It outlines the mechanics of the network – who should be involved, how they should interact, how resources will be shared, and how the network’s effectiveness will be measured and improved over time. On the other hand, a network strategy is a more specific plan that focuses on how to build, manage, and leverage a particular network effectively. For example, a non-profit organization might adopt a network-based strategy to amplify its social impact by forming partnerships with other organizations. It recognizes the value of networks and includes building, managing, or participating in networks as part of the strategy to achieve desired outcomes. This often comes at the cost of strong network norms and diversity.Ī: A network-based strategy is a broader decision or plan that incorporates the concept of leveraging networks to accomplish wider organizational or community goals. However, a unitary governance model can increase coordination with a single individual accountable for much of the network’s operations. Shared governance often helps facilitate emergence – the development of new goals, ways of thinking, and innovations seemingly from random interaction among partners. Second, network governance can be unitary, exercised by just one or a small number of organizations (backbone-organization), or it can be shared, with most or even all organizations taking part in decision making activity. Internal governance is often best, allowing the network total autonomy, however external governance can help keep the network accountable, especially to those supporting their work. First, network governance can happen within the network (self-governance) or from outside the network (board-governance). The first step is to map your network to see how it exists today, and then begin making intentional changes to move it towards where you want it to be in the future.Īll networks require some level of governance – individuals or organizations managing the day-to-day activity of the network, making major decisions, and working to implement them. However it can make a transformational difference in how you work with your network, making it well worth the effort. This saves you time and money that can be used to build new partnerships, while still leveraging all the value your current partners provide.ĭesigning a strategic network structure is time-consuming and never totally finished, as new partners come and go. Healthy networks build a structure strategically, taking advantage of network concepts like sub-groups, weak ties, and bridging nodes that help you connect with more partners indirectly. In reality, this saps your energy and time very quickly. Alternatively, sparse, open networks have “structural holes,” gaps between partners, that force them to connect indirectly through intermediaries.Īs I mentioned earlier, many networks aim to create a dense cloud of ties, believing that more partnership is better. For example, dense, closed networks consist of many direct connections between partner – everyone knows and works with nearly everyone else. The structure of a network consists of the way in which partners connect, both directly and indirectly.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |