Author ORCID Identifier
Minji Hong: https://orcid.org/0009-0003-2019-8659
Benedict Jimenez: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4184-7713
Document Type
Article
Publication Date
6-24-2024
Abstract
The study examines how two major strategy formulation approaches – rational planning and logical incrementalism – influence the decision of city governments to collaborate with for-profit, non-profit, and other public organizations. Collaboration with governmental and non-governmental actors gives rise to varying levels of risks, and the choice of which type of organization to collaborate with is influenced by how distinct strategy formulation processes can help governments address those risks. Using data from a national survey of cities, we find that the strategy-making process can spur or hinder collaborative undertakings. The results of the regression analysis indicate that rational planning catalyzes cross-sectoral collaboration but is not associated with government-to-government collaboration. Logical incrementalism, in contrast, has a consistently negative relationship with collaboration regardless of sector. The findings indicate that collaboration can be limited by city governments’ capacity to undertake rational planning and their propensity to engage in incrementalist decision-making.
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.12701716
Recommended Citation
Hong, M., & Jimenez, B. S. (2024). Strategy Formulation Process and Interorganizational Collaboration. Public Performance & Management Review, 1–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2024.2366238
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
Comments
Accepted manuscript version of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Public Performance & Management Review on 2024-06-24 available online at https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2024.2366238