More Like this

1. Interorganizational network portfolios of nonprofit organizations: Implications for collaboration management

   https://doi.org/10.1002/nml.21438  

   Fu, Jiawei Sophia ; Cooper, Katherine R. ( August 2020 , Nonprofit Management and Leadership)

   Increasingly, nonprofit organizations engage in interorganizational collaboration to address large‐scale social problems. Scholarship typically focuses on the characteristics of both within‐sector and cross‐sector partnerships of two collaborating organizations or all partnering organizations involved in a collaboration, but we know little about the patterns of interorganizational relationships that single nonprofit organizations maintain. This research draws upon surveys from 452 nonprofits and introducesnonprofit network portfolios, which we define as thenumber,integration,intensity, anddurationof relationships that nonprofits purposefully develop with other organizations. Using 12 network measures, Ward cluster analysis revealed three distinct network portfolios:restricted within‐sector(n= 319, 70.58%), which included limited collaboration and prioritized within‐sector partnerships;robust within‐sector(n= 80, 17.70%), which included more nonprofit partnerships than restricted within‐sector portfolios; andcross‐sector(n= 53, 11.72%), which had a rich assemblage of integrative partnerships with nonprofits, businesses, and government agencies. Further, nonprofits that maintained each type of portfolio differed in their revenue and social mission, suggesting these factors are related to the types of collaboration that nonprofits maintain. This study makes contributions to existing research on interorganizational networks and cross‐sector collaboration and suggests practical and policy implications for nonprofit network management.

    

   more » « less
2. Theoretical and Empirical Modeling of Identity and Sentiments in Collaborative Groups

   Jesse Hoey, Meiyappan Nagappan ( January 2021 , SocArXiv)

   null (Ed.)

   Theoretical and Empirical Modeling of Identity and Sentiments in Collaborative Groups (THEMIS.COG) was an interdisciplinary research collaboration of computer scientists and social scientists from the University of Waterloo (Canada), Potsdam University of Applied Sciences (Germany), and Dartmouth College (USA). This white paper summarizes the results of our research at the end of the grant term. Funded by the Trans-Atlantic Platform’s Digging Into Data initiative, the project aimed at theoretical and empirical modeling of identity and sentiments in collaborative groups. Understanding the social forces behind self-organized collaboration is important because technological and social innovations are increasingly generated through informal, distributed processes of collaboration, rather than in formal organizational hierarchies or through market forces. Our work used a data-driven approach to explore the social psychological mechanisms that motivate such collaborations and determine their success or failure. We focused on the example of GitHub, the world’s current largest digital platform for open, collaborative software development. In contrast to most, purely inductive contemporary approaches leveraging computational techniques for social science, THEMIS.COG followed a deductive, theory-driven approach. We capitalized on affect control theory, a mathematically formalized theory of symbolic interaction originated by sociologist David R. Heise and further advanced in previous work by some of the THEMIS.COG collaborators, among others. Affect control theory states that people control their social behaviours by intuitively attempting to verify culturally shared feelings about identities, social roles, and behaviour settings. From this principle, implemented in computational simulation models, precise predictions about group dynamics can be derived. It was the goal of THEMIS.COG to adapt and apply this approach to study the GitHub collaboration ecosystem through a symbolic interactionist lens. The project contributed substantially to the novel endeavor of theory development in social science based on large amounts of naturally occurring digital data. 

   more » « less
3. A Synthesis of Land Use/Land Cover Studies: Definitions, Classification Systems, Meta-Studies, Challenges and Knowledge Gaps on a Global Landscape

   https://doi.org/10.3390/land10090994  

   Nedd, Ryan ; Light, Katie ; Owens, Marcia ; James, Neil ; Johnson, Elijah ; Anandhi, Aavudai ( September 2021 , Land)

   Land is a natural resource that humans have utilized for life and various activities. Land use/land cover change (LULCC) has been of great concern to many countries over the years. Some of the main reasons behind LULCC are rapid population growth, migration, and the conversion of rural to urban areas. LULC has a considerable impact on the land-atmosphere/climate interactions. Over the past two decades, numerous studies conducted in LULC have investigated various areas of the field of LULC. However, the assemblage of information is missing for some aspects. Therefore, to provide coherent guidance, a literature review to scrutinize and evaluate many studies in particular topical areas is employed. This research study collected approximately four hundred research articles and investigated five (5) areas of interest, including (1) LULC definitions; (2) classification systems used to classify LULC globally; (3) direct and indirect changes of meta-studies associated with LULC; (4) challenges associated with LULC; and (5) LULC knowledge gaps. The synthesis revealed that LULC definitions carried vital terms, and classification systems for LULC are at the national, regional, and global scales. Most meta-studies for LULC were in the categories of direct and indirect land changes. Additionally, the analysis showed significant areas of LULC challenges were data consistency and quality. The knowledge gaps highlighted a fall in the categories of ecosystem services, forestry, and data/image modeling in LULC. Core findings exhibit common patterns, discrepancies, and relationships from the multiple studies. While literature review as a tool showed similarities among various research studies, our results recommend researchers endeavor to perform further synthesis in the field of LULC to promote our overall understanding, since research investigations will continue in LULC. 

   more » « less
4. Flexible Work and Personal Digital Infrastructures

   Jarrahi, M ; Newlands, G ; Butler, B ; Savage, Saiph ; Lutz, C ; Dunn, M ; Sawyer, S. ( January 2021 , Communications of the ACM)

   null (Ed.)

   Flexible, contingent, or 'agile,' working arrangements provide workers with greater autonomy over when, where, or how to fulfill their responsibilities. In search of increased productivity and reduced absenteeism, organizations have increasingly turned to flexible work arrangements. Although access to flexible work arrangements is more prevalent among high-skilled workers, in the form of flextime or co-working, the past decade has also witnessed growth of independent contractors, digital nomadism, digitally enabled crowdwork, online freelancing, and on-demand platform labor. Flexible work arrangements reduce commutes and can enable workers with care-responsibilities to stay in the workforce. Younger workers also see flexibility as a top priority when considering career opportunities. Flexible working arrangements can also be mutually beneficial, enabling organizations to scale dynamically. Specific skill sets can be immediately accessed by turning to freelancers to fill organizational gaps. A growing number of organizations and workers rely on short-term and project-based relationships, using online platforms such as Upwork or Fiverr to connect. However, flexible work arrangements often come entwined with precarity cloaked in emancipatory narratives. Fixed salaries and benefits have given way to hourly rates and quantified ratings. Flexible workers often face unpredictability and uncertainty as they carry more risk and responsibility, and are burdened with a great portion of administrative costs (that is, overhead) associated with organizational support systems. Flexible workers at Google, for instance, outnumber full time workers but face far more unpredictability. Current formulations consider organizations as relatively fixed 'containers', which encapsulate the work performed and the information and communications technology (ICT) systems used to perform it.12 However, flexible work arrangements take place outside of organizational containers. In this new sociotechnical dynamic, flexible workers interact with a diversity of digital tools that defy centralized, top-down standardization or governance. We capture this diversity of digital tools through the concept of Personal Digital Infrastructures (PDIs), which denote an individualized assemblage of tools and technologies, such as personal laptops, smartphones, cloud services, and applications brought together by workers to perform their work tasks. Yet, flexible workers constantly reconfigure their PDIs as the technology landscape, client-relationship, and task requirements shift. For flexible work arrangements to be mutually beneficial, PDI integration in ICT systems for work is increasingly necessary, beyond a narrow focus on enterprise systems supporting standard work. Our collective research on flexible work arrangements indicates that PDIs present non-trivial challenges, but a more effective design of ICT systems for work can facilitate the integration of these bottom-up infrastructures. The nuanced understanding of PDIs presented here highlights their interplay with flexible work arrangements across key dimensions (spatial, temporal, organizational, and technological) and suggests key priorities for technology and platform developers. 

   more » « less
5. A multiple case study of an interorganizational collaboration: Exploring the first year of an industry partnership focused on middle school engineering education

   https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20403  

   Gillen, Andrew L. ; Grohs, Jacob R. ; Matusovich, Holly M. ; Kirk, Gary R. ( June 2021 , Journal of Engineering Education)

   Calls to improve learning in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), and particularly engineering, present significant challenges for school systems. Partnerships among engineering industry, universities, and school systems to support learning appear promising, but current work is limited in its conclusions because it lacks a strong connection to theoretical work in interorganizational collaboration.

   This study aims to reflect more critically on the process of how organizations build relationships to address the following research question: In a public–private partnership to integrate engineering into middle school science curriculum, how do stakeholder characterizations of the collaborative process align with existing frameworks of interorganizational collaboration?

   This qualitative, embedded multiple case study considered in‐depth pre‐ and post‐year interviews with teachers, administrators, industry, and university personnel during the first year of the Partnering with Educators and Engineers in Rural Schools (PEERS) program. Transcripts were analyzed using a framework of interorganizational collaboration operationalized for our context.

   Results provide insights into stakeholder perceptions of collaborative processes in the first year of the PEERS program across dimensions of collaboration. These dimensions mapped to three central discussion points with relevance for school–university–industry partnerships: school collaboration as an emergent and negotiated process, tension in collaborating across organizations, and fair share in collaborating toward a social goal.

   Taking a macro‐level look at the collaborative processes involved enabled us to develop implications for collaborative stakeholders to be intentional about designing for future success. By systematically applying a framework of collaboration and capitalizing on the rich situational findings possible through a qualitative approach, we shift our understanding of collaborative processes in school–university–industry partnerships for engineering education and contribute to the development of collaboration theory.

    

   more » « less