Whole networks : a systematic literature review

Addressing complex needs is a common issue for public and private sectors. In both cases, it is highly unfeasible that a single organization can completely satisfy such needs; therefore collaborative forms become a practical answer, which is evidenced in the existence of interorganizational networks. In general, interorganizational networks have been studied at the organizational or dyadic level limiting our understanding of these at the aggregated or ‘whole’ network level. The identification of this research gap in summation with the public and private interest on network forms set up the fundamental motivation for executing a systematic literature review on whole network studies. In order to execute the literature review a preliminary revision of seminal literature on whole network studies was performed in order to identify major themes and set up research questions. The research questions were defined into two mayor streams, firstly towards an analysis of methodological issues on whole networks and secondly towards an analysis of issues regarding network characteristics, network evolution, network governance and network outcomes. Then, a review on background theory was performed in order to clarify terminology and increase our understanding on whole networks. Consequently, the methodology was defined in terms setup and execution, in particular by the definition of key words and the configuration of the database of studies in terms of the fields to be completed by each paper that were to be included. After this step, the research process was executed and it yielded a total of 143 studies that we considered relevant for the literature review. The main finding regarding methodological issues is that there is considerable variability in terms of size of networks studied (from 3 to 899 nodes) and number of networks studied (from 1 to 249). Moreover, regarding network boundary setting it was found that only in one third of the studies authors explained their bounding decisions and two major ‘types‘ of bounding justifications were identified. Finally, in terms of underpinning theoretical perspectives it was observed that general network theories are predominant, followed by studies with adopting multiple theoretical perspectives and by studies where no specific theory was identified (36%, 19% and 17% of the studies respectively). Additionally it was observed that theoretical perspectives have a clear influence on aspects regarding type of network studied and bound justification. On network characteristics, findings exposed the positive relationship of network effectiveness with network size and centralization for both public and private networks. Moreover, also for private and public networks, findings evidence the positive relationship of network 3 substructures (cliques, clustering) on network effectiveness. In addition, it was found that context specific properties affect network structure, hence influence network effectiveness. In terms of network evolution the major findings support the idea that networks evolve by several drivers being individual networking strategies, managerial agency and technological changes relevant on private networks, as well as past network structures. Findings also acknowledge the difficulty on measuring the influence of project specific initiatives on network evolution. Regarding network governance main findings on network management activities indicate that these vary depending on the type of network and its level of development. Findings also underscore the importance of legitimacy in network sustainment and the challenges related to how it is built. Also, the importance of management control mechanisms, in particular informal ones, is observed. In relationship to network outcomes, evidence shows that whole networks offer an opportunity for companies to increase performance, acknowledging a rise in knowledge and learning, resource sharing and standardization practices. It was found that sector specificities and predominant needs, are determinants on the type of benefits networks achieved. Public sector focus mostly in service provision effectiveness, while private in efficiency practices to achieve cost reductions. Yet assessing actual network benefits can be difficult task, given networks’ multidimensionality, which explains the 53% of studies that did not mention them. Whole network research is not just and interesting field because of the theory it has built but because of its relevance for managers and public administrators. Positive outcomes reached through interorganizational collaboration were evidenced spanning both in public and private sectors. Nevertheless, also challenges were surfaced given that networks can also fail and represent a managerial endeavour. Additionally lack of standardization in terminology and academic rigour limit research on the field.