Research has shown that socially-focused partnerships that cross sectors (referred to as social partnerships within) are necessary in order to effectively address pressing societal issues such as poverty. Yet, in these complex organizational contexts, there is often variability within and between involved organizations as it relates to basic assumptions around work and the meanings given to practices at macro, meso and micro levels of analysis. Put differently, there are often a plurality of meaning systems at play in such multi-faceted organizational arrangements. Accordingly, the purpose of this dissertation was to understand to what extent multiple meaning systems exist in social partnerships focused on addressing multi-faceted societal challenges and, whether and how such differences in meaning systems are strategically negotiated over time. At a deeper theoretical level, this research was focused on illuminating the processes by which meaning systems are negotiated when organizational boundaries are blurred and when a plurality of meaning systems are at play, with a central focus on players that act as boundary spanners within these complex organizational contexts. To understand the complexities at play in social partnerships emanating from multiple meaning systems, I conducted a multi-site ethnographic study, involving in-depth interviews and participant observation, of the Greater Victoria Coalition to End Homelessness Society (Coalition) located in Victoria, British Columbia. In doing so, I utilized the principal literature streams that address multiple meaning systems at work: the culture literature in organization studies and the institutional logics perspective. As well, I incorporated other literatures based upon the emergent findings, namely organizational identity. Through this work I make a number of contributions within the area of sustainability, particularly the social partnership literature, as well as organizational theory. Empirically, I develop a process model that elucidates how players negotiate multiple meanings of organizational identity over time in a social partnership setting characterized by permeable boundaries and shared authority, at the group level of analysis. This is significant as we know little about how identity plays out in such multi-faceted organizational settings with continual blurred boundaries even as research has indicated that such arrangements are likely to surface identity issues among players (Maguire & Hardy, 2005). I also elucidate how individual players bridge across multiple meaning systems in a social partnership over time, answering the call for more research concerning the role of individuals and their interactions with organizations in the collaboration process over time (Manning & Roessler, 2014). To my knowledge, this work is one of the first of its kind to empirically explore tri-sector socially focused collaborations – involving players from the public, private and nonprofit sectors – that are more integrative and interconnected in nature (Austin & Seitanidi, 2012a) and that employs a process based perspective to understand how such collaborations unfold over time. In addition, I theoretically develop the link between institutional logics and organizational culture that emerged empirically via this study to guide future integrative work to holistically account for the multiplicity of meaning systems at work within and between such multi-faceted arrangements. / Graduate / 2020-04-01

It is a common misconception that the cross-sector partnership between private companies and environmental NGOs purely benefit financing and image possibilities. However, suppositions like these are worryingly out-of-date and do no longer correspond to the actual make-up, ambitions, effort, and functionings of said partnerships. Most companies use a concept called Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) when describing their sustainability work, often including partnerships with Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs). The term was coined at a time when sustainability work was less refined than what we see today, and while societal awareness and industrial appreciation for the importance of environmental agendas has developed, the term CSR and its definition has remained the same. This study interviewed three environmental NGOs and four private companies in Sweden in order to investigate the structure and outcomes of their current partnerships with the respective actor. The findings underline the need for an updated conceptual definition, that facilitates cross-sector partnership development parallel to societal development rather than to hold it back. With environmental threats winning the attention of both private and public actors in local as well as global settings, the issue of this conceptual misalignment and possible snag in efficiency that it may pose, becomes highly relevant.

As the rhetoric of collaborative governance continues to gain popularity in the discourse of public affairs, both scholars and practitioners advocate cross-sector partnerships as a strategy to replace the vertical hierarchy of government with the horizontal approach of governance through a network of actors. This research explores the potential of social impact bonds (SIBs) as an instrument of collaborative governance. An SIB is an approach for broadening social programs, in a multi-faceted partnership among private investors, governments, and nonprofits. In this cross-sector partnership, private investors take on the financial risk of expanding evidence-based social programs provided by nonprofit organizations. In return, the government agency repays investors if the interventions meet measurable goals that demonstrate social impact (McKinsey & Company 2012, 15). Actors involved in the development of SIBs have published the majority of the scholarship to support them. Therefore, much of the literature informing the creation of future bonds is biased, and governments appear hesitant to try them before seeing any results. This study investigates possible disconnections between the arguments for and the practice of SIBs through textual analysis and elite interviewing. I identify three major disparities between the rhetoric and realities of SIBs: measurement of social impact, complexity of partnerships, and transfer of risk. / Master of Arts

This study investigates how cross-sector collaborations can mitigate value chain emissions, thereby reducing complex environmental issues. The point of departure is the Energize program, which ten pharmaceutical companies introduced at COP26 in November of 2021. Energize aims to accelerate the adaptation of renewable energy and reduce greenhouse gas emissions throughout the industry and its value chain, which refers to Scope 3 emissions. By interviewing 13 respondents from nine participating companies, the study’s objective is to increase the understanding of these collaborative activities through a case study of Energize. Moreover, it investigates and identifies the drivers to encourage collaboration, its constraints, and the factors to make a program productive. The research concludes that for a cross-sector collaboration program to become fruitful, internal factors such as corporate engagement, the importance of industry working groups, and intrinsic and extrinsic motivation are needed to exist throughout the process. Besides, external factors such as social awareness, legal requirements, and technological readiness are essential. Similar programs can efficiently try to solve complex issues by leveraging the combined bargaining power to increase the development within the value chain. Moreover, as a pre-competitive partnership, Energize has attractive benefits in reducing costly implementation processes and improving the resources of the participating actors.

This research paper examines the enablers of technology diffusion in the field of cell and gene therapy. Recent scientific advancements for cell and gene therapies have provided personalized and potentially curative treatments to patients who otherwise would have suboptimal or no options for their disease. This innovative science has taken more than 60 years to reach patients, and even with FDA approvals in 2017, global diffusion has encountered many rate limiting aspects. To better understand why diffusion of transformative treatments is stunted, this research examines knowledge transfer as an enabler of technology diffusion in the healthcare sector. Two qualitative and inductive studies were conducted to identify the enablers of diffusion. Study 1, an exploratory, archival analysis, compares historically innovative technologies and documents the representative knowledge transfer archetypes that enable diffusion. The findings resulted in a new archetype of knowledge transfer, referred to as the Cross Sector Collaboration (CSC) Pathway. Study 2 is an industry-level case study which asks how the transfer of knowledge is enacted in the cell and gene sector, examines the relevance of the CSC Pathway, and explores differences in the knowledge transfer process among the various types of organizations (public, for-profit, non-profit) that support the sector. There were three key findings from the research. First, the research expands on the interconnectedness between the theories of Diffusion of Innovations, Absorptive Capacity and Knowledge Creation. Second, the research finds evidence to support the critical role of knowledge transfer in the diffusion of technologies involved in cell and gene therapies. Third, the findings produce a new framework for knowledge transfer, termed the Cross Sector Collaboration Pathway. The dissertation findings contribute to the literature as they provide a framework for collaborative knowledge transfer mechanisms that cell and gene therapy firms, together with industry stakeholders, can employ to enable efficient diffusion of technology in this rapidly growing field. / Business Administration/Strategic Management

No description available.

In today's society, we face many complex and major challenges, several of them concerning human rights - at both global, regional and local level. To enable solutions to these problems, collective action and effort is required. As a result, cooperation between all sectors within the UN, as well as the public and the private sector, not to mention civil society, is crucial. In September 2015, the UN General Assembly adopted a historic framework: Agenda 2030, which addresses the importance of partnerships and engagement from all sectors to achieve sustainable development and the application of human rights for all. In light of this, the present study investigates partnerships between the private and non-profit sector from a human rights perspective. Previous research has dealt with both cross-sector partnerships for social issues, the role of companies in relation to the Sustainable Development Goals, and CSR and human rights. The research about cross-sector partnerships for social issues, which are the partnerships that are addressed in Agenda 2030, often lacks the perspective of how they can promote human rights. The aim with this thesis is to therefore research how human rights are understood in cross-sectoral partnerships, in which ways these partnerships can promote human rights, as well as the successes and challenges that exist for them. The methodological design of this research consists of interviews with participants from partnerships between the private and the non-profit sector, with representatives from both sides. The present study shows that there is an interdependency between cross-sector partnerships and human rights and that it is clear that partnerships between different sectors are necessary to solve the social problems we are facing today. We need to partner for change.

Climate alliances like the Climate Council Jönköping have a big impact on combating environmental issues on a local level. Research shows that communication plays a crucial role in such cross-sector partnerships to enhance the collaboration between its members. This thesis wants to explore the impact of climate alliances on their members’ sustainable communication and CSR initiatives, using the example of the Climate Council Jönköping. Based on different theories, namely Communication Constitutes Organization Theorizing, the Model of CSR Implementation, and the Value Belief Norm Theory of Environmentalism, the aim was to contribute knowledge to the research fields of sustainable communication, CSR, and collaboration. To explore the existing research gap, twelve semi-structured interviews with experts from different member organizations of the Climate Council were conducted. By applying qualitative content analysis, it became visible that the Climate Council’s impact on communication and CSR efforts differs among the members. On the one hand, it can be difficult to include the campaigns of the council into one’s own communication. On the other hand, the membership raises awareness about sustainability and environmental topics and enables collaboration and knowledge exchange through cross-sector partnerships. Based on the findings, it can be recommended to the Climate Council to provide more communication material for the members for easy integration. Additionally, more events can increase the visibility of the council and raise awareness for local cross-sector collaborations to tackle environmental problems, enable new networking options, and establish innovative partnerships.

In this article, the ability of partnerships to generate goods that enhance the quality-of-life of socially and economically deprived urban communities is explored. Drawing on Rawl¿s study on social justice [Rawls, J.: 1971, A Theory of Justice (Harvard University Press, Cambridge)] and Sen¿s capabilities approach [Sen, A.: 1992, Inequality Re-Examined (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA); 1999, Development as Freedom (Oxford University Press, Oxford); 2009, The Idea of Justice (Ellen Lane, London)], we undertake an ethical evaluation of the effectiveness of different approaches to partnership activity in city neighbourhood regeneration. We focus, in particular, on their impact on the social regeneration of disadvantaged communities. Governance of cross-sector partnerships, built upon negotiated values and strong community voice, may result in a greater sense of procedural justice, as well as improvements to orderliness in local neighbourhoods. However, distributive justice, the accumulation of, and access to, goods that enable greater participation in society, remains largely elusive within neighbourhood partnership activity. We conclude that social provision that deals fairly with the causes of disadvantage by enhancing the capabilities of local communities and increasing social capital is likely to be a more effective and sustainable approach for partnerships, despite being a longer-term and more costly endeavour.

Det senaste decenniet har fokus riktats mot hur vi med gemensamma åtaganden kan bidra till ett mer hållbart samhälle. En del i utvecklingen handlar om att främja mer hållbara konsumtionsmönster, där det nationella programmet Sharing Cities Sweden finansierar olika delningsprojekt som ska hjälpa invånarna dela mer och konsumera mindre. Inom Sharing Cities Sweden har konceptet Smarta Kartan utvecklats genom ett idéburet offentligt partnerskap mellan den ideella föreningen Kollaborativ Ekonomi Göteborg och Göteborgs stad. Smarta Kartan är en digital tjänst som visualiserar delningsinitiativ i en stad, där målet är att öka deltagandet i delningsekonomin och främja en växande delningskultur. Umeå är en av testbäddarna inom Sharing Cities Sweden som under 2020 planerar att lansera sin egen version av kartan. Med Coompanion Nord som huvudansvarig vill Umeå identifiera hur olika aktörer kan organiseras och samverka för kartan. Denna uppsats skrivs därför på uppdrag av Coompanion Nord. Studiens huvudsakliga syfte är att ge förslag på hur den digitala delningstjänsten Smarta Kartan bör organiseras i Umeå genom samverkan mellan olika aktörer. Genom att kartlägga olika aktörers förväntningar, attityder samt behov ska studien presentera konkreta förslag på hur delningstjänsten kan drivas. Studien ska även bidra till ökade insikter för hur Umeå Kommun kan främja arbetet med delningsekonomi baserat på olika aktörers involvering och roller. Vidare är syftet att skapa en förståelse över hur andra städer arbetat med Smarta Kartan och ge vägledning inför framtiden. Med detta som utgångspunkt har studien utgått från följande centrala frågeställning: Hur kan Smarta Kartan organiseras för att bli framgångsrik? Den teoretiska referensramen inkluderar studier på partnerskap, motivation, plattformar, nätverk, ekosystem och roller. Baserat på tidigare forskning skapades tre teman som har varit vägledande för vår studie: (1) Partnerskap & samverkan, (2) Rollfördelning & ansvar samt (3) Potential till att stimulera delning i en stad. Vi har utgått från en kvalitativ ansats där åtta semistrukturerade intervjuer genomförts med representanter från Umeå, Göteborg, Malmö, Karlstad och Sjuhärad, som alla är i olika faser i arbetet med kartan. Det empiriska materialet bidrar med förväntningar, lärdomar och erfarenheter och beskriver hur städerna arbetat med kartan på olika sätt. Därtill identifieras gemensamma möjligheter och utmaningar som berör tid, finansiering, motivation och engagemang. Våra slutsatser visar att organiseringen av arbetet med kartan måste baseras på en stads lokala förutsättningar. Därtill behöver kunskap och kännedom om delningsekonomi och Smarta Kartan öka i samhället. För Umeå innebär detta att kommunen bör ta en aktiv roll för att engagera ideella krafter och identifiera potentiella individer eller organisationer som vill överta en del av arbetet med kartan. Med våra rekommendationer som vägledning finns utsikter för att kartan blir framgångsrik, vilket leder till att kommunen i ett senare skede kan anamma en mer stöttande roll.