Managing Complex Policy Issues: The Importance of Network Management

1
Managing Complex Policy IssuesThe Importance of
Network Management

• Erik-Hans Klijn
• Professor of Public Administration
• Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam

2

• Spoorzone
• Delft

3
Decision-making networks

• If we look at this case (or many other cases) we
  see networks of actors in which the
  decision-making process takes place
• Number of inter-dependent actors
• Patterns of interactions
• Conflicting values (and actors that represent
  values)
• Economic values, transport values, livability
  values etc.
• Decisions take time!

4
Strategic Complexity in decision-making

• Many involved actors
• average number of actors in Dutch environmental
  projects 12 (survey research)
• All autonomous and acting strategically!
• Unexpected moves and outcomes
• Thus erratic processes

5
Content complexity in decision-making

• Actors have different perceptions
• on nature of problem
• On desired solutions etc.
• Actors do not view the available information in
  the same way
• Research is often part of the struggle and not
  the objective truth
• thus content of decisions changes, documents
  are only temporarily fixed moments, no joint
  problem definition

6
Institutional complexity in decision-making

• Not one decisions but many decisions
• Decisions often have to be taken at various
  arenas/networks and levels (central, regional
  local governments, different private actors)
• Different institutional regimes (rules, formal
  procedures habits etc.)
• Thus we use a variety of rules and rules of
  thump but often there are conflicting rules
  (crowded institutional space!)

7
Conclusion 1 complex and uncontrolled!

• decision making is erratic
• often difficult to predict
• shows abrupt changes or long periods of
  inactivity etc
• Decision making is a struggle about values
  (represented by different actors) and about value
  weighting
• Cannot be controlled, but has to be managed!

8
The need for managerial activity

• Network management is needed
• There are no natural coordination mechanisms
• There is a need to There is a wide diversity of
  desired contents that have to be reconciled
• connect various strategies of actors
• Network management deliberate attempts to guide
  and facilitate complex interaction processes
  (organizing process searching for a content!)
• Activity more than a person (can be more than one
  person)

9
Searching for an interesting content

• Crucial playing with the content!
• To achieve support with involved stakeholders
• To achieve content that satisfies different
  values
• Creating variety, organizing joint research etc
• Aim to keep involved actors interested so that
  they are willing to invest their resources

10
Managing interactions

• Building a network, sustaining a network!
• Very active in connecting various actors to the
  projects and facilitating the interactions,
• but also securing and evaluating existing
  organizational arrangements to facilitate
  interactions (projects groups, steering groups or
  other arrangements)
• The need for (temporarily) process rules (a
  process design)

11
connecting arenas and networks

• Getting the project attached to ongoing political
  and policy initiatives
• Keeping the project connected to the various
  arenas where decisions are being taken
• If necessary create new networks that coordinate
  of support your policy initiatives

12
Intermezzo 1 Some recent empirical evidence

• Same research (survey) to respondents on
  environmental projects
• Asked them a number of questions about the
  managerial activities that are being employed in
  the projects (exploring, connecting, arranging,
  process rules)
• Also a number of questions on outcomes (process
  and content outcomes)
• Strong correlation between number of managerial
  strategies employed and perceived outcomes
• Thus projects that show a more active network
  management also show better perceived outcomes

13
Intermezzo 2 organizational form?

• Organizational forms
• Much in discussion (partnerships)
• a lot less important for achieving interest
  outcomes that many people think
• We could not find a relation between the type of
  organizational form (project organization,
  project bureau, consortium, no organizational
  form) of a project and the perceived outcomes!

14
Conclusion

• It is the management stupid!