Scholars often view conflict management in governance networks as a consensus-seeking practice in which managers attempt to resolve disputes and advance collective network goals. In contrast, this article uses a power-based perspective to explore how different power strategies–adversarial and cooperative–may be applied to manage conflict and disagreements in networks. Using qualitative empirical evidence from two Israeli governance networks, it postulates these strategies lead to different types of network administrative organizations (NAOs)–exclusive and inclusive–which may enhance or obstruct inter-organizational collaboration. The article uses the case studies to evaluate the ensuing implications for networks‘ endurance, legitimacy, and performance.
Bibliographical notePublisher Copyright:
© 2021 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
- Governance Networks
- Network Administration Organization (NAO)
- Network Management