Knowledge Sharing in a Third-Party-Governed Health and Human Services Network

The rapid growth of knowledge in disease diagnosis and treatment requires health service provider organizations to continuously learn and update their practices. However, little is known about knowledge sharing in service implementation networks governed by a network administrative organization (NAO). The author suggests that strong ties enhance knowledge sharing and that there is a contingent effect of third-party ties. Two provider agencies’ common ties with the NAO may undermine knowledge sharing because of resource competition. In contrast, a dyad's common ties with a peer agency may boost knowledge sharing as a result of social cohesion. Finally, the author posits that third-party ties moderate the relationship between strong ties and knowledge sharing. These hypotheses are examined in a mental health network. Quantitative network analysis confirms the strong tie and third-party tie hypotheses and provides partial support for the moderating effect of third-party ties. The implications for public management, including the implementation of HealthCare.gov, are discussed.

[1]  Jason P. Davis,et al.  Brokerage as a Process: Decoupling Third Party Action from Social Network Structure , 2014 .

[2]  Elizabeth H Bradley,et al.  Deliberate Learning in Health Care , 2014, Medical care research and review : MCRR.

[3]  G. Dunn,et al.  Cognitive therapy for people with schizophrenia spectrum disorders not taking antipsychotic drugs: a single-blind randomised controlled trial , 2014, The Lancet.

[4]  B. Apenteng,et al.  Science-based and practice-based innovativeness and performance of substance abuse treatment facilities. , 2014, Health care management review.

[5]  Alicia C. Bunger.  Administrative Coordination in Non-Profit Human Service Delivery Networks: The Role of Competition and Trust. , 2013, Nonprofit and voluntary sector quarterly.

[6]  K. V. von Ranson,et al.  Psychotherapies provided for eating disorders by community clinicians: Infrequent use of evidence-based treatment , 2013, Psychotherapy research : journal of the Society for Psychotherapy Research.

[7]  Daniel A. McFarland,et al.  Ties That Last , 2013 .

[8]  K. Provan,et al.  Awareness of Evidence-Based Practices by Organizations in a Publicly Funded Smoking Cessation Network. , 2013, Journal of public administration research and theory : J-PART.

[9]  H. Milward,et al.  Governance, Privatization, and Systemic Risk in the Disarticulated State , 2012 .

[10]  Keith S. Snavely,et al.  Three Faces of the State and the Nonprofit Sector , 2012 .

[11]  Chris Huxham,et al.  The Tangled Web: Unraveling the Principle of Common Goals in Collaborations , 2012 .

[12]  Rosemary O'Leary,et al.  Collaborative Public Management , 2012 .

[13]  Barbara S. Romzek,et al.  A Preliminary Theory of Informal Accountability among Network Organizational Actors , 2012 .

[14]  K. Provan,et al.  Resource Tangibility and the Evolution of a Publicly Funded Health and Human Services Network , 2012 .

[15]  Ingrid M. Nembhard,et al.  All teach, all learn, all improve?: The role of interorganizational learning in quality improvement collaboratives , 2012, Health care management review.

[16]  R. Feiock,et al.  Competitors and Cooperators: A Micro-Level Analysis of Regional Economic Development Collaboration Networks , 2012 .

[17]  David Lazer,et al.  Searching for Answers , 2011 .

[18]  Ralph A. Heidl,et al.  Knowledge, Networks, and Knowledge Networks , 2011 .

[19]  J. Prochaska.  Smoking and mental illness--breaking the link. , 2011, The New England journal of medicine.

[20]  Bin Chen,et al.  Antecedents or Processes? Determinants of Perceived Effectiveness of Interorganizational Collaborations for Public Service Delivery , 2010 .

[21]  C. Pahl-Wostl,et al.  Research, part of a Special Feature on Social Network Analysis in Natural Resource Governance Synapses in the Network: Learning in Governance Networks in the Context of Environmental Management , 2010 .

[22]  D. Krackhardt,et al.  Activating Cross-Boundary Knowledge: The Role of Simmelian Ties in the Generation of Innovations , 2010 .

[23]  Kun Huang,et al.  Governance and Collaboration: An Evolutionary Study of Two Mental Health Networks , 2010 .

[24]  D. V. Slyke,et al.  Contracting for Complex Products , 2010 .

[25]  Jessica E. Sowa.  The Collaboration Decision in Nonprofit Organizations , 2009 .

[26]  Jan B. Heide,et al.  The Organization of Regional Clusters , 2009 .

[27]  Kun Huang,et al.  The evolution of structural embeddedness and organizational social outcomes in a centrally governed health and human services network , 2009 .

[28]  P. Tsasis.  The social processes of interorganizational collaboration and conflict in nonprofit organizations , 2009 .

[29]  Philip S. Wang,et al.  Improving mental health treatments through comparative effectiveness research. , 2009, Health affairs.

[30]  A. Cresswell,et al.  From "Need to Know" to "Need to Share": Tangled Problems, Information Boundaries, and the Building of Public Sector Knowledge Networks , 2009 .

[31]  T. Salge,et al.  Hospital innovativeness and organizational performance: evidence from English public acute care. , 2009, Health care management review.

[32]  T. Valente,et al.  Collaboration and competition in a children's health initiative coalition: a network analysis. , 2008, Evaluation and program planning.

[33]  Akbar Zaheer,et al.  Geography, Networks, and Knowledge Flow , 2007, Organ. Sci..

[34]  David Krackhardt,et al.  Sensitivity of MRQAP Tests to Collinearity and Autocorrelation Conditions , 2007, Psychometrika.

[35]  K. Provan,et al.  Modes of Network Governance: Structure, Management, and Effectiveness , 2007 .

[36]  J. H. Davis,et al.  An Integrative Model of Organizational Trust: Past, Present, and Future , 2007 .

[37]  S. Dawes,et al.  Authority and Leadership Patterns in Public Sector Knowledge Networks , 2007 .

[38]  Luiz Mesquita,et al.  Starting Over when the Bickering Never Ends: Rebuilding Aggregate Trust Among Clustered Firms Through Trust Facilitators , 2007 .

[39]  Antonio Capaldo.  Network Structure and Innovation: The Leveraging of a Dual Network as a Distinctive Relational Capability , 2006 .

[40]  D. Ferrin,et al.  Direct and indirect effects of third-party relationships on interpersonal trust. , 2006, The Journal of applied psychology.

[41]  Pamela Bloomfield,et al.  The Challenging Business of Long‐Term Public–Private Partnerships: Reflections on Local Experience , 2006 .

[42]  J. Perry-Smith.  Social Yet Creative: The Role Of Social Relationships In Facilitating Individual Creativity , 2006 .

[43]  David Dekker,et al.  Measures of Simmelian Tie Strength, Simmelian Brokerage, and, the Simmelianly Brokered , 2006, J. Soc. Struct..

[44]  Alfred A. Marcus,et al.  EMBEDDED TIES AND THE ACQUISITION OF COMPETITIVE CAPABILITIES , 2005 .

[45]  Morten T. Hansen,et al.  KNOWLEDGE SHARING IN ORGANIZATIONS: MULTIPLE NETWORKS, MULTIPLE PHASES , 2005 .

[46]  G. Robert,et al.  Diffusion of innovations in service organizations: systematic review and recommendations. , 2004, The Milbank quarterly.

[47]  Keith G. Provan,et al.  Cooperation and Compromise: A Network Response to Conflicting Institutional Pressures in Community Mental Health , 2004 .

[48]  W. Berta,et al.  Factors that impact the transfer and retention of best practices for reducing error in hospitals. , 2004, Health care management review.

[49]  David Lazer,et al.  Friends, Brokers, and Transitivity: Who Informs Whom in Washington Politics? , 2004, The Journal of Politics.

[50]  D. Lazer,et al.  The Strength of Strong Ties , 2003 .

[51]  Ray Reagans,et al.  Network Structure and Knowledge Transfer: The Effects of Cohesion and Range , 2003 .

[52]  Brian Uzzi,et al.  Relational Embeddedness and Learning: The Case of Bank Loan Managers and Their Clients , 2003, Manag. Sci..

[53]  A. Zaheer,et al.  Special Issue: Trust in an Organizational Context: Trust as an Organizing Principle , 2003, Organ. Sci..

[54]  Morten T. Hansen,et al.  Knowledge Networks: Explaining Effective Knowledge Sharing in Multiunit Companies , 2002 .

[55]  Wenpin Tsai.  Social Structure of Coopetition Within a Multiunit Organization: Coordination, Competition, and Intraorganizational Knowledge Sharing , 2002 .

[56]  Pamela R. Haunschild,et al.  Network Learning: The Effects of Partners' Heterogeneity of Experience on Corporate Acquisitions , 2002 .

[57]  M. McPherson,et al.  Birds of a Feather: Homophily in Social Networks , 2001 .

[58]  Keith G. Provan,et al.  Do networks really work? A framework for evaluating public-sector organizational networks , 1999 .

[59]  P. Ingram,et al.  Friendships among Competitors in the Sydney Hotel Industry1 , 2000, American Journal of Sociology.

[60]  Morten T. Hansen,et al.  The Search-Transfer Problem: The Role of Weak Ties in Sharing Knowledge across Organization Subunits , 1999 .

[61]  D. Krackhardt.  Simmelian Ties: Super Strong and Sticky , 1998 .

[62]  B. Uzzi,et al.  Social Structure and Competition in Interfirm Networks: The Paradox of Embeddedness , 1997 .

[63]  W. Powell,et al.  Interorganizational Collaboration and the Locus of Innovation: Networks of Learning in Biotechnology. , 1996 .

[64]  L. L. Cummings,et al.  The Organizational Trust Inventory (OTI): Development and validation. , 1996 .

[65]  David Krackhardt,et al.  PREDICTING WITH NETWORKS: NONPARAMETRIC MULTIPLE REGRESSION ANALYSIS OF DYADIC DATA * , 1988 .

[66]  P. V. Marsden,et al.  Measuring Tie Strength , 1984 .

[67]  Mark S. Granovetter.  The Strength of Weak Ties , 1973, American Journal of Sociology.