A Local-State Government Spatial Data Sharing Partnership

A Local-State Spatial Data Sharing Partnership Model to Facilitate SDI Development
Azad and Wiggins (1995) proposed a typology based on inter-organisational relations
(IOR) and dynamics. The authors argue that spatial data sharing across multi-agencies is
fundamentally an organisational affair and that the organisational concept of autonomy is a
critical issue in data sharing. Specifically, they argue that the process of sharing results in
the loss of autonomy and greater inter-organisational dependence, which in turn conflict
with each organisation’s goals. The typology classified organisations into three types
based on the inter-organisational dynamic as being one way, mainly one way or two way.
This typology extended the work of Oliver (1990) on organisational behaviour which
classified the reasons for IOR into six areas namely: necessity, asymmetry, reciprocity,
efficiency, stability and legitimacy. The authors also examined the level of IOR intensity
and the stages of inter-organisational relations which they propose were “powerful
explanatory concepts to disentangle the complex dynamics of geographic data sharing”
(Azad & Wiggins 1995, p. 33). The model proposed by Azad and Wiggins is somewhat
weakened by lack of justification of the initial premise that data sharing leads to the loss of
autonomy and independence (Wehn de Montalvo 2003a).
Another framework to understand organisational data sharing is put forward by Nedovic-
Budic and Pinto (1999) and draws on the Kevany model (1995) which is largely
experienced based. The conceptual framework draws on a broader literature base to derive
four theoretical constructs namely: inter-organisational context, motivation, coordination
mechanisms and outcomes. The theoretical foundations of this framework provide a very
useful basis for further development and assessment of spatial data sharing initiatives.
The authors have extended the understanding of the conceptual framework through a
number of empirical investigations including mechanisms and motivations for data
exchange (Nedovic-Budic et al. 2004a) and also the exploration of the organisational
issues with respect to GIS interoperability (Nedovic-Budic & Pinto 2001).
Sharing by its very nature is a human behaviour (Wehn de Montalvo 2002) and therefore it
should be explored from a human behavioural context. Wehn de Montalvo (2003a)
investigated the theory of “planned behaviour” as an organising framework for the
willingness to share spatial data. The model maps the process of data sharing based on a
belief structures and the predictive power of intentional behaviour. The basic model as
shown in Figure 2.7 consists of five components: a particular behaviour consideration, the
intention to act, and three determinants of intention (Wehn de Montalvo 2003a). These
determinants identify the willingness to share based on attitude, social pressure and
perceived control.
48