Understanding and Operating in Complex Networks: a Focus on the Role of the ‘Networker’

When Might a Network Approach be Appropriate?

Issue

Detail

•   
• When you cannot undertake the task without the participation of other parties, including industry and community and other government bodies.
•  

The resources (including knowledge, data and influence) to address complex NRM problems are often held by a number of organisations. This interdependence requires a network approach to successfully address these problems, while retaining sufficient organisational autonomy.

•   
• When it is undesirable or inappropriate to use authoritative or market-based approaches.
•  

Particularly when working on regional/place-based programs, building relationships can become as important a goal as the ‘substantive outcomes’ of the network process. Employing an authoritative approach, or an unsupported market based instrument, may destroy trust in Government and erode the networks (social capital) that is crucial for a community to address emerging threats.

•   
• When you are seeking to build the collaborative capacity of a group.
•  

While it may not be a required goal of program or project, it may be desirable to enhance the resilience of network members by building their ability to work together. This will also build the ability of the network (or community) to respond to government initiatives.

•   
• When you are seeking to address a complex (or wicked) NRM problem* with numerous stakeholders.
•  

Seeking to solve only a part of a complex problem in your narrow field of responsibility may be totally ineffective in the context of the range of problems facing regional communities. A collaborative approach may be the only effective and efficient way of dealing holistically with a range of interrelated issues that intersect organisational responsibilities.

*NB. If every stakeholder accepts that both the problem and solution are straightforward, a public manager may undertake action unilaterally. However, some seemingly simple problems may become complex or wicked if latent networks of interest groups are activated in response to the ‘solutions’ you implement. Thinking a problem is ‘simple’ may only be a consequence of how you are framing the problem and what you want to achieve.

•   
• Joint action may be a required part of the policy ‘package’ developed earlier in the policy process.
•  

Even if collaborative action is a requirement in your program or project you need to ascertain if you have suitable support and commitment for a network process.  The need for ‘collaboration’ can be included in policy development without a real understanding of the costs of doing it. Being open about the boundaries of collaboration is critical in this case.

When Might a Network Approach be Inappropriate?

Issue

Detail

•   
• When there is no clear support for a network process.
•  

It is critical that you consider carefully whether there is sufficient organisational support for a network process and a commitment from government to the collaborative process, including the possibility of compromising on some aspirations to achieve an agreed outcome.

•   
• If you do not have adequate time, resources and support to put into the process of management (assuming you have a choice to not use a participatory process)
•  

You should not commence a network process if there is little support for the likely high transaction costs. You should also not represent your organisation in a network if you cannot sustain your participation. It will decrease trust in government and your (and the Department’s) perceived authority in the network if you are not a consistent contributor, or withdraw without an explanation that satisfied the network.

•   
• When the program/project has a high chance of failure because it is a highly contested issue with a history of acrimonious conflict.
•  

You should consider whether a good network process will likely be successful in ameliorating an issue where there is significant conflict. In many cases, a well run network approach may be the only way to deal with such issues and re-build trust in the Government. Judgement, however, must be made as to whether compromise is possible and whether there is scope to agree to disagree in order to move forward. Failing in such situation may be worse that not intervening at all in terms of loss of trust in the Department.

•   
• When there is not an established group with a desire to work towards a common goal OR an individual charged with the role of ‘managing’ the network
•  

It is folly to expect a network to just work. If there is no joint commitment to the network process, or an individual (this may be someone else) with the time, energy and resources to put into the process of managing the network, then you can be wasting money and time on a doomed process. This does not preclude you from joining a network that is being ‘managed’ by others and seeking to employ network management processes yourself to improve network performance (given you have the resources and support to do this).

 Failure of a network process because of lack of organisational support or commitment to collaborative action, or the perception that the network was a ‘token gesture’, will likely lead to a loss of trust in the Government and reduced social capital.

What type of network are you in? *

I have a clear statutory responsibility (full time or part time) for an ongoing task or program (eg. emergency response), but a number of required resources that are not aligned or people I cannot command to act.

Even ongoing ad hoc networks that engage often, or irregularly, and have familiar tasks, require management to ensure that they are immediately effective upon activation, and there are no hidden assumptions about roles and responsibilities.

Focus on understanding the level of influence and control in the network and synthesising the range of views in the network into a clear understanding of required roles and responsibilities and commitment to the joint tasks. Focus likely also includes formalising informal processes and agreements to stabilise the network.

Intermittent (emergency) network

I have relatively clear program/ project objectives and performance indicators. A mostly defined network. Short term projects, perhaps disbanding after output or requiring ongoing Monitoring.

Some instrumental actions still require that you operate in a complex network in which you only have partial control. For example, it may be desirable that some service providers join the network if their work will impact on the outcome.

Focus on identifying and recruiting appropriate people with the skills and resources required. Synthesising the range of views into clear understanding and action and developing procedures to ensure efficient/effective interaction.

Action network

I am in charge of, or a participant in, a complex policy/implementation issue with potentially conflicting goals/views and many stakeholders. You have clear goals and maybe a statutory responsibility.

How do you meet your own organisational goals while at the same time allowing others in the network to also meet their own? Goals will be mutually created and adjusted over time. If you are a minor player, not in control, what do you bring to the network? What is you level of power?

Focus on developing support from network members and stakeholders for you position. Influence the operating structure of the network and its prevailing values and norms to ensure a shared purpose, minimise destructive conflict, and ensure your goals are appropriately incorporated.

Programmatic network

I am involved in a wicked policy/ implementation issue: That is there is little agreement on causes and/or solutions to the problem and many divergent interests.

Top-down solutions to (parts of) a wicked problem will likely be met with resistance or outrage. Simple responses to complex problems can make them worse and further erode trust in the government.

Focus here will be directed to furthering collective understanding of the nature of the problem and of each other’s perspectives. This is unlikely to be a decision-making network, but focused on agreeing on ways to move towards a collective understanding and long term response.

Passive learning network

My goal is to build my ability to respond flexibly to change and improve my performance. A focus on Monitoring key contacts and identifying potential resource value in my connections.

Building flexibility in you work life and your networks is important. How do you do this when you are flat out managing your substantive role? Can you draw on resources to respond to an emerging challenge that you might not be able to imagine at the moment?

Focus here would be directed at strategically building your networks while reducing transaction costs. Tactics around activating new contacts and reducing redundant contacts are likely to be important.

Contingent network

Setting up the network. Points to consider before you engage a network to ensure you have all the appropriate resources and know-how for effective network action.

Self

This focuses on the understanding, Perceptions and behaviour of the network managers themselves

Anticipating

What may arise during the life of the network that might hold it up or completely derail its activities? What assumptions do you have that may have consequences later? This includes processes and understandings that must be developed early in the network’s life in order to forestall common network problems

Perceptions

These tactics are aimed at influencing, challenging, or encouraging participant’s conceptualisations of issues in the network

Monitoring

This involves watching the progress of the network and ensuring that emerging processes do not develop into something that disrupts progress.

Connections

These tactics are aimed at influencing the relationships and interaction between participants in the network.

Managing

This includes strategic processes to respond to challenges common in networks

Institutions

These tactics are aimed at the formal and informal rules that structure the relationship between network participants.

Innovating

Tactics here would focus on processes that will aid a network to break out of conventional thinking

Mobilising

These are aimed at securing external support for network action

Consolidating

Tactics for where a network is well established and needs to take stock of achievements and work to outcomes

Transactions

These tactics are about reducing the cost of interaction to minimise barriers to participation

Sustaining

The focus here is on generic processes to ensure the network functions efficiently. It includes a range of administrative and facilitation issues common to networks

Communication

Focused on more generic ways to improve communication in a way that is suited to diverse networks

Evaluating

# In development

B

< Boxes (N) shaded grey suggest the network type the tactics would be suitable for. However, this is not fixed. Most tactics can be used in most network types at various times. Importantly, your ability to apply many of the tactics strongly depends on your legitimacy as a network manager. Perceived instrumental or top down behaviour will be resisted or erode trust.

Tools & Tactics – Instigating, Monitoring and Sustaining networks

S

A

N

Issue

Detail

Example Tactics

S
e
l
f

Do you have a clear understanding of the desired outcome of the network approach?
   Have you considered all that is required to get to that outcome?

Go back to square one. Do not pass GO. Do not spend any money.

•   
• Utilise the Outcomes Framework to clearly define program/project goals
•  

D

E

P
l
a
n n
i
n
g

Do you have a clear understanding of the scope of the network action?
   What is ‘not negotiable’?

Potential participants in the network will need clarity in the purpose of the network action in order to decide whether to join. Surprises, perceived deception, or encroaching on others’ domain can damage network relationships and hinder progress.

•   
• Be absolutely clear right from the start what the ‘givens’ are what areas are out of bounds and what your own goals are in the network
•   
• Make sure you have clear and concise story to take to potential network members.
•  

D

E

M o
b
i
l
i
s
i
n
 g 

Do you have organisational support for a network approach? Are you sure it extends beyond your immediate supervisor?

For the network manager, there can be lack of recognition of the time spent on network duties This can mean a potential inability to get support and enormous pressure to complete a range of tasks in minimal time.

•   
• Negotiate right from the start the time and resources that will be required to undertake a network approach properly. If no supported, consider other approaches.
•   
• Cultivate ‘champions’ in your organisation who can speak for your work and can allow you ‘breathing space’.
•  

E

Is there acceptance in your organisation of the need for some compromise on aspirations in a network? Do you know how far these aspirations can flex?

There can be significant loss of trust in government if network negotiated decisions are overruled. Undertaking a network management approach implies a commitment to the joint outcomes. Any boundaries need to be transparent from the start.

•   
• Be sure you understand what will be an acceptable outcome by critical stakeholders (and where you might be able to push the boundaries a bit).
•   
• Be absolutely clear in the way you communicate this to the network.
•  

D

E

C
o
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
s

Have you considered the full range of stakeholders that may have an interest in the outcome of the network action? Are they sufficiently represented?

Insufficient democratic legitimacy can lead to conflict or outrage, and program and policy failure. All critical interest groups should have access to the network. Implementation and/or enforcement can then be easier and less costly

•   
• Complete a Network Stakeholder Analysis (in development)
•   
•  
•  

E

S
e
l
f

A

Have you allowed enough time for the process of network management? Have you considered what administrative support and resources you might need or can access?

Managing a network takes time. The transaction costs of a network managers role are frequently underestimated and under-resourced. Not all required resources will be evident at the start of network action, so allow flexibility.

•   
• Develop a network management plan, considering the range of resources you may need and the time you will need to manage them. Communicate the plan clearly with your managers so that there is no misunderstanding about the resources and time required.
•  

E

Tools & Tactics – Instigating, Monitoring and Sustaining networks

S

A

N

Issue

Detail

Example Tactics

A
 n
 t
 i
 c
 i
 p
 a
 t
 i
 n
 g

P
e
r
c
 e
 p
 t
 i
 o
  n
  s

Build some rules of interaction early in the network process

The formal and informal rules in a network have an important organising role. It is harder to change embedded rules than it is to design them early in a process.  Be careful not to create rules that restrict the ability of the network to change as required.

•   
• Design the ‘rules’ of the network in consultation with network members.
•   
• Find a way to frequently revisit these rules until they become standard practice.
•  

E

Do you have the ‘legitimacy’ to take on the role of manager in the network?

Insufficient perceived legitimacy will dilute management actions. Being the responsible/lead agency does not ensure you have the power or ability to lead. You may need to build that authority over time.

•   
• Demonstrate the support of a departmental person in senior management, or invite them to a meeting.
•   
• Identify opinion leaders in the network and build your relationship with them.
•  

E

Do the members of the network understand the full scope of a network process and the different way of going about decision making.

This is a particularly important part of the role of the network manager. Not everyone has experience working in networks where goals must be negotiated and compromises made. If members revert to old ways it will destabilise the network.

•   
• Make clear at the start the unique elements of working in networks and potential issues that may arise.
•   
• Check and re-check that there is a clear understanding of the goals of the network and implications of every decision made.
•  

E

C
o
n
n
e
c
t
i
 o
 n
 s
 

Do network members sufficiently understand your organisations’ position/role in the network action?

Transparency is important for building trust. While you still need to pursue organisational goals in the network, convergence of objectives will likely require agreeing to disagree on some points to move forward.

•   
• Articulate the tensions between your own role as a government officer, and as a network member.
•   
• Be absolutely clear what outcomes are important to you and what expectations there might be in your hierarchy.
•  

E

How will you handle the ‘usual suspects’? How will you ensure the appropriate integration of new people into an established network?

Networks that have worked together before may require less effort to develop trust. However, such networks may reproduce familiar routines and responses, or resist new players or ideas.

•   
• Be prepared to challenge the network to broaden thinking and resist attempts to exclude other interests.
•   
• Developing rules that regulate new entries may be useful to prevent exclusion of important interests
•  

E

A

Consider the range of people/resources in the network. Is it diverse enough to provide a flexible response to any emerging challenges?

A greater diversity of interests leads to a greater bank of knowledge and ideas, increasing the likelihood of innovative solutions to complex problems. A network needs to cultivate a repertoire of responses to respond to surprises.

•   
• The flexibility does not have to be only in the network itself. Ensure that the team thinks about who they are connected with who might be useful in the future.
•   
• A future scenarios process might stimulate thinking
•  

B

E

Tools & Tactics – Instigating, Monitoring and Sustaining networks

S

A

N

Issue

Detail

Example Tactics

A
n
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
i
n
g

C
 o
 n
 n
  e
  c
  t
  i
  o
  n
  s

What if there are critical skills missing in the network.

It will be difficult or impossible to command people to build their skills in a horizontal network as you could in a hierarchical network.

•   
• Connect new people with those in the network with the required skills
•   
• Develop a schedule of minimum skills and seek support for it in the organisation’s of network members
•  

C

D

E

Have you considered how you will handle a situation where a participant must significantly compromise their goals?

Network situations inevitably require compromise on the part of most, if not all, participants. However, a perceived unequal distribution of benefits can erode trust, delay action or fuel opposition to the network (within and without).

•   
• Be clear up-front that compromise is a part of a network process, but that it may mean progress where none was possible before (agreeing to disagree is OK)
•   
• Consider what incentives or compensation may be available if the need arises.
•  

D

E

M
 o
 b
 i
 l
 i
 s
 e

A

How will you sustain support for the network?

Organisational support (eg. permission, money, advocacy) is critical for network dealing with complex and wicked issues.

•   
• Find a person with more influence higher in your organisation who is interested in your work or wants what you or are developing.
•   
• Be bold and ask for introductions and connection to their networks.
•  

B

E

Broaden your information-source base

If you don’t know something, you might know who will know. A diversity of contacts means flexibility. There are only so many contacts you can maintain, so be strategic.

•   
• Map your information sources so you can keep better tabs on them, or know what information might be missing.
•   
• Find a balance between frequent and infrequent contact. It is important to maintain ‘weak ties’ but don’t make it too hard for yourself.
•  

E

M
 o
 n
 i
 t
 o
 r
 i
 n
 g

C
o
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
s

A

Is the network process transparent?

One of the biggest criticisms of network processes is that they lack transparency. Representation by stakeholders in the network does not reduce the need for clear communication. Don’t assume network members are doing their bit.

•   
• Encourage those who have important links to key stakeholders.
•   
• Develop a process to formalise feedback on contacts
•   
•  
•  

E

A

Does the network have the right mix of leaders?

Networks may need multiple ‘leaders’: to manage the functional aspects internal to the network, to work at the interface between the network and their agencies, and to manage inter-organisational relations and seek resources.

•   
• Identify key links that need to be stronger (both internally and externally) and identify which network member might be able to take a role in brokering the relationship.
•   
• Build the networking skills on others by explaining the processes you are using and why.
•  

E

Tools & Tactics – Instigating, Monitoring and Sustaining networks

S

A

N

Issue

Detail

Example Tactics

A

Is there widespread support for the network in the hierarchy of the various network members?

Maintaining cohesiveness can be difficult if  network members’ managers are not supportive or are unwilling to commit to full participation in the process of network action

•   
• Encourage key ‘supporters’ to influence resistant organisations to ‘trust’ in the network.
•   
• Organise processes to bring the hierarchy of all network members together. Ensure you have sufficient cheerleaders for your work present.
•  

E

A

Watch your language!

Specific language forms can arise in networks that can exclude new entries or others unfamiliar with the jargon you use.

•   
• Regularly check that all network members have a clear understanding of network decisions.
•   
• Develop informal (or formal) rules about the use of jargon.
•   
• Don’t assume everyone is up to speed
•  

E

S
e
l
f

A

Check your assumptions. Resist pigeonholing people based on any beliefs you have about their likely behaviour or beliefs

Network processes and language – or that which is present in society – can demonise certain positions (“bloody greenies”) and create cognitive barriers to real listening.

•   
• Be interested. Talk to individuals about their understanding of the process and decisions made in the network. Find out why.
•  

E

P
e
r
c
e
p
t
i
o n
s

A

Don’t assume everyone sees network goals and decisions in the same way.

Individuals can have dramatically different Perceptions of the same network. Network managers can be completely surprised by resistance to, or rejection of, what they assumed were mutually reached goals

•   
• Check and re-check Perceptions as the network reaches important decision making milestones
•   
• Develop procedures that allow reflection on the journey of the network and points of convergence or divergence.
•  

E

I
 n  s
t
i
t
u
t
i
 o
 n
 s

Are the formal and informal rules of operating encouraging effective decision-making and confidence amongst network members?

Networks can be conservative in every decision they make. The potential for compromise on organisational goals can also create uncertainty. The usual way of operating may produce watered down, ineffective outcomes

•   
• Revisit rules that are identified as supporting conservatism – can you change them?
•   
• Introduce respected identity or high profile stakeholder to support innovative solutions
•  

E

P
e
r
c
e
p
t
i
 o
 n
 s

A

How are you perceived in the network?

Despite efforts to assure network members that joint decision making is important, being representative of government, and the potential source of funding, may give you a level of perceived power that is hard to shake.

•   
• In some networks it will be important that you are seen to take a back seat. Any steering processes will need to reflect this.
•   
•  
•  

B

C

D

E

Tools & Tactics – Instigating, Monitoring and Sustaining networks

S

A

N

Issue

Detail

Example Tactics

M
 a
 n
 a
 g
 i
 n
 g

C
o
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
s

Are dominant individuals or cliques excluding other’s views or deploying veto power to prevent certain courses of action

Network members can declare a particular line or approach as out of order or veto the inclusion of other interests or other points of view, thus limiting the capacity of the network

•   
• Make clear the consequences of network failure – (eg. government takeover of the decision). Introduce a high profile supporter to emphasise/imply close scrutiny.
•   
• Bring in a high profile stakeholder respected in the network to support marginal views or challenge thinking.
•  

E

Are members of the network not considering other’s views or suggesting processes that will affect others not in the network?

Network members not aware of the different world views in the ‘real world’ around them cannot ascribe meaning to them, and therefore don’t incorporate them in their deliberations

•   
• Introduce a new player with a totally different perspective.
•   
• Arrange meetings in a place familiar to marginal individuals or groups.
•   
• Present a paper outlining the position of others.
•  

E

P
e
r
c
e
p
t
i
o
n
 s 

Are some potentially important stakeholders choosing not to join the network?

Some stakeholders may decide not to join the network, because it is not their priority, they feel the costs are too high, or because they may have a bad relationship with someone already in the network.

•   
• Seek incentives to get important stakeholders to join.
•   
• If you cannot bring someone into a network directly, encourage those who can broker links to these groups to develop an indirect connection to network processes.
•  

E

A

Are some critical network members refusing to work together because of bad relationships in the past?

Past acrimonious relationships can prevent a network from working effectively together, or can make reaching decisions difficult

•   
• Articulate network goals of compromising aspirations to overcome impasses and agreeing to disagree to reach points of convergence.
•  

B

E

A

Aim for minimum agreement to proceed and not complete consensus.

Attempts to ensure that all network members have the same Perceptions are unnecessary, undesirable, likely to suppress legitimate aspirations, and doomed to failure.

•   
• Develop a culture of ‘constructive controversy’, where disagreeing is normal and people feel comfortable challenging others without fearing repercussions. Develop formal rules about articulating differences.
•  

B

E

A

Don’t automatically avoid or suppress conflict.

Conflict may be an opportunity and not always a threat. Avoiding it, or dismissing it, will only de delaying inevitable conflict or suppressing legitimate views. Constructive use of conflict can build a much more dynamic group.

•   
• Conflict can be deliberately encouraged to break a persistent deadlock, the dominance of one worldview, or to stimulate innovative thinking.
•   
• Develop conflict mediation processes that do not suppress individuals’ views .
•  

B

E

Tools & Tactics – Instigating, Monitoring and Sustaining networks

S

A

N

Issue

Detail

Example Tactics

I
 n
 n
 o
 v
 a
 t
 i
 n
 g

C
o
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
s

A

Does the structure of the network encourage innovative thinking

Open flexible groups are better for innovation. Similarly a network of loosely connected sub groups is more organic and innovative than one tightly linked network.

•   
• Empower the brokers in the network to cast wide for new contacts.
•   
• Break the network into smaller loosely connected task groups to address particular issues
•  

E

P
e
r
c
e p
t
i
o
n
s

A

Challenge conventional thinking

Customs, conventions, norms and informal rules can be important for keeping a group together, but they can at times stifle innovation.

•   
• Encourage someone with different views to speak up.
•   
• Hold meetings in a totally different space.
•   
• Introduce a controversial paper or guest.
•  

E

I
 n
 s
 t
 i
 t
 u
 t
 i
 o
 n
 s

A

Are the rules governing the network flexible enough to allow the easy flow of new ideas and knowledge?

Rules that can be deployed to restrict the entry of new ideas (“hey that’s not relevant” or “lets stick to what we know works”) can support the reproduction of usual ways of operating and reduce the chance of innovative new solutions.

•   
• Delineate phases of the network process (eg. time for new ideas, time to stop and complete a task) and adjust the rules (formal and informal) of operating to suit.
•  

E

C
 o
 n
 s
 o
 l
 i
 d
 a
 t
 i
 n
 g

C
o
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
s

A

Does the structure of the network support the consolidation of the network’s efforts into clear outcomes?

Often in a network’s life it is important to stop and take stock in order to reflect on progress and work towards a concrete output.

•   
• Resist the inclusion of new network members
•   
• Reduce or eliminate the role of brokers
•   
• Reduce the size of the network in the consolidation phase
•  

B

C

D

E

P
e
r
c
e
p
t
i
o
n
s

A

Are divergent views or mavericks in the network continuing to drag the process away from focus on important tasks

•   
• Delineate phases of the network process and adjust the rules (formal and informal) of operating to suit.
•   
• Resit the inclusion of new ideas and direct focus to the operational phase of the network
•  

B

C

D

E

I
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
s

A

Are the operational rules supporting consolidation of knowledge and work towards an outcome?

B

C

D

E

Tools & Tactics – Instigating, Monitoring and Sustaining networks

S

A

N

Issue

Detail

Example Tactics

S
 u
 s
 t
 a
 i
 n
 i
 n
 g

S  e
l
f

Be a representative of your agency AND the network

To be effective in networks, you have to balance the dualism of agency and network concerns.  You will have to effectively represent each role to stakeholders in the other. A constant flow of information is a ‘necessary evil’.

•   
• Always be there. No one will represent your interest but you.
•   
• Know your organisation well, its programs, technologies, funding bases, regulations, etc
•  

P
e
r
c
e p
t
i
o
n
s

A

Encourage constructive controversy

Controversy is the opposite of conflict, not the opposite of absence of disagreement. The absence of controversy is as dangerous as is the presence of conflict. It might reflect the suppression of legitimate views.

•   
• Create a tradition of constructive controversy by creating rules about making intelligent and practical dissent standard practice.
•   
• Know who has a different view and support them in speaking up, even if you disagree with them.
•  

B

E

A

Create smart activities to explore other’s world views

The round-table getting to know you processes, or catch-ups over afternoon tea are often insufficient to create alignment in diverse networks.

•   
• Put the business of getting to know each other on the agenda. Be clear how it fits network goals.
•   
• Deepen the risk taken in these activities as trust develops.
•   
• Beware of facilitation burnout.
•  

B

E

A

Maintain processes that support the aligning of cognitive frames

Electronic communication processes are not sufficient to establish trusting collaborative processes

•   
• Convene meetings 10-15 minutes before formal start times and arrange refreshments afterward or something to encourage informal processes of reflection on formal decisions.
•  

B

E

A

Find a balance between urgency and deliberativeness

Complex problems require a different way of thinking, with emphasis on learning together and exploring possibilities – things that take time. This is very frustrating to those who want to get it done.

•   
• Manage expectations of group performance
•   
• Reinforce the need for agreement across the network before moving forward.
•  

B

E

A

Build trust and confidence in the network

Suspicions that networks are just ‘token’ processes to placate stakeholders can reduce commitment and trust in Government.

•   
• Invite a key sponsor to talk to the network to provide evidence of government support
•   
• Create an event where senior representatives of network organisations can attend
•  

E

Tools & Tactics – Instigating, Monitoring and Sustaining networks

S

A

N

Issue

Detail

Example Tactics

S
 u
 s
 t
 a
 i
 n
 i
 n
 g

P
e
r
c
e
p
t
i
o
n
s

A

Act as the memory and voice of the network.

Summarising what has happened throughout the network’s life and articulating questions and understandings helps individuals understand the ‘whole’ of the network.

•   
• Speak for the network as if it had a mind and intention of its own.
•   
• Record such things as goals, actions, rationales, decision points, in enough detail to give more colour than simple minutes of meetings.
•  

B

E

A

Be patient

Complex issues often require a long learning curve. Groups without clear authority structures require much more time to evolve an understanding of different worldviews. Hurried decisions make for weak compromises.

•   
• Wait for the ‘teachable moment’. It can take some time for understanding to ‘accumulate’ when people are dealing with new concepts and challenging problems.
•   
• Develop good listening skills
•  

B

E

C
o
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
s

Recognise shared expertise based authority

You are operating in a network because you do not have all the resources or answers. It is also not useful to consider that a network has one ‘leader’

•   
• Recognise the expertise of network members. Take the back seat from time to time.
•   
• Giving trust creates trust. Demonstrate good network practice in the way you act.
•  

An Incentive to keep participating in the network is important

Two incentives to participate in the network are the opportunity to work toward solutions that are important to agencies, and platforms for information/knowledge expansion

•   
• Keep the information flowing
•   
• Develop a culture of knowledge reciprocity
•   
• Keep the collective eye on the desired outcomes, emphasising why collaborative outcomes might be better.
•  

Utilise the social capital of key contacts and supporters.

Judicious reference to the involvement or positive opinions of high profile people can enhance your credibility.

•   
• Cultivate connections to important decision-makers.
•   
• Ask your connections to introduce you to people with resources important to the network.
•   
• Know who knows who, has what etc.
•  

Build social capital for the future

Organisations with a history of mistrust can find it very difficult to work together when needed. Create a new history now by building the social infrastructure of the group.

•   
• Find ways for the network to make new links or achieve outcomes in arenas outside of the networks main task.
•   
• Consider processes that build network function (trust etc.) as critical goals of the process.
•  

Tools & Tactics – Instigating, Monitoring and Sustaining networks

S

A

N

Issue

Detail

Example Tactics

S
 u
 s
 t
 a
 i
 n
 i
 n
 g

I
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
s

Are there informal relationships/rules that should be formalised for a network’s sustainability?

Normalising informal agreements and shared understandings makes future collaborative efforts less dependent on personal relationships or leaders that are hard to replace, and stabilises situations where staff turnover is high.

•   
• Think carefully about informal relationships that are critical to the function of the network and may hinder network success if players leave.
•   
• Make critical links between organisations (eg. MOUs), not individuals
•  

E

Tread carefully when altering the rules in an established network

Attempts to alter institutional arrangements can damage or destroy the relationships already existing. Managers should carefully consider the implications of significant changes to the network structure.

•   
• Instrumental reforms may best be incremental and build on existing relationships, rather than seeking to replace them
•   
• Sometimes a radical change in the rules is needed to shake a network into action
•  

E

Make use of the network to reduce collective costs

Resources are limited and stakeholders have multiple needs. Networks provide a way to pool resources, provide services in a way that improves collective ability to solve problems.

•   
• Identify resource overlaps – even if it is in areas outside of the network’s agenda.
•   
• Resource sharing broader than the network action can help maintain a tradition of cooperation.
•  

E

A

Build trust and confidence through achievement and celebration

Action and achievement of results can build trust between network members and confidence in the network process

•   
• Ensure smaller tasks are set and delivered on time, particularly early in the process.
•   
• Celebrate successes
•  

E

T
r a
n
s
a
c
t
i
o
n
s

Reduce unnecessary meetings

Nothing annoys some people more than unnecessary, overlong or unfocussed meetings.

•   
• Develop clear meeting guidelines (with some flexibility for informal communication and catch-up).
•   
• Consider who must be at a meeting, or whether sub-groups can meet separately.
•  

E

A

Take a share of the administrative burden

Most small networks rely on voluntary support. Becoming a chair of the network implies also taking a share of the administrative burden

•   
• Ensure you have, and can sustain, support for the network.
•  

B

E

Tools & Tactics – Instigating, Monitoring and Sustaining networks

S

A

N

Issue

Detail

Example Tactics

S
 u
 s
 t
 a
 i
 n
 i
 n
 g

C
 o
 m
 m
 u
 n
 i
 c
 a
 t
 i
 o
 n

A

Sustain interest in learning new ideas

Keep the information flowing, organised so that it is accessible, in small doses so as not to overload, and continually stimulating to facilitate thinking and expansion of cognitive frames

•   
• Utilise a range of electronic means to store and circulate information
•   
• Utilise the expertise in the network, or activate external expertise to stimulate thinking on complex issues
•  

E

Vary the forms of communication

Familiar media forms can be overused, leading to such notions as “death by brochure”. Consider different learning styles. Multiple information sources can also reinforce a message. 

•   
• Keep questioning the appropriateness of communication channels and the people you are using to connect and vary these so people and the message do not go stale.
•   
• Varying the forms a message is transmitted in, and the sources that transmit it
•  

Structure the information so that people can choose what they want.

Everyone is overloaded with information and must choose what they pay greater attention to. If you don’t come to the point very quickly, your message will be lost

•   
• Keep email messages short, giving all the key messages – append additional data so that it can be accessed if wanted.
•   
• Busy people mightn’t find time to for references. If it is important, append it. If it is not, offer to provide it later.
•  

Structure your communication efforts

You have limited time. Transaction costs of a large network can be crippling. Use your understanding of the various roles and needs of the network (or you network map) to target your communications strategically

•   
• Consider who you should be in frequent contact with. Who has access to critical resources. Who you can send infrequent FYIs to keep on their radar. Who will help if you contact them, but tends not to initiate contact?
•   
• Don’t be afraid to reduce contact with some people.
•  

Respond promptly

This may be difficult in a busy schedule, but timely provision of information encourages confidence in you as a manager…

•   
• Give network members priority, but also consider the potential resources that a non-member may provide in future. Don’t shut the gate on opportunities.
•  

Phone etiquette

Don’t assume because people answer the phone, that they have time to talk. Clarity about the purpose of a call is essential, as is the courtesy of a raincheck option.

•   
• Begin a phone contact with an outline of what you want to discuss, and give the other person the option to set another time if it is not convenient.
•  

Tools & Tactics – Instigating, Monitoring and Sustaining networks

S

A

N

Issue

Detail

Example Tactics

A

Do you have an exit strategy?

It is important that you don’t just abandon the network when the project ends or the money runs out

•   
• Be clear on the boundaries of your participation (no surprises)
•   
• Design a succession plan, perhaps including infrequent contact and support of some form.
•  

B

C

D

E

A

B

C

D

E

A

B

C

D

E

A

B

C

D

E