service Summer 2015 Exploring Conceptualization and Operationalization of Interorganizational Interactions: An Empirical Study Andrew Paul Williams Old Dominion University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/publicservice_etds Part of the Organizational Behavior and Theory Commons, Public Administration Commons, and the Public Policy Commons Recommended Citation Williams, Andrew P.. "Exploring Conceptualization and Operationalization of Interorganizational Interactions: An Empirical Study" (2015). Doctor of Philosophy (PhD), Dissertation, School of Public Service, Old Dominion University, DOI: 10.25776/5vyc-fa79 https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/publicservice_etds/2 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the School of Public Service at ODU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in School of Public Service Theses & Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ODU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. i EXPLORING CONCEPTUALIZATION AND OPERATIONALIZATION OF INTERORGANIZATIONAL INTERACTIONS: AN EMPIRICAL STUDY by Andrew Paul Williams MPhys(Hons) 1998, University of Manchester, United Kingdom A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of Old Dominion University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY PUBLIC POLICY AND ADMINISTRATION OLD DOMINION UNIVERSITY August 2015 Approved by: John C. Morris (Director) Katrina Miller-Stevens (Member) Professor of Public Administration Assistant Professor of Public and Urban Studies Administration and Urban Studies John R. Lombard (Member) Associate Professor of Public Administration and Urban Studies Tancy Vandecar-Burdin (Member) Associate Director, Social Science Research Center ii ABSTRACT EXPLORING CONCEPTUALIZATION AND OPERATIONALIZATION OF INTERORGANIZATIONAL INTERACTIONS: AN EMPIRICAL STUDY Andrew Paul Williams Old Dominion University, 2015 Director: Dr. John C. Morris Collaboration and other forms of interaction between complex arrangements of private, nonprofit, and public organizations to address challenging policy problems now occurs routinely. In many cases collaboration is mandated by law, and often disbursement of grants to nonprofits is contingent upon demonstrating collaboration with other organizations. To understand this contemporary landscape of public administration and develop cumulative knowledge, theory requires reliable and valid constructs of collaboration and other forms of interorganizational interaction. Theoretical rigor then underpins practice, including the growing discipline of evaluating the level of interaction between organizations or an organization’s “collaborative capacity,” and to understand more broadly how public administrators should best lead, manage and interact in complex multiorganizational situations. This dissertation reviews the approaches to conceptualization and operationalization of interorganizational interaction in the public administration literature. While many frameworks, typologies and arrays have been offered, few have been tested empirically. Furthermore, the literature incorporates a widely stated but untested notion that interactions between organizations can be placed on a “continuum” of intensity or integration. iii Using insights from previously developed systems-based frameworks and arrays, this research creates a generalized interorganizational interaction array (GIIA) that conceptualizes and operationalizes three forms of interaction common in public administration literature: cooperation, coordination and collaboration. From a sample of over 200 interorganizational interactions between national and international defense organizations, the GIIA is tested using cluster analysis to determine: the extent to which collaboration, coordination and cooperation are observed; which variables are most important in differentiating interaction states, and to explore the concept of a continuum of interaction. Results show the only interaction state clearly observed is collaboration in about half of sample cases; the remaining cases cannot be easily classified as either cooperation or coordination. Only variables relating to collective decision making structures and processes are essential for identifying collaboration, but are not useful in distinguishing between cooperation or coordination. Variables relating to the context or situation have little influence on differentiating interaction states, and variables describing properties of the organizations such as trust, autonomy and shared perspectives have more ability to distinguish outcomes rather than form. Finally, the concept of a continuum of interaction is not supported. The implications of this finding for future conceptualization and operationalization and development of theory is considered. iv © Copyright, 2015, by Andrew Paul Williams, All Rights Reserved v I dedicate this dissertation to Jenny and Éowyn, who have borne its burden more than anyone, but never let me fall. “…And he went on, and there was yellow light, and fire within; and the evening meal was ready, and he was expected… He drew a deep breath. ‘Well, I’m back,’ he said.” J.R.R. Tolkein, Lord of the Rings vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS There are many people to whom I am greatly indebted for their support, encouragement and guidance, in the eight years that have passed since I first started as a Ph.D. student. First, I thank my friend, mentor, and committee chair, Dr. John Morris. From first seeing me into the program to now signing me out, I appreciate deeply your guidance, flexibility and support, especially in helping me with extra-curricular publications. Thank you to my other committee members, Dr Katrina Miller-Stevens, Dr Tancy Vandecar-Burdin, and Dr John Lombard. I am grateful for your patience in putting up with my capricious and multiple changes of direction, but mostly for your counsel and suggestions concerning methods, surveys, and clarity. I am also tremendously grateful to Dr Berhanu Mengistu for making me think, and for supporting a very ambitious cognate subject. Last but not least from my Old Dominion family, I am much obliged to my fellow classmates over the years for their camaraderie, pilot-testing survey support, and for expanding my horizons and viewpoints in rich classroom discussion. As a part-time student with a full-time job, this endeavor was never going to be easy, but I can thank my colleagues in the OAB for making it just that little bit easier and for allowing me to indulge fully my academic predilections in the office. Thank you especially, Han, for your generous flexibility, encouragement and survey support. I am endlessly appreciative to my American in-laws and family for always being willing to take care of my family at a moment’s notice, and for being understanding in allowing me to occasionally show up for Sunday dinner and drink their beer after a hard day’s study. Thank you Richard and Christine, I could not have done it without you. I thank my English family—my Mum, Dad and sister—for their love and belief in me, and for sowing the seeds of academia early on. Thank you, Mum, for your early vii lessons about doing jobs properly even if I did not like them, and showing me how to study, concentrate, and be organized. Thank you, Dad, for instilling early on my sense of curiosity and wonder in the world. I will never forget the stories about atoms, the skeleton in the box in the garage, and watching the shadows lengthen as the “sun went round the earth” before bedtime. And thank you “real” Dr Sarah, for always lightening things up. Thank you, Jenny, for your remarkable support, love and encouragement. I am incredibly lucky that you put up with an absent husband for evenings, weekends, holidays, parties and many other events. Thank you for being super-mum and super-wife. And thank you Éowyn; I’m sorry your first question of the day is usually “Daddy, are you going to stay with me today?” Hopefully one day you will understand why I could not, and that you are what makes it all worth it. viii TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................................ ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................... vi TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................. viii LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................... xiii LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................... xviii CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION .................................................................................... 1 Problem Statement .............................................................................................. 5 Research Objectives and Questions .................................................................... 9 Research Purpose ............................................................................................ 9 Research Questions ......................................................................................... 9 Statement of Research Importance ................................................................... 10 Theoretical Approach.......................................................................................