The impact of hybridity on PPP governance and related accountability mechanisms: the case of UK education PPPs

IF 4.6 3区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS, FINANCE Accounting Auditing & Accountability Journal Pub Date : 2021-06-24 DOI:10.1108/aaaj-12-2019-4324
A. Stafford, Pamela Stapleton
{"title":"The impact of hybridity on PPP governance and related accountability mechanisms: the case of UK education PPPs","authors":"A. Stafford, Pamela Stapleton","doi":"10.1108/aaaj-12-2019-4324","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeContemporary organisational landscapes offer opportunities for hybrids to thrive. Public–private partnerships (PPPs) are one thriving hybrid form incorporating the use of resources and/or structures from both public and private sectors. The study examines the impact of such a hybrid structure on governance and accountability mechanisms in a context of institutional complexity.Design/methodology/approachThis study uses an approach that draws on institutional logics and hybridity to examine governance arrangements in the PPP policy created for the delivery of UK schools. Unusually, it employs a comparative case study of how four local governments implemented the policy. It draws on a framework developed by Polzer et al. (2017) to examine the level of engagement between multiple logics and hybrid structures and applies this to the delivery of governance and accountability for public money.FindingsThe Polzer et al. framework enables a study of how the nature of hybrids can vary in terms of their governance, ownership and control relations. The findings show how the relationships between levels of engagement of multiple logics and hybrid structures can impact on governance and accountability for public money. Layering and blending combinations led to increased adoption of private sector accountability structures, whilst a hybrid with parallel co-existence of community and market logics delivered a long-term governance structure.Research limitations/implicationsThe paper examines the operation of hybrids in a complex education PPP environment in only four local governments and therefore cannot provide representative answers across the population as a whole. However, given the considerable variation found across the four examples, the paper shows there can be significant differentiation in how multiple logics engage at different levels and in varying combinations even in the same hybrid setting. The paper focuses on capital investment implementation and its evaluation, so it is a limitation that the operational stage of PPP projects is not studied.Practical implicationsThe findings have political relevance because the two local government bodies with more robust combinations of multiple logics were more successful in getting funds and delivering schools in their geographical areas.Originality/valueThe study extends Polzer et al.'s (2017) research on hybridity by showing that there can be significant differentiation in how multiple logics engage at different levels and in varying combinations even in what was planned to be the same hybrid setting. It shows how in situations of institutional complexity certain combinations of logics lead to differentiation in governance and accountability, creating fragmented focus on the related public accountability structures. This matters because it becomes harder to hold government to account for public spending.","PeriodicalId":48311,"journal":{"name":"Accounting Auditing & Accountability Journal","volume":"41 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounting Auditing & Accountability Journal","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/aaaj-12-2019-4324","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

PurposeContemporary organisational landscapes offer opportunities for hybrids to thrive. Public–private partnerships (PPPs) are one thriving hybrid form incorporating the use of resources and/or structures from both public and private sectors. The study examines the impact of such a hybrid structure on governance and accountability mechanisms in a context of institutional complexity.Design/methodology/approachThis study uses an approach that draws on institutional logics and hybridity to examine governance arrangements in the PPP policy created for the delivery of UK schools. Unusually, it employs a comparative case study of how four local governments implemented the policy. It draws on a framework developed by Polzer et al. (2017) to examine the level of engagement between multiple logics and hybrid structures and applies this to the delivery of governance and accountability for public money.FindingsThe Polzer et al. framework enables a study of how the nature of hybrids can vary in terms of their governance, ownership and control relations. The findings show how the relationships between levels of engagement of multiple logics and hybrid structures can impact on governance and accountability for public money. Layering and blending combinations led to increased adoption of private sector accountability structures, whilst a hybrid with parallel co-existence of community and market logics delivered a long-term governance structure.Research limitations/implicationsThe paper examines the operation of hybrids in a complex education PPP environment in only four local governments and therefore cannot provide representative answers across the population as a whole. However, given the considerable variation found across the four examples, the paper shows there can be significant differentiation in how multiple logics engage at different levels and in varying combinations even in the same hybrid setting. The paper focuses on capital investment implementation and its evaluation, so it is a limitation that the operational stage of PPP projects is not studied.Practical implicationsThe findings have political relevance because the two local government bodies with more robust combinations of multiple logics were more successful in getting funds and delivering schools in their geographical areas.Originality/valueThe study extends Polzer et al.'s (2017) research on hybridity by showing that there can be significant differentiation in how multiple logics engage at different levels and in varying combinations even in what was planned to be the same hybrid setting. It shows how in situations of institutional complexity certain combinations of logics lead to differentiation in governance and accountability, creating fragmented focus on the related public accountability structures. This matters because it becomes harder to hold government to account for public spending.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
混合性对PPP治理及相关问责机制的影响:以英国教育PPP为例
临时的组织格局为混合型企业提供了茁壮成长的机会。公私伙伴关系(ppp)是一种蓬勃发展的混合形式,结合了公共和私营部门的资源和/或结构。该研究考察了在体制复杂性背景下这种混合结构对治理和问责机制的影响。设计/方法/方法本研究采用了一种利用制度逻辑和混合性的方法来检查为英国学校的交付而制定的PPP政策中的治理安排。不同寻常的是,它采用了四个地方政府如何实施该政策的比较案例研究。它借鉴了Polzer等人(2017)开发的框架,以检查多种逻辑和混合结构之间的参与水平,并将其应用于公共资金的治理和问责。Polzer等人的框架能够研究混合企业在治理、所有权和控制关系方面的本质如何变化。研究结果表明,多种逻辑和混合结构的参与水平之间的关系如何影响公共资金的治理和问责制。分层和混合组合导致私营部门问责结构的采用增加,而社区和市场逻辑并行共存的混合提供了长期治理结构。研究局限/启示本文仅考察了四个地方政府在复杂教育PPP环境下的混合模式的运行情况,因此无法在整个人口中提供具有代表性的答案。然而,考虑到在四个例子中发现的相当大的差异,本文表明,即使在相同的混合设置中,多种逻辑在不同层次和不同组合中的参与方式也可能存在显著差异。本文主要研究的是资本投资实施及其评价,没有对PPP项目的运营阶段进行研究是一个局限性。这些发现具有政治意义,因为这两个地方政府机构在多种逻辑的有力结合下,在各自的地理区域获得资金和办学更成功。独创性/价值该研究扩展了Polzer等人(2017)对混合性的研究,表明即使在计划成为相同混合设置的情况下,多种逻辑在不同层次和不同组合中的参与方式也可能存在显着差异。它显示了在制度复杂性的情况下,某些逻辑组合如何导致治理和问责制的分化,从而导致对相关公共问责制结构的分散关注。这很重要,因为让政府对公共支出负责变得更加困难。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.50
自引率
14.30%
发文量
77
期刊介绍: Dedicated to the advancement of accounting knowledge, the Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal publishes high quality manuscripts concerning the interaction between accounting/auditing and their socio-economic and political environments, encouraging critical analysis of policy and practice in these areas. The journal also seeks to encourage debate about the philosophies and traditions which underpin the accounting profession, the implications of new policy alternatives and the impact of accountancy on the socio-economic and political environment.
期刊最新文献
Exploring a Soccer Society: dreams, themes and the beautiful game Reporting controversial issues in controversial industries AAAJ Literature and Insights 36.7/8 Editorial The accounting profession is undergoing a change An autistic in postgraduate accounting
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1