Networks - a briefing paper for the Health Foundation - Centre for ...

supporting, developing and solidifying networks: ‘However, surprisingly little has been writtenon their strategic development and management, and even less is known about how capacitycan be built’ (Serrat, 2009: p.12). Research has also identified the challenges of gatheringdata on large scale social network structures (Kossinets et al., 2008).2.4 Agency Networks, Policy NetworksPolicy network literature is often confused with Network Governance: the former is anelement of policy analysis that is based upon a condensed version of conventional /hierarchical forms of governance. Network governance (See 3.1) is associated with aparadigm shift from conventional to plural forms of governing (Blanco et al., 2009)Policy NetworksCharacteristics: policy inspired agents engaging in knowledge sharing; restrictive;closed shop;Leadership: Little dictators in daily process of policy-makingGovernance: Hierarchies remain dominant as policy networks meet the legal andpolicy-based functions of government.Failure: Resistance to change; Democratic Accountability; Shape behaviour ofstakeholders through rules and regulationsAttempts have been made to construct a typology of policy networks, with differentiatedmodels encompassing policy/territorial communities; professional networks;intergovernmental networks; producer networks and issue networks (Rhodes, 1997, Marshand Rhodes, 1992, Rhodes, 2006). Policy networks (McPherson et al., 2006, Rhodes, 2006)encompass agents (individuals and organisations) with a particular interest in policy, andpublic management networks (Ferlie et al., 2011) transcend: ‘...studies of informal andintraorganizational networking among individuals to include interorganizational...[and]intergovernmental— entities that emerge from interactions among formal organizations’(Agranoff, 2006: p.56). McPherson et al., (2006) describes how policy networks provide themeans for knowledge transfer and exchange-based activities to enhance evidence-basedpolicies and systemic change. Knowledge sharing often develops through memberinteraction, thus leading to jointly constructed solutions. Public sector knowledge networks(PSKNs) for example encompass a complex blend of interorganizational relations, policies,information-based content, professional knowledge and expertise, work-based processes,and technological artefacts which are connected to achieve a cooperative public purpose(Dawes, 2005).Agency theory is used by Provan and Milward (2001) as a theoretical lens and analyticalframework for the primary network-constituent groups, by proposing that agents situated atone plane may be a principal on another plane. Each respective group is more concernedwith effectiveness at a specific level of network analysis. The paradox is that networks oftenconsist of long-established programmes and participating organizations that may beculturally disinterested or fearful of change. In contrast with individual organisations, anoverriding dilemma with any attempts to appraise public networks is that external stakeholdergroups seldom subsist for networks (Provan and Milward, 2001). In the USA, most federal,state and philanthropic funding for public health activities is directed through local publichealth organisations, who are tasked with mobilising and directing public health activities ofhospitals, health-plans and neighbourhood-based organisations (Mays et al., 2010).31