Djoko Sigit Sayogo
J. Ramon Gil-Garcia
ABSTRACT
Cross-boundary information sharing has been studied for many years now and it is still a very important challenge to government agencies from around the world. Existing literature points to important differences on the determinants of information sharing depending on which organizations are involved and how different they are from each other. Whether the organizations are part of a bigger entity or not seems also important. This study systematically compares the determinants of information sharing success in three different types of inter-organizational collaborations: (1) intra-agency, (2) inter-agency, and (3) cross-sectoral. The study employs data from a national survey distributed to public managers and other actors involved in public health and criminal justice information integration initiatives at the state and local level in the United States. The analysis results confirm that each type of cross-boundary information sharing has distinctive types of determinants affecting the success of the initiative. The results also demonstrate that four variables – effective communication, the involvement of executive, exercise of formal authority, and interoperable standards - significantly predict the likelihood of intra-agency IIS success. Two variables – informal leaders and technical infrastructures - significantly predict inter-agency success. Finally, only one variable, information needs, predict the probability of cross-sectorial information sharing success. From a practical perspective, public managers may want to differentiate how they manage the partnership depending on the types of information sharing to ensure the success of information sharing initiative.
- Johnston, E. W., & Hansen, D. L. (2011). Design lessons for smart governance infrastructures. Transforming American governance: Rebooting the public square, 197-212.Google Scholar
- Goodman, E. P. (2013). Smart Cities Meet Anchor Institutions: the Case of Broadband and the Public Library. Fordham Urb. LJ, 41, 1665.Google Scholar
- Scholl, H. J., & Scholl, M. C. (2014). Smart governance: A roadmap for research and practice. IConference 2014 Proceedings.Google Scholar
- Gil-Garcia, J. R., Pardo, T. A., & Burke, G. B. (2010). Conceptualizing inter-organizational information integration in government. In H. J. Scholl (Ed.), E-Government: Information, Technology, and Transformation. M.E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
- Pardo, T. A., Gil-Garcia, J. R., & Burke, G. B. (2006). Building response capacity through cross-boundary information sharing: The critical role of trust. In P. Cunningham & M. Cunningham (Eds.), Exploiting the Knowledge Economy: Issues, Applications, Case Studies (pp. 507–514). Retrieved from http://dev5.ctg.albany.edu/publications/journals/e-2006_building_response/e-2006_building_response.pdfGoogle Scholar
- Dawes, S. S. (1996). Interagency information sharing: Expected benefits, manageable risks. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 15 (3), 377-394.Google Scholar
- Greenwald, H. P. (2008, April). Challenges in cross-sectoral partnerships: An organizational perspective. In Consortium on Collaborative Governance (CCG) Mini-Conference.Google Scholar
- Gil-García, J. R., & Pardo, T. A. (2005). E-government success factors: Mapping practical tools to theoretical foundations. Government information quarterly, 22 (2), 187-216.Google Scholar
- Pardo, T.A. and Tayi, G.K. (2007). Interorganizational information integration: A key enabler for digital government. Government Information Quarterly, 24(4), 691–715.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Andersen, D. F., & Dawes, S. S. (1991). Government information management: A primer and casebook. Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
- Andrews, R., & Entwistle, T. (2010). Does cross-sectoral partnership deliver? An empirical exploration of public service effectiveness, efficiency, and equity. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 20 (3), 679-701.Google Scholar
- Zhang, X. (2005). Critical success factors for public–private partnerships in infrastructure development. Journal of construction engineering and management, 131 (1), 3-14.Google Scholar
- Gottschalk, P. (2009). Maturity levels for interoperability in digital government. Government Information Quarterly, 26 (1), 75-81.Google Scholar
- McDermott, P. (2010). Building open government. Government Information Quarterly, 27 (4), 401-413.Google Scholar
- Scholl, H. J., & Klischewski, R. (2007). E-government integration and interoperability: framing the research agenda. International Journal of Public Administration, 30 (8-9), 889-920.Google Scholar
- Yang, T. M., & Maxwell, T. A. (2011). Information-sharing in public organizations: A literature review of interpersonal, intra-organizational and inter-organizational success factors. Government Information Quarterly, 28 (2), 164-175.Google Scholar
- Chen, D., Doumeingts, G., & Vernadat, F. (2008). Architectures for enterprise integration and interoperability: Past, present and future. Computers in Industry, 59 (7), 647–659. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2007.12.016Google ScholarDigital Library
- Yang, T. M., Pardo, T., & Wu, Y. J. (2014). How is information shared across the boundaries of government agencies? An e-Government case study. Government Information Quarterly, 31 (4), 637-652.Google Scholar
- Sayogo, D. S., Najafabadi, M. M., Tayi, G. K., & Pardo, T. A. (2016). Privacy, Confidentiality, and Security Challenges for Interoperable Data Platforms in Supply Chains. In H. Jarman & L. F. Luna-Reyes (Eds.), Private Data and Public Value (pp. 109–128). Springer International Publishing. Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-27823-0_6Google ScholarCross Ref
- Dawes, S. S. (2010). Stewardship and usefulness: Policy principles for information-based transparency. Government Information Quarterly, 27 (4), 377–383. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2010.07.001Google ScholarCross Ref
- Masten, S. E., & Saussier, S. (2000). Econometrics of contracts: an assessment of developments in the empirical literature on contracting. Revue D’économie Industrielle, 92 (1), 215–236.Google Scholar
- Mellewigt, T., Madhok, A., & Weibel, A. (2007). Trust and formal contracts in interorganizational relationships — substitutes and complements. Managerial & Decision Economics, 28 (8), 833–847. http://doi.org/10.1002/mde.1321Google ScholarCross Ref
- Dekker, H. C. (2004). Control of inter-organizational relationships: evidence on appropriation concerns and coordination requirements. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 29 (1), 27–49. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0361-3682(02)00056-9Google ScholarCross Ref
- Tanggaard, L. (2007). Learning at trade vocational school and learning at work: boundary crossing in apprentices’ everyday life. Journal of Education and Work, 20 (5), 453-466.Google Scholar
- Bachmann, R. (2001). Trust, Power and Control in Trans-Organizational Relations. Organization Studies, 22 (2), 337–365. http://doi.org/10.1177/0170840601222007Google ScholarCross Ref
- Shapiro, S. P. (1987). The Social Control of Impersonal Trust. American Journal of Sociology, 93 (3), 623–658.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Scott, J. E. (2000). Facilitating Interorganizational Learning with Information Technology. Journal of Management Information Systems, 17 (2), 81–113.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Dirks, K. T., & Ferrin, D. L. (2001). The Role of Trust in Organizational Settings. Organization Science, 12 (4), 450–467. http://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.12.4.450.10640Google ScholarDigital Library
- Thomson, A. M., & Perry, J. L. (2006). Collaboration Processes: Inside the Black Box. Public Administration Review, 66, 20–32. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00663.xGoogle ScholarCross Ref
- Pardo, T. A., Burke, B., Gil-Garcia, J. R., & Guler, A. (2009). Clarity of roles and responsibilities in government cross-boundary information sharing initiatives: Identifying the determinants. In Proceedings of 5th International Conference on e-Government (pp. 148–155). Retrieved from http://www.ctg.albany.edu/publications/journals/iceg_2009_clarityofroles?chapter=&PrintVersion=2Google Scholar
- Sayogo, D. S., Gil-Garcia, J. R., & Cronemberger, F. (2018). Clarity of roles and responsibilities in interagency information sharing (IIS) projects: determinants and impact on success. International Journal of Electronic Governance, 10 (3), 296-316.Google Scholar
- Luna-Reyes, L. F., Black, L. J., Cresswell, A. M., & Pardo, T. A. (2008). Knowledge sharing and trust in collaborative requirements analysis. System Dynamics Review, 24 (3), 265–297. http://doi.org/10.1002/sdr.404Google ScholarCross Ref
- Müller‐Seitz, G. (2012). Leadership in interorganizational networks: a literature review and suggestions for future research. International Journal of Management Reviews, 14 (4), 428-443.Google Scholar
- Sayogo, D. S., Gil-Garcia, J. R., & Pardo, T. A. (2016, June). Modeling the roles of leadership for inter-organizational information sharing and integration success. In Proceedings of the 17th International Digital Government Research Conference on Digital Government Research (pp. 146-154).Google ScholarDigital Library
- Casciaro, T. (2003). Determinants of governance structure in alliances: the role of strategic, task and partner uncertainties. Industrial and Corporate Change, 12 (6), 1223-1251.Google Scholar
- Harris, M. (1998). Doing it their way: Organizational challenges for voluntary associations. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 27 (2), 144-158.Google Scholar
- Bryson, J. M., Crosby, B. C., & Stone, M. M. (2006). The design and implementation of Cross‐Sector collaborations: Propositions from the literature. Public administration review, 66, 44-55.Google Scholar
- Sayogo, D. S., & Gil-Garcia, J. R. (2015, January). Analyzing the influence of governance structure determinants on the success of inter-organizational information sharing initiatives. In 2015 48th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 2232-2241). IEEE.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Cairns, B., & Harris, M. (2011). Local cross‐sector partnerships: Tackling the challenges collaboratively. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 21 (3), 311-324.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Tsai, W. (2002). Social structure of “coopetition” within a multiunit organization: Coordination, competition, and intraorganizational knowledge sharing. Organization science, 13 (2), 179-190.Google Scholar
- Rethemeyer, R. K., & Hatmaker, D. M. (2008). Network management reconsidered: An inquiry into management of network structures in public sector service provision. Journal of public administration research and theory, 18 (4), 617-646.Google Scholar
- Salojärvi, H., Sainio, L. M., Saarenketo, S., & Tarkiainen, A. (2010). What Factors Enhance Intra-Organizational Customer Knowledge Sharing in International Key Account Management?. In Industrial Marketing and Purchasing Conference 26th IMP-Conference, Budapest, Hungary.Google Scholar
- Provan, K. G., & Kenis, P. (2008). Modes of network governance: Structure, management, and effectiveness. Journal of public administration research and theory, 18 (2), 229-252.Google Scholar
- Helfrich. (2013). Common Goods Don't Simply Exist – They Are Created. In D. Bollier & S. Helfrich (Eds.), The Wealth of the Commons: A world beyond market & state. The Commons Strategy Group. Retrieved from http://wealthofthecommons.org/essay/common-goods-don%E2%80%99t-simply-exist-%E2%80%93-they-are-createdGoogle Scholar
- Sahin, I., & Gozubenli, M. (2014). Cross-Sectoral Governance: Examining the Florida Integrated Network For Data Exchange And Retrieval (Finder). European Scientific Journal, 10 (2).Google Scholar
Recommendations
Understanding the determinants of success in inter-organizational information sharing initiatives: results from a national survey
dg.o '14: Proceedings of the 15th Annual International Conference on Digital Government ResearchInter-organizational collaboration and information sharing have the potential of generating great benefits to government agencies and other social actors dealing with complex public problems. However, these initiatives have proved to be difficult to ...
Examining Cross-Agency Collaborations in E-Government Initiatives
HICSS '06: Proceedings of the 39th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - Volume 04Cross-agency collaborations are critical to the success of e-government, which has great potential to transform the way that governments work, share information and deliver services to external and internal clients. Most prior research examining cross-...
Exploring the determinants of cross-boundary information sharing in the public sector: An e-Government case study in Taiwan
This paper explores the complexity of cross-boundary information sharing in the public sector. In particular, determinants influencing interagency information sharing are investigated and discussed, and a case study of Taiwan e-Government is employed. ...
Comments