Antioch University AURA - Antioch University Repository and Archive Student & Alumni Scholarship, including Dissertations & Theses Dissertations & Theses 2020 The Construction and Impact of Power in Cross-Sector Partnerships: An Interpretive Phenomenological Study Kimberly Allyn Walker Antioch University - PhD Program in Leadership and Change Follow this and additional works at: https://aura.edu/etds Part of the Leadership Studies Commons, Public Administration Commons, Public Affairs Commons, Public Policy Commons, and the Social Psychology and Interaction Commons Recommended Citation Walker, K. The Construction and Impact of Power in Cross-Sector Partnerships: An Interpretive Phenomenological Study.edu/etds/574 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Student & Alumni Scholarship, including Dissertations & Theses at AURA - Antioch University Repository and Archive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations & Theses by an authorized administrator of AURA - Antioch University Repository and Archive. For more information, please contact hhale@antioch.edu, wmcgrath@antioch.
The Construction and Impact of Power in Cross-Sector Partnerships: An Interpretive Phenomenological Study Kimberly Allyn Walker ORCID Scholar ID #0000-0003-1070-3765 A Dissertation Submitted to the PhD in Leadership and Change Program of Antioch University in partial fulfillment for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy May 2020 This dissertation has been approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of PhD in Leadership and Change, Graduate School of Leadership and Change, Antioch University. Dissertation Committee • Lize (A.) Booysen, DBL, Committee Chair • Donna Ladkin, PhD, Committee Member • Kirk Emerson, PhD, Committee Member Copyright 2020 Kimberly Allyn Walker All rights reserved Acknowledgments Completing this dissertation is the proudest moment of my life, and one in which I am acutely aware how much support was needed to get me here. I begin this dissertation with lots of gratitude. To C16⎯Thanks for your friendship.
What an incredible group to be a part of: our experiences together challenged and empowered me. Thank you for all the personal growth that you supported. Special recognition to Ashley Blackburn, Mike Bills, and Lauren Bullock, who have been my closest companions during this process. Mike, thanks for being a research buddy as well! To my interviewees⎯Thank you for sharing your stories with someone who was a total stranger.
I learned so much from you, have profound respect for the difficult and amazing work that you do, and really could not have done this without you! To Lize⎯Thank you for being an advisor, and then a dissertation chair, who had to be part coach, part mentor, and part guide to me at every stage of my PhD journey. Your steady support throughout the program was exactly the support I needed to reach my goals. My dissertation could not have been in better hands. I’ve never seen someone provide high-level and detailed feedback so quickly with such ease.
I stand in awe of your scholarship and am incredibly grateful for all you've done for me. To Donna⎯Thank you for the massive amount of knowledge you've imparted throughout this process. I’ve really enjoyed our time working together. I've grown tremendously as a phenomenologist and an academic because of you, and truly discovered a new way of seeing and understanding the world.
Every interaction with you during this process made me a sharper thinker. i To Kirk⎯Thank you for your collaborative governance program, which hopefully will continue to generate folks invested in cross-sector problems to solve the world, as well as bringing your expert eye to my research. I've been honored to have your thought partnership and hope to follow in your footsteps as an impressive scholar-practitioner. To Corrie⎯Thanks for being my constant cheerleader throughout this journey.
I was so lucky to have you first as a professor and then as a mentor and friend. I know I’m not alone in having benefited from your wisdom and care. To Norm⎯Thanks for unknowingly helping lead me toward this path and for teaching me how to have an impact on an enormous social issue. I use what I learned working with you every day and am grateful for your friendship.
To my grandmothers Tommie Lean Walker and Jean Patton, two of the strongest women I know⎯I hope I’ve made you proud. To the friends and coworkers who kept me going through this process, encouraged me, and checked in: thank you for your unwavering support and your friendship before, during, and (hopefully) after my PhD! To Jones⎯Thanks for being my couch or floor buddy for many a writing session. You're a good boy. To my parents, Judy and Harry (the other Drs.
Walker) ⎯I owe all of this to you. Thank you for encouraging my education and modeling what hard work and service mean. I spend every day of my life benefiting from how I was raised. I wouldn't be here without your unconditional love and support, and I am fully aware of that.
And finally, to Markus, who had to endure and sacrifice more than anyone during this process: while doing this PhD is one of the best decisions I've ever made, marrying you is still ii the very best one. As a good friend once told me, not everyone could handle being married to me. Congrats on pulling it off! And thank you for your patience and your support. Here's to post-grad life.
iii Abstract In the United States, cross-sector partnerships, a form of collaboration, are becoming increasingly common in practice (Gray & Purdy, 2018). However, questions remain regarding the effectiveness of these partnerships and if the many challenges of using them can be overcome. In particular, the intersection of cross-sector partnerships and power, which can deeply impact these partnerships, needs more attention. This study used interpretive phenomenology to understand, from the participant perspective, (a) the experience and construction of power, (b) the impact of power on participants, and (c) how power dynamics in these initiatives compare to dynamics in organizations.
Seventeen participants from four homelessness-focused Collective Impact (CI) initiatives, a popular cross-sector partnership model, were interviewed about their experiences. In addition, I reviewed key documents about each initiative. Data was interpreted using a variety of theoretical lenses, including critical theory, as well as my own work experience in this area, and carefully analyzed through iterative re-engagement, reflexivity, and thematic analysis. The findings revealed that power presented in six different ways: resources, structures and processes, identity, resistance, formal leadership, and framing and communication.
When examining the differences between collaborations, differences in these six areas, as well as the identity and ways of operating of the partner who began the partnership, seemed to influence the experience of power. Financial resources were a dominant form of power and provided some partners with disproportionate influence. Dominant partners were also able to stack power across these six areas. The impacts of power dynamics were largely negative.
Other significant findings included that some partners did not experience power at all. Critical theory and positive framing may explain this outcome. I call for an expanded CI model with a sixth condition related to power. As part of this sixth condition, I iv suggest communities make structural changes, such as, to honor discursive power more effectively, putting consumers in positions of power and rotating facilitation responsibilities.
This dissertation is available in open access at AURA: Antioch University Repository and Archive, http://aura.edu/ and Ohiolink ETD Center, https://etd.edu/ Keywords: leadership, power, power dynamics, cross-sector, collaboration, Collective Impact, absence of power, homelessness, interpretive phenomenology, IPA, interorganizational, critical theory, discursive power, resource power, identity, race, resistance, framing v Table of Contents Acknowledgments. iv Table of Contents. vi List of Tables. xi List of Figures.
xii Chapter I: Introduction. 1 Purpose of the Study. 2 Definitions of Key Terms. 4 Interorganizational or Multi-Stakeholder Partnership.
4 Cross-Sector Partnership. 5 Study Significance to Practice and the Cross-Sector Field. 5 Significance for Theory. 6 Cross-Sector Leadership.
9 Overview of Research Design. 10 Scope and Limitations of the Study. 14 Outline of the Remaining Chapters. 15 Chapter II: Literature Review.
17 Cross-Sector Partnership Origins and Motivations. 19 Partner Motivations and Initiating Factors. 19 vi Characteristics of Cross-Sector Leadership. 22 Comparison to Other Leadership Theories.
24 Leadership Roles in Cross-Sector Partnerships. 25 Leader Responsibilities and Skills. 26 Leadership Structures and Governance. 27 Challenges of Cross-Sector Partnerships.
28 Power and Trust. 28 Lack of Control or Familiar Power Sources. 29 Difficulty Defining and Measuring Success. 29 Lack of Alignment in Purpose, Commitment, or Goals.
30 Investment of Time. 30 New Roles, Skills, and Relationships. 31 Benefits of Cross-Sector Partnerships. 31 Micro-(individual) Level Benefits.
31 Meso-(organizational) Level Benefits. 32 Macro-(community) Level Benefits. 33 Factors That Influence Success. 33 Gaps in the Literature.
37 Mutually Reinforcing Activities. 37 Shared Measurement Systems. 38 Other Key Processes. 38 Leadership in CI.
39 Measures of Success and Outcomes. 39 Challenges and Criticisms of CI. 41 vii Collaborative Efforts to End Homelessness in the United States. 42 Power and Cross-Sector Partnerships.
44 Definitions of Power. 45 Leadership and Power. 46 Sources and Presentations of Power in Cross-Sector Partnerships. 48 Critical Theory and Related Frameworks.
55 Steven Lukes and Critical Theory. 58 Experiences of Power. 59 Synthesis of Power Literature. 60 Gaps in the Literature.
62 Chapter III: Research Method. 64 Research Philosophy and Approach. 66 Research Approach Justification. 71 Overview of Semi-structured Interviews.
73 Analysis and Presentation. 73 Research Design Limitations. 80 viii Chapter IV: Findings. 85 Presentation of the Findings.
88 Discussion of the Three Case Studies. 90 Constructions and Experiences of Power in Community A. 94 Perceived Impact of Power Dynamics in Community A. 97 Comparison to Power in Home Organizations in Community A.
97 Summary of Community A. 98 Constructions and Experiences of Power in Community B. 102 Perceived Impact of Power Dynamics in Community B. 105 Comparison to Power in Home Organizations in Community B.
105 Summary of Community B. 106 Constructions and Experiences of Power in Community C. 110 Perceived Impact of Power Dynamics in Community C .110 Comparison to Power in Home Organizations in Community C .110 Summary of Community C. 111 Conclusion and Integration of the Community Narratives.
111 Themes from Interviews Across all Three Cases. 114 ix Integration of Findings of Case Studies and Individual Interviews. 130 Chapter Summary and Conclusion. 133 Reflection on Differences Between Communities.
134 Review of All Themes. 135 Experiences and Constructions of Power. 137 Summary of Research Question 1. 146 Perceived Impact of Power.
147 Comparison to Home Organization. 148 Collective Impact and Critical Theory. 149 Significance of This Study. 151 Implications for Leadership and Collaborative Theory.
153 Findings That Align with the Literature. 153 Findings That Did Not Align with the Literature. 154 Recommendations for Action. 161 Lack of Definition of Power.
161 Lack of Diversity in Interview Sample. 161 Sensitivity of the Topic. 163 Limited Responses to Some Questions. 163 Areas for Future Study.
164 Closing Reflections on Researcher Experience. 168 Appendix A: Interview Guide. 190 Appendix B: IRB Informed Consent Form. 193 Appendix C: Email to Participants.
197 x List of Tables Table 4.1 Age Range of Participants .2 Partner Type across Interviewees .3 Sector Type of Interviewees .4 Alignment on Coding.5 Demographics of Each Community .6 Unique Themes and Subthemes Highlighted in the Three Cases .7 Themes and Subthemes Highlighted in All Three Cases .1 Themes and Subthemes in How Power and Power Asymmetries are Experienced, Constructed, and Understood (Research Question 1) .2 Interpreting the Findings Through Critical Theory. 150 xi List of Figures Figure 1. Data Analysis Process. Collective Impact Model.
Expanded Collective Impact Model.