Strategies of Engagement: Lessons from the Critical Examination of Collaboration and Conflict in an Interorganizational Domain Cynthia Hardy Nelson

n Philli s !c"ill #ni$ersity% &ac'lty of !anagement% ())( Sherbroo*e +est !ontreal% Canada% H,I". &rom time to time% /e need reminding that organizational strategies and henomena come in com lex ac*ages0 1his st'dy foc'sed on collaboration in the inter2organizational domain0 It resents e$idence that s'ggests that collaboration may not al/ays be a desirable strategy for sol$ing 3oint iss'es among organizations and that conflict may not be a negati$e factor in their exchanges0 Peter &erns

Abstract
!any /riters ad$ocate interorganizational collaboration as a sol'tion to a range of organizational and intersectoral roblems0 -ccordingly% they often concentrate on its f'nctional as ects0 +e arg'e that collaboration deser$es a more critical examination% artic'larly /hen the interests of sta*eholders conflict and the balance of o/er bet/een them is 'ne4'al0 #sing exam les from a st'dy of the #5 ref'gee system% /e arg'e that collaboration is only one of se$eral ossible strategies of engagement 'sed by organizations as they try to manage the interorganizational domain in /hich they o erate0 In this a er% /e disc'ss fo'r s'ch strategies6 collaboration% compliance% contention and contestation0 7y examining the sta*eholders in the domain and as*ing /ho has formal a'thority% /ho controls *ey reso'rces% and /ho is able to disc'rsi$ely manage legitimacy% researchers are in a stronger osition to e$al'ate both the benefits and costs of these strategies and to differentiate more clearly bet/een strategies that are tr'ly collaborati$e and strategies that are not0 In other /ords% /e ho e to demonstrate that collaboration between organizations is not necessarily "good", conflict is not necessarily "bad", and surface dynamics are not necessarily an accurate representation of what is going on beneath. 8Interorganizational Collaboration6 Confiict6 Interorganizational Domain6 Po/er6 9ef'gee Systems:

Introduction
Collaborati$e strategies ha$e been attracting increasing attention as a means to address roblems that range from dereg'lation% to globalization% to s'stainable de$elo ment ;e0g0% -stley (<=>6 7resser and Harl (<=?6 Harrigan (<=.6 Carney (<=@6 7resser (<==6 5anter (<<):0 +riters ha$e arg'ed that collaboration across different economic sectors can bring together business, government, and nongovernment organizations to tackle important social and environmental issues ;e0g00 "ray (<=<6 +addoc* (<=<6 +estley and Aredenb'rg (<<(:0 1hro'gh the ooling of ex ertise and reso'rces% collaboration can sol$e intractable problems ;1rist (<=,: in /ays that confrontation or com etition cannot0 -ccordingly% m'ch of the literat're on interorganizational relations has foc'sed on the virtues of collaboration0 It is considered to be beneficial for participants ;e0g00 -lter (<<)6 5no*e (<<)6 Nathan and !itroff (<<(6 -lter and Hage% (<<,: beca'se B arties /ho see different as ects of a roblem can constr'cti$ely ex lore their differences and search for sol'tions that go beyond their o/n limited $ision of /hat is ossibleB ;"ray (<=<6 0 .:0 In addition% those outside the collaboration also stand to profit thro'gh the o ening ' of Baccess and agendas to /ider artici ationB ;"ray (<=<% 0 (C)% also Nathan and !itroff (<<(% -lter and Hage (<<,:%

It has been noted% ho/e$er% that m'ch of the research in this area ado ts a functionalist rather than a critical perspective ;e0g00 +arren et al (<@>% Hazen (<<>:0 Conse4'ently% collaboration is often seen as a means of reducing uncertainty% acquiring resources% and solving problems6 and it is often ass'med that sta*eholders collaborate $ol'ntarily% sharing common goals and e4'al o/er0 &'rthermore% as 5nights et al ;(<<,: ha$e noted0 ()>@2@),<D<=D)<)CD)C(@DE).0)) Co yright F (<<=0 Instit'te for G erations 9esearch and the !anagement Sciences G9"-NIH-1IGN SCIENCEDAGI0 <% No0 C% !arch2- ril (<<= C(@

CIN1HI- H-9DI -ND NELSGN PHILLIPS Strategies of Engagement iss'es s'ch as exploitation, repression, unfairness, and asymmetrical power relations, which have preoccupied critical theorists% are often neglected0 +e s'ggest that these issues are crucial to an understanding of collaboration % artic'larly /hen artners ha$e different goals, values, and beliefs ;+addoc* (<=<: and /hen the distribution of power between them is unequal ;"ray and Hay (<=?:0 In s'ch sit'ations% collaboration may not be intended for the good of all artici ants or for sta*eholders o'tside the collaboration% b't to protect specific organizational interests0 &or exam le% more o/erf'l sta*eholders may force collaboration on weaker players to control them 6 or they may cooperate with other powerful allies to prevent opponents from reconstituting the domain ;e0g0% +ai1en et al (<@>% 9ose and 7lac* (<=.% Hasenfeld and Chesler (<=<:0 In other /ords% collaboration may mask moves by powerful organizations to protect their privileged positions and to disadvantage less powerful stakeholders: those /ho collaborate are coo ted6 those /ho do not are excl'ded0 1his a er arg'es that /e need to cast a more critical eye o$er collaboration% es ecially in the e$ent of conflicting goals and 'ne4'al o/er0 1o do so% /e ma*e t/o recommendations0 &irst% /e need to extend the level of analysis beyond a particular collaboration to include the interorganizational domain in which the interaction takes place 0 Second% /e need to $ie/ collaboration as simply one of a number of strategies of engagement used by stakeholders to change or maintain the parameters of the interorganizational domain in /hich they o erate0 In this /ay% /e can examine conflict as /ell as collaboration and assess the im lications of both for different sta*eholders in the domain ;also see "ricar and 7ro/n (<=(:0 1o ex lore the otential of s'ch an analysis% /e ro$ide exam les from the #5 ref'gee system% an interorganizational domain consisting of go$ernment and nongo$ernment sta*eholders0 +hile the #5 ref'gee system in$ol$es 'blic sector organizations% it is nonetheless a artic'larly fr'itf'l site in /hich to obser$e the dynamics of an interorganizational domain beca'se sta*eholders ha$e conflicting goals and o/er is distrib'ted 'ne4'ally among thetii0 -s a res'lt% the #5 ref'gee system re resents a Btrans arentB exam le ;Eisenhardt (<=<: in /hich theoretical iss'es can be ex lored and im lications dra/n for other sectors0 1he remainder of this a er roceeds as follo/s0 &irst% /e ro$ide a theoretical disc'ssion of interorganizational domains0 Next% /e introd'ce readers to the #5 ref'gee system and to fi$e organizations that lay im ortant roles /ithin it0 1hen /e differentiate fo'r strategies of engagement0 &inally% /e dra/ some im ortant lessons for research and ractice0 In artic'lar% /e arg'e that researchers m'st dig belo/ the s'rface /hen examining a arent coo eration to ens're that asymmetrical o/er relations are not dri$ing a arently coo erati$e interorganizational relationshi s% thereby red'cing the li*elihood of synergy and creati$ity0 +e also demonstrate that conflict may be concomitant /ith transformational change in the domain beca'se it ' sets existing o/er relationshi s0 1h's% the creati$e and synergistic o'tcomes% /hich many /riters associate /ith collaboration% may also follo/ from conflict'al interorganizational relationshi s0 Interorganizational Domains: - Critical Pers ecti$e +hile interorganizational relationshi s ha$e been examined from a n'mber of different ers ecti$es% this a er dra/s rimarily on the body of literat're on interorganizational domains ;e0g0% 1rist (<=,% !cCann (<=,% 7ro/n (<=,% "ray (<=<% +estley and Aredenb'rg (<<(:0 Interorganizational domains emerge as different organizations ercei$e themsel$es to be connected to common iss'es0 1hey are not

ob3ecti$e% redetermined str'ct'res% bni rocesses of social constr'ction ;!c"'ire (<==: and meaning creation ;-ltheide (<==:% /herein social order is negotiated ;Stra'ss et al (<?,% "ray (<=<% Nathan and !itroff (<<(:0 Domains are cognitive as well as organizational structures 0 0 0 one can only too easily fall into the tra of thin*ing of them as ob3ecti$ely gi$en% 4'asi2 ermanent fixt'res in the social fabric rather than /ays /e ha$e chosen to constr'e $ario's facets of it ;1rist (<=,% 0 C@,:0 s individuals come to share a vision of the issues and participants that constitute the domain, they become stakeholders. 1his shared a reciation creates an identity for the domain, and mutually agreed upon directions and boundaries, which may be perceived and experienced as a permanent structure ;1rist (<=,:0 In this /ay% the de$elo ment of an interorganizational domain is a rocess of social constr'ction that enables sta*eholders to comm'nicate% to be identified and legitimated% and to ac*no/ledge the roblems they face0 1he literat're on interorganizational domains and negotiated order theoiJ often fails to deal ade4'ately /ith the role of o/er ;see Hardy (<<>6 also 7enson (<@@% (<@=6 Day and Day (<@@% (<@=6 GK1oole and GK1oole (<=(:0 -ltho'gh /riters ha$e ac*no/ledged that o/er is im ortant in the emergence of interorganizational domains% they ha$e not al/ays offered $ery con$incing ex lanations concerning why dominant groups would share power with other groups in a collaborative venture. If organizations ha$e a sta*e in the domain% and the domain is socially constr'cted% then it is in the interests of each G9"-NIH-1IGN SCIENCEDAGI0 <% No0 C% !arch2- ril (<<=

CIN1HLA H-9DI -ND NELSGN PHILLIPS Strategies of Engagement Sta*eholder to do e$erything ossible to ens're that the domain is constmcted in the /ay that affords it the most ad$antage0 Since the ability to artici ate in social constr'ctionL the ability to create meaningLis differentially distrib'ted bet/een actors ;e0g0% 7erger and L'c*man (<??6 Pettigre/ (<@<6 GK1oole and GK1oole (<=(6 Smircich and !organ (<=C6 Hardy (<=.a%b6 &rost (<=@6 -ltheide (<==:% one might ex ect those stakeholders with more power to use it to shape the interorganizational domain to their advantage. 1his might lead them to share o/er in the case of con$ergent goals% b't they are 'nli*ely to do so /hen goals conflict0

Power in Interorganizational Domains

Clearly% then% the dynamics of o/er are a central as ect of the constit'tion of organizational domains0 - $ariety of different frame/or*s and conce t'alizations of o/er exist ;e0g0% L'*es (<@>6 &rost (<=@6 Clegg (<=<6 7o'rdie' (<<,6 Hardy (<<>6 Hardy and Clegg (<<?: and it is not o'r 'r ose to ex lore them here0 Instead% /e resent a sim lified frame/or* that highlights three as ects of o/erLformal authority, the control of critical resources, and discursive legitimacyL/hich are artic'larly 'sef'l in ma*ing sense of dynamics in interorganizational domains0 !ormal authority refers to the recognized% legitimate right to ma*e a decision ;see &rench and 9a$en (<?=6 -stley and Sachde$a (<=>:0 In an interorganizational domain% s'ch o/er might rest /ith one artic'lar organization% s'ch as the go$ernment6 it might be shared bet/een organizations as in a 3oint $ent're6 it may rest /ith a con$enor6 or it may be dis ersed0 In the ref'gee system% formal a'thority lies /ith the go$emmentLthe only actor /ith the legitimate a'thority to determine ref'gee stat's ;Cohen (<<>:0 Scarce or critical reso'rces ;e0g0% Hic*son et al (<@(6 Pettigre/ (<@,6 Pfeffer and Salanci* (<@=6 Pfeffer (<=(6 -stley and Sachde$a (<=>: also lay an im ortant role in interorganizational domains0 +hen one organization or gro' relies on another for a critical resource, such as expertise, money, equipment, information, etc., the dependent organization is at a power disadvantage 0 In some domains% f'nding or other reso'rces may be concentrated in the hands of one artici ant% /hereas in others these reso'rces may be /idely dis ersed0 1hird% some organizations may be able to infl'ence the rocess of social constr'ction that forms the domain% e$en tho'gh they ossess neither formal a'thority nor critical reso'rces% b't beca'se they have disctirsive legititnacy "#umby and $tohl %&&%' !airclough %&&(' )arker %&&(' *hompson %&&+' )hillips and ,ardy %&&-.. S'ch actors are 'nderstood to be s ea*ing legitimately for iss'es and organizations affected by the domain ;see Philli s and 7ro/n (<<,:0 &or exam le% en$ironmental gro' s s'ch as "reen eace can affect 'blic 'nderstanding% attract media attention% and ress're the go$emment% beca'se they are 'nderstood to be s ea*ing on behalf of the en$ironment0 Disc'rsi$e legitimacy may afford s'ch organizations more infl'ence than reso'rce2rich cor orations or formal decision ma*ers /hose self interest is more ob$io's0 Combined% these three as ects of o/er ro$ide a frame/or* for analyzing the dynamics of interorganizational domains0 1h's% /hen one organization is Bde endentB on another% /e sho'ld not sim ly ass'me that a reso'rce2de endency relationshi binds the t/o6 /e m'st also consider /ho has formal a'thority and /ho has disc'rsi$e legitimacy0 Different atterns of o/er distrib'tion ha$e rofo'nd im lications for the /ay in /hich the domain e$ol$es0 Clearly% then% the actors /ith greater access to a'thority% reso'rces% and disc'rsi$e legitimacy /ill ha$e the best chance of s'ccess in infl'encing the domain0 Sometimes% dominant sta*eholders may /ant to ens're that the domain does not change0 &or exam le% Hall and

S encer2 Hall ;(<=C: oint o't that changes in the social order are unlikely to occur when power is concentrated in the hands of dominant groups. In other cases% dominant sta*eholders may /ant to initiate changeLb't in a form that s'its them0 Le$y ;(<=C6 0 C<,: has noted the Bself2ser$ing strategiesB of indi$id'als and interest gro' s /ho define and control the context in /hich negotiations occ'r0 1he 4'estion is% ho/ do sta*eholders 'se their o/er and ho/ does it affect interactions bet/een them and other organizations in the domainM 1here are t/o rimary /ays in /hich o/erf'l sta*eholders can infl'ence the domain: by ;re:defining the iss'e aro'nd /hich the domain forms and by infl'encing the artici ation of other sta*eholders0 &irst% the iss'e or B roblemB aro'nd /hich a domain forms is not redetermined% waiting to be "discovered," b't is created as a res'lt of interorganizational interactions0 -s 7l'mer ;(<@(: has ointed o't% social problems do not exist in any ob/ective sense0they are "named" as a result of the collective, discursive practices that create meaning for them. 1his rocess is% in t'rn% infl'enced by the interests and actions of different layers /ith different sta*es in the roblem0 1he /ay in /hich a roblem is defined has im ortant im lications for the s'bse4'ent direction of the domain6 it laces limits on the otential nat're and o'tcome of interactions and lays an im ortant role in determining /ho has a legitimate case for membershi in the collaboration ;"ray (<=<:0 1h's% the identification and legitimation of strategic iss'es and roblems is an im ortant mechanism thro'gh /hich o/er is G9"-NIH-1IGN SCIENCEDAGI0 <% No0 C% !arch2- ril (<<=

CIN1ffl- H-9DI -ND NELSGN PfflLLIPS Strategies of Engagement exercised ;D'tton and D'ncan (<=@:0 In this sit'ation% collaboration might be 'sed to defend against inc'rsions by ne/ sta*eholders /ho /ant to redefine the domain in a /ay that tlireatens existing atterns of ad$antage0 +arren et al ;(<@>: and 9ose and 7lac* ;(<=.: doc'ment 3'st s'ch a sit'ation in the mental health comm'nity /hen an organization challenged existing definitions of mental health roblems as a BdiseaseB and% instead% attrib'ted many of them to social roblems0 *he new problem definition required a very different solution, one in which mental health patients were empowered. 1onflict between the two sides ensued as the domain2s powerholders collaborated to try to exclude the newcomer and marginalize its views. It is /orth noting that in this sit'ation% collaboration characterized a bid to maintain the stat's 4'o /hile conflict /as associated /ith ne/ a roaches to mental health care that many obser$ers might find BenlightenedB and B rogressi$e0B Second% power can be used to influence decisions concerning the inclusion and exclusion of stakeholders. +riters arg'e that all BlegitimateB sta*eholders sho'ld be incl'ded ;"ray (<=.:0 Legitimacy% ho/e$er% is not an ob3ecti$e state% b't one based on o/er ;&rost (<=@: and created thro'gh the management of meaning ;Pettigre/ (<@<6 Smircich and !organ (<=C:0 Conse4'ently% indi$id'als and organizations re4'ire s'fficient o/er to demonstrate that they ha$e a BlegitimateB right to artici ate0 &or exam le0 "ray and Hay ;(<=?: describe the rocess by /hich certain gro' s /ere excl'ded from the National Coal Policy Pro3ect ;NCPP:La collaborati$e ro3ect in the #S coal ind'stry0 1he con$enors chose not to in$ite members of the #nited !ine +or*ers ;#!+: to artici ate beca'se of their desire to Blimit the di$ersity of $ie/ ointsB ;"ray and Half (<=?6 0 ().:0 Clearly% in$iting the #!+ /o'ld ha$e 3eo ardized the agenda of other o/erf'l sta*eholders0 1he con$enors deliberated long and hard o$er /hom to incl'de% and their e$ent'al decisions /ere often infl'enced by considerations of the o/er of sta*eholders /ithin the domain0 1hese decisions effecti$ely restricted some sta*eholders from artici ating e$en tho'gh theyLand the domainLmight be affected by the o'tcomes of the collaboration ;"ray and Hay (<=?:0 1he identification and legitimation of sta*eholders is not% then% determined by any ob3ecti$e BrightB to artici ate% b't is infl'enced by /hether doininant sta*eholders allo/ less o/erf'l sta*eholders to artici ate% /hich% in t'rn% is related to the formerKs $ested interests0 1h's% collaboration is im ortant for /ho is excl'ded as m'ch as /ho is incl'ded0 In summary, the social nat're of an interorganizational domain ro$ides an o ort'nity for more o/erf'l sta*eholders to infl'ence its definition and de$elo ment in /ays that afford them the most ad$antage0 1hese o/er dynamics may mean that interactions that a ear to be collaborati$e% in fact% mas* defensi$e manoe'$res to maintain the stat's 4'o6 and that conflict signals an attem t to redefine the domain in a /ay that ta*es into acco'nt the needs of sta*eholders that ha$e been re$io'sly ignored0 1o ex lore these iss'es% /e m'st mo$e beyond a f'nctional a roach to/ards collaboration and consider it to be one of a n'mber of strategies of engagement 'sed by actors to ;re:define the domain6 and /e m'st mo$e ast the foc's on collaboration to consider other s'ch strategies% incl'ding conflict0

The UK Refugee System^

1he (<>= #nited Nations ;#N: #ni$ersal Declaration of H'man 9ights asserts that indi$id'als ha$e the right to see* asyl'm from ersec'tion in other co'ntries0 1he #N defines ref'gees as eo le /ho ha$e left their o/n co'ntry beca'se of a /ell2fo'nded fear of ersec'tion for s'ch reasons as race% religion% nationality% and olitical o inion0 1he #5 ref'gee system re resents an interorganizational domain com rising go$ernment%

nongo$ernment ;N"G: and ref'gee organizations that are in$ol$ed in determining the stat's of indi$id'als claiming asyl'm and in assisting in the settlement of those indi$id'als granted asyl'm0B +e examine fi$e organizations in more detail6 the go$ernment and% /ithin it% the Immigration and Nationality De artment6 the 9ef'gee Legal Centre and the 7ritish 9ef'gee Co'ncil% both N"Gs6 the Comm'nity De$elo ment 1eam% art of the 7ritish 9ef'gee Co'ncil6 and the 9ef'gee &or'm% a ref'gee organization0

The Government
1he go$ernment% es ecially the Home Gffice and the Immigration and Nationality De artment% lays a central role in the #5 ref'gee system0 1he go$ernment drafts and asses the legislation that s ecifies determination roced'res and defines the rights of ref'gees0 In (<<(% the go$ernment introd'ced the -syl'm and Immigration - eals 7ill% /hich defined ref'gee rights for the first time and s ecified ne/ roced'res to s eed ' the rocessing of a lications0 1he go$ernment /ithdre/ the 7ill d'ring the (<<C election% b't assed a similar $ersion in (<<,0 1he Immigration and Nationality De artment im lements go$ernment olicy on immigration and nationality /hich% in (<<(DC% incl'ded allo/ing Bgen'ine $isitorsB to enter the #5 and restricting Bse$erely the n'mbersB /ho did not fall into this category ;Home Gffice (<<(DC6 0 iii:0 1he De artmentKs Immigration Ser$ice admits and detains asyl'm see*ers6 /hile the -syl'm Di$ision determines /hether asyl'm see*ers are ref'gees0 1he latter /as a small 'nit of less than (C) ci$il ser$ants 'ntil (<<(6 G9"-NIH-1IGN SciHNCEDAol% <% No0 C% !arch2- ril (<<=

CIN1HI- H-9DI -ND NELSGN PHILLIPS Strategies of Engagement n'mbers then increased to >?) /ithin the follo/ing year to deal /ith the gro/ing n'mber of asyl'm a lications ;Home Gffice (<<(DC:0 +hile the central layer in determination% the Home Gffice lays a lesser role in settlement0 It ro$ides some f'nding% b't so% too% do a $ariety of other arts of the #5 go$ernment% thro'gh race e4'ity% training% and em loyment and other initiati$es0 Local ;m'nici al: go$ernments also lay an acti$e role by ro$iding ho'sing% and the London 7oro'gh "rants Committee ; art of LondonKs m'nici al go$ernment: has been an im ortant so'rce of f'nding for settlement ser$ices% along /ith a ano ly of ri$ate charities and tr'sts0

The British Refugee Council

1he 7ritish 9ef'gee Co'ncil is a go$ernment2f'nded charity ;abo't ?)N of a b'dget of some L. million comes from the go$ernment: that em loys aro'nd C)) eo le to gi$e ractical hel to ref'gees and to romote ref'gee rights in the #5 and abroad0 It is an 'mbrella organization for o$er ()) nongo$ernment organizations% incl'ding /ell2*no/n charities li*e Gxfam and Sa$e the Children &'nd0 - roximately one2third of its members and its Exec'ti$e Committee are ref'gee comm'nity organizations0 1he 7ritish 9ef'gee Co'ncil is an acti$e lobby gro' 6 it /as a fo'nding member of the -syl'm 9ights Cam aign% a consorti'm of N"Gs% ch'rches% and ref'gee comm'nity organizations% set ' in (<<( Bto try to re$ent the Ogo$ernmentKs ne/P ro osals from becoming la/B ;Exile (<<(6 0 (:0 1he Co'ncil also acti$ely lobbies for a national settlement olicy% in /hich a centrally coordinated a roach to settlement /o'ld ro$ide clearly defined ser$ices to ref'gees% altho'gh so far to no a$ail0

The Community Development Team

1he ma3ority of the Co'ncilKs em loyees are res onsible for ro$iding ser$ices to ref'gees0 1he Comm'nity De$elo ment 1eam /as created in (<=< as art of a ne/ initiati$e to hel de$elo and organize the ref'gee comm'nity0 It consists of a team leader and fi$e comm'nity /or*ers0 In (<<(% the team /or*ed /ith a roximately @) ref'gee comm'nity organizations on management and go$ernance% f'ndraising% and training0 1he Comm'nity De$elo ment 1eam /or*s /ith n'mero's other organizations in addition to ref'gee comm'nity organizations0 1he team leader /or*s /ith the Aol'ntary Sector &or'm% /hich deals /ith the London 7oro'gh "rants CommitteeLa ma3or f'nder of ref'gee comm'nity organizations6 the Ch'rchesK +or*ing Party for 9ef'gees6 as /ell as boro'gh ;m'nici al: co'ncils in London0 1he team hel s to set ' net/or*s of ref'gee comm'nity organizations% nongo$ernment organizations% and local a'thority co'ncil /or*ers in se$eral London boro'ghs0 It also /or*s /ith a n'mber of charitable tr'sts for f'ndraising 'r oses0 In (<<(% it co2organized a conference on "rantma*ing: Charitable 1r'sts and 9eftigee Comm'nity Grganizations% /hich bro'ght together ,( ref'gee organizations and C) tr'sts% fo'ndations% and charities0

The Refugee Legal Centre

1he 9ef'gee Legal Centre /as initially set ' by the go$ernment in (<@? as the 9ef'gee #nit% art of a larger% go$ernment2f'nded organization called the #5 Immigrant -d$isory Ser$ice ;#5I-S:0 In - ril (<<(% follo/ing the increase in the size of the -syl'm Di$ision% the go$ernment ro osed a arallel increase in the n'mber of case/or*ers in the 9ef'gee #nit% /hile still art of #5I-S0 1he go$ernment also anno'nced lans to end legal aid to ref'gee claimants and to ma*e the 9ef'gee #nit the sole ro$ider of free legal re resentationL

thereby re$enting asyl'm see*ers from 'sing ri$ate solicitors 'nless they /ere able to ay for their ser$ices0 &ollo/ing /ides read criticism% this lan /as dro ed0 In (<<C% at the instigation of the go$ernment% the 9ef'gee Legal Centre /as se arated from #5I-S and established as an organization in its o/n right0 In (<<,% the 9ef'gee Legal Centre had >. case /or*ers% ' from (. in (<<)% and ==N of its b'dget /as go$ernment f'nded0 Its mandate is to ro$ide free% inde endent legal re resentation and ad$ice to asyl'm see*ers d'ring the determination rocess0 +hile case /or*ers from other nongo$ernment organizations and ri$ate la/yers also re resent ref'gee claimants% the $ast ma3ority of cases are handled by the 9ef'gee Legal Centre0 It is also the only nongo$ernment organization to recei$e case referrals from the Home Gffice0 In most asyl'm cases% then% a case /or*er from the 9ef'gee Legal Centre re resents the asyl'm see*er% /hile a ci$il ser$ant from the go$ernmentKs -syl'm Di$ision determines the stat's of that indi$id'al0 In the e$ent of an a eal of a decision not to grant asyl'm% the 9ef'gee Legal Centre case /or*er challenges the -syl'm Di$isionKs decision directly d'ring the ad3'dication rocess0

The Refugee Forum

9ef'gees re resent the Bo't 't constit'encyBLthose affected by the decisions ta*en in the domain ;+arren et al (<@>:0 1hey are ty ically the most o/erless of the three gro' s ;7enard (<=?:6 often tra'matized% alone% 'norganized% enniless% and 'nable to s ea* English0 E$en /hen ref'gees organize% these ref'gee comm'nity organizations tend to be small% often em loying only a handf'l of eo le% and 'nder2reso'rced% li$ing hand2to2mo'th on small grants from m'nici al go$ernments and charitable tr'sts ;see Salinas et al (<=@6 !a3i*a (<<(:0 Gne s'ch G9"-NIH-1IGN SCIENCEDAGI0 <% No0 C% !arch2- ril (<<=

CIN1HI- H-9DI -ND NELSGN PHILLIPS Strategies of Engagement organization is the 9ef'gee &or'm% an 'mbrella association com rising other ref'gee comm'nity organizations0 1he 9ef'gee &or'm% /hich is neither a charity nor go$ernment f'nded% is an 'mbrella gro' of ref'gee2r'n organizations that engages rimarily in lobbying acti$ities% /hile its member organizations ro$ide rotection and settlement ser$ices0 It /as formed in (<=> in res onse to the Bfail'resB of instit'tions li*e the 7ritish 9ef'gee Co'ncil and #5I-S to Bre resent 's% to fight for 'sB ;s eech by 9ef'gee &or'm Director% - ril (<<(:0 Its aims incl'de self2 organization and self2determination: Bhel ing ref'gees to hel themsel$esB ;9ef'gee &or'm broch're:0 In (<<)% according to its director% the 9ef'gee &or'm had ?> branches in the #5 and Ireland0 It remained% ho/e$er% a loosely federated net/or* o erating on a small b'dget /ith only t/o f'll2time em loyees0 1he 9ef'gee &or'm ad$ocates ref'gee em o/erment and direct f'nding to ref'gee2led organizations0 -s s'ch% it em hasizes a grassroots a roach /here ref'gees ta*e charge of their o/n destiny% rather than relying on the established ;often /hite2r'n: agencies0 B"one are the days /hen /e sit /ith the begging bo/l% /aiting for instit'tionalized agencies /ith their missionary mentalitiesB ;em loyee:0 It is closely lin*ed to the -frican 9ef'gee Ho'sing -ction "ro' % a charity established in (<@< to ro$ide ho'sing for -frican ref'gees based on selfhel rinci les0 1he 9ef'gee &or'm also acti$ely distances itself from the more established N"Gs% /hich it sees as a threat0 Conse4'ently% most of its members are not members of the 7ritish 9ef'gee Co'ncil0 -lso% 'nli*e the more established agencies% the 9ef'gee &or'm has 'blicly ad$ocated hel ing indi$id'als denied ref'gee stat's to Bgo 'ndergro'ndB to a$oid de ortation0

Conflict and Cooperation in the Domain

In this section% /e resent fo'r s ecific relationshi s bet/een the organizations described abo$e0 In so doing% /e describe s'rface dynamics characterized by both coo eration and conflict0 7y cooperation% /e mean "socially contrived mechanisms for collective action" ;9ing and Aan de Aen (<<>6 0 <?:6 by conflict% /e refer to "incompatible behaviour among parties whose interests differ" ;7ro/n (<=,6 0 >:0 +e /ill also robe beneath the s'rface to sho/ that coo eration does not necessarily mean collaboration and that conflict can rod'ce inno$ation0

Cooperation
In this section% /e describe t/o coo erati$e relationshi s0 +e first sho/ an exam le of coo eration bet/een the Comm'nity De$elo ment 1eam and a $ariety of other organizations /hich% /e arg'e% bears many of the hallmar*s of a collaborati$e relationshi 0 +e then describe the relationshi bet/een the 9ef'gee Legal Centre and the go$ernment% arg'ing that beneath a arent coo eration lies% not collaboration% b't com liance0 1ollaborationL1he Comm'nity De$elo ment 1eam0 1he Comm'nity De$elo ment 1eam /as set ' to hel ref'gee comm'nity organizations organize more effecti$ely% de$elo management s*ills% raise f'nds% deal /ith granting agencies% etc0 Its ob3ecti$es are to em o/er ref'gee organizations by hel ing them to de$elo the confidence% *no/ledge% and s*ills needed to ta*e action0 In many res ects% the 1eam reflects a broader change in the hiloso hy of the 7ritish 9ef'gee Co'ncil to ro$ide more sco e for artici ation by ref'gee comm'nities0

Certainly the attitudes of the established agencies have changed; this one [the British Refugee Council] has changed.... I think that the strategic planning exercise [on community development] here had an impact . . . uestioning the role of our services. !hould "e be doing this or should "e be helping a community organi#ation to do it$ %ou have to introduce that uestioning so you don&t automatically assume that you&ve got to do it. %our role might be to help a refugee community organi#ation to solve the problem '(eam employee). 1he Comm'nity De$elo ment 1eam does not have any formal authority to ta*e on this role% in so far as the ref'gee comm'nity is concerned% b't it does ossess resourcesL ex ertise% money% ex erience% etc0Lthat ref'gees do not0 Ho/e$er% both the 1eam and the ref'gee comm'nity organizations o erate in a sit'ation /here all reso'rces are scarce: f'nding% ex ertise% and olitical ress're ha$e to be obtained from a $ariety of different so'rces% ma*ing coordinated initiati$es essential0 In addition% the team is 'nable to ro$ide ser$ices to all the ref'gee comm'nity organizations that see* s' ort0 1herefore% by hel ing ref'gee comm'nity organizations to hel themsel$es% the team le$erages these scarce reso'rces0 1he ref'gee comm'nity organizations $ol'ntarily artici ate in these 3oint initiati$es s'ch as the Haring'ay 9ef'gee Consorti'm% /hich consists of fo'r fo'nding ref'gee comm'nity organizations of Eritreans% Iranians% Somahs% and #gandans0 $uch organizations perceive that benefits derive from /oint action that would not accrue from working in isolation. In so doing% they accord the Comm'nity De$elo ment 1eam the legitimacy to speak on their behalf. Similarly% team members set great store in f'll artici ation by ref'gees% according them the legitimacy of e4'al artners0 1hese relationshi s a ear to be consistent /ith the disc'ssions of collaboration enco'ntered in the literat're0 1here ha$e been many attem ts to ool reso'rces and share o/er in order to sol$e some of the many roblems facing ref'gee comm'nity organizations0 G9"-NIH-1IGN SCIENCEDAGI0 <% No0 C% !arch2- ril (<<=

CIN1HI- H-9DI -ND NELSGN PHILLIPS Strategies of Engagement (he *oint approach "as a tactical move that "e encouraged .. . to make composite applications "hich "e thought have a better chance of competing for government funding. It also pools the experience that exists .. . the +ome ,ffice seems to be happier "ith *oint applications. (hat&s the feedback "e got... -e don&t usua.y impose things on groups/ "e try to facilitate it.. . (hese *oint initiatives are not at the cost of organi#ational identities. (hese refugees have their o"n organi#ations and only come together for common pro*ects 'team employee). In Gther /ords% the relationshi bet/een the team and other organizations /as one of mutual collaboration. +hile this collaboration contrib'ted to change in the domain% notably in the participation and empowerment of refugee community organizations% the domain arameters /ere not com letely o$erha'led since the teamKs role in em o/ering ref'gees reaffirmed its ri$ileged osition0 0s far as letting go [of these refugee community organi#ations]/ it is a strange situation. I&m not trying to patroni#e them but they are like children at different stages of their life and/ so/ need different types of help. !ome are older and should be more developed but [because of staff turnover] remain inexperienced 'team employee). &inally% it is im ortant to note that one of the catalysts behind the 7ritish 9ef'gee Co'ncilKs creation of the Comm'nity De$elo ment 1eam /as the 9ef'gee &or'mKs confrontational and $ocal s' ort for ref'gee em o/erment ;see belo/:0 1omplianceL1he 9ef'gee Legal Centre0 Gn the s'rface% interactions bet/een the go$ernment and the 9ef'gee Legal Centre a ear to be highly coo erati$e0 1he centre does la'nch challenges to go$emment determination decisions b't% regardless% ci$il ser$ants in the -syl'm Di$ision clearly differentiated case /or*ers in the centre from ri$ate solicitors0 (he relationship bet"een us and the Refugee 1egal Centre is one of respect. (hey don&t "ork in an antagonistic sense/ unlike some solicitors "ho are being paid by the client/ "ho see it as much more confrontational/ 2you&re "rong/ I&m right2 "ay. -e do have a special relationship "ith the Centre "hich involves "orking "ith them to get the best result but "ithout compromising either organi#ation&s standards or values. (hey tend to understand our problems a lot more and "e understand theirs 'civil servant). 1he go$emment also ro$ided s' ort for the 9ef'gee Legal Centre% /hich it needed to aid in the rocessing of ref'gee a lications 'nder the ne/ legislation0 -e continue to liaise as closely as possible "ith the Refugee 1egal Centre. -e had a meeting recently about the ne" Bill and ho" to liaise [around procedures]. -e are anxious to maintain the good relations "e have there.... (hey do have anxieties and "e are doing our best to "ork them through. It is in our interests to make the procedures "ork 'civil servant). 1his reliance of the go$emment on the 9ef'gee Legal Centre /as% ho/e$er% a short2term henomenon restricted rimarily to the transition eriod 'ntil the ne/ legislation and accom anying reg'lations /ere assed and im lemented0 (here&s a political "ill at the moment to get us up and running. -e&ve got a strong "ind behind us and "e&re under no illusions that "e&ve got to take advantage of the political "ill. It exists because they "ant their ne" asylum procedure in place and

they can&t do it "ithout us... (hey can&t disband us and get it done . . . but I shouldn&t think it "ill last. I think "e&ll come do"n to earth about one year into the [ne"] Bill and they "ill start cutting our budget/ s uee#ing and chopping 'centre employee). In fact% this eriod in /hich the 9ef'gee Legal Centre ossessed some le$erage mas*ed a far more end'ring relationshi in /hich the go$emment /as% by far% the more o/erf'l layer of the t/o0 &or exam le% /hile% officially% the go$emment had no role in the daily o erations of the 9ef'gee Legal Centre% in reahty it had considerable infl'ence0 1he centreKs se aration from #5I-S and reconstit'tion as a se arate organization had been instigated by the go$emment0 1echnically /e Othe Home GfficeP are entirely distinct Ofrom the 9ef'gee Legal CentreP: yo' ha$e an inde endent organization0 +here this falls do/n in the eyes ofthe 'blic or of the ress're gro' s is that it does recei$e art of its f'nding from the go$emment and critics say: BHo/ can an organization that recei$es f'nding from the go$ernment be inde endent of the go$emmentMB +e say that000 /e ha$e no say in ho/ the organization r'ns0 ItKs entirely ' to them and their constit'tion ho/ they carry o't their /or*0 1hat also falls do/n slightly /hen yo' consider that /e ga$e them an 'ltimat'm on ho/ to reform themsel$es and later /ithdre/ their f'nding on the basis that they didnKt do it ;ci$il senKant:0 Ho/e$er% the mandate of the 9ef'gee Legal Centre /as to ro$ide inde endent legal ad$ice to ref'gees0 1he na2 t're of the close relationshi bet/een the centre and the go$emment did not assed 'nnoticed by other agencies% artic'larly /hen the go$erntnent ro osed gi$ing it a mono oly o$er free legal re resentation0 1he 7ritish 9ef'gee Co'ncil /rote to the centre ;then still art of #5I-S: as*ing it Bnot to agree to any ex ansion of its ser$ices at the ex ense ofthe abolition of legal aidB ;Exile (<<(:(:0 1o co'nteract criticism% the go$emment hel ed to ens're that the 9ef'gee Legal Centre /as Bseen to be inde endentB6 other/ise its Bc'stomersB might lose BfaithB ;ci$il ser$ant:0 I thin*% gen'inely% ministers /ant to see the Centre /or* and /eKre not in the b'siness of gi$ing them a bad start0 00 0 I am only too /ell a/are that there are significant ress'res on the G9"-NIH-1IGN SCIENCEDAGI0 <% No0 C% !arch2- ril (<<=

CIN1H# H-9DI -ND NELSGN PHH0LIPS Strategies of Engagement Centre from others in the ref'gee ind'stry /ho are s's icio's of their relationshi /ith the Home Gffice and IKm not abo't to re3'dice those relationshi s beca'se that /o'ldnKt be in anybodyKs interests ;ci$il ser$ant:0 In other /ords% coo eration occ'rred bet/een these t/o organizations% b't ste s /ere ta*en to ens're that the f'll extent of this coo eration /as hidden from other organizations in the domain0 1his relationshi does not constit'te collaboration b't com liance: the 9ef'gee Legal Centre com lied /ith the go$ernment beca'se of the asymmetrical distrib'tion of o/er0 Em loyees of the 9ef'gee Legal Centre had no ill'sions concerning the limits of their o/er0 +eK$e come to the oint /here /eK$e reached agreement on /hat /e can and canKt do0 1hereKs not m'ch oint in table o'nding ;Centre em loyee:0 In effect% the Centre had been s'fficiently socialized ;see +arren et al (<@>: to *no/ exactly ho/ far it co'ld go in challenging the go$ernment0 1hey 'ndo'btedly do ha$e reser$ations abo't as ects of the legislation b't at this oint itKs not going to change0 1hey acce t that and try to ma*e the best of it ;ci$il ser$ant:0 1his imbalance of o/er enabled the go$ernment to reg'late the 9ef'gee Legal CentreKs actions to a great extent% re$enting serio's threats to its osition from being made0 &or exam le% instead of agitating for ma3or changes in the /ay the #5 ref'gee domain /as constit'ted% the centre /as more li*ely to s'bmit to go$ernment demands% as can be seen from its stance on the ne/ legislation0 +e can artici ate in the 'blic debate thro'gh the normal channels if it directly concerns o'r clients0 !y inter retation of the charity la/s is they allo/ 's to do that0 I donKt thin* /e can initiate anything% I donKt thin* /e can march do/n the street and say: B1he 9ef'gee Legal Centre says do/n /ith the Home SecretaiJ%B +e can certainly artici ate in the debate on the -syl'm 7ill b't /e canKt 3'm on e$ery cam aign for e$ery detainee ;Centre em loyee:0 -ccordingly% the Centre /as not a ma3or layer in the o legislation0 osition to the "o$ernmentKs ne/

1here is a c'lt're Oat the 9ef'gee Legal CentreP that does not fa$o'r resistance0 If yo'Kre re resenting ref'gees yo' ha$e to *no/ /here yo'r bottom line is% b't Othe centreP /as no/here in the c'rrent cam aign abo't the -syl'm 7ill% Io' /ill not see the director on tele$ision against the Conser$ati$es abo't /hat is ha ening ;director of another agency:0 Instead% the Centre acted largely as an agent of the go$ernment in the latterKs attem t to infl'ence the domain0 +hile this relationshi 'ndo'btedly had certain ad$antagesL for exam le% in ens'ring the smooth im lementation of the ne/ determination roced'resLit is 'nli*ely that this form of BcollaborationB /o'ld rod'ce m'ch synergy0 Significant inno$ation 's'ally re4'ires f'ndamental changes in con$entional /ays of thin*ing6 and% in this case% the 9ef'gee Legal Centre /as far more li*ely to re licate the go$ernment $ie/ than ro$ide radical ne/ alternati$es0 In s'mmary% the t/o coo erati$e relationshi s described here are 4'ite different0 1he initiati$es of the Comm'nity De$elo ment 1eam a ear to be collaborative% if /e reser$e this term for a s ecific form of coo eration0

1ollaboration operates on a model of shared o/er0 In collaboration% problem3 solving decisions are eventually taken by a group of stakeholders who have mutually authorized each other to reach a decision. 1h's% o/er to define the roblem and to ro ose a sol'tion is effecti$ely shared among the decision ma*ers ;"ray (<=<% 0 ((<:0 3., this happened to !imon "ray goes on to say that this does not mean that artners ha$e to be e4'al in o/er% that o/erholders ha$e to relin4'ish it% nor that reso'rces m'st be distrib'ted e4'ally0 It does mean% ho/e$er% that ma/or inequities in power will probably undermine collaboration and, therefore, all parties need sufficient power to prevent other organizations from imposing solutions on them or other affected parties. 1ollaboration is th's a m't'al engagement strategy in /hich all artners $ol'ntarily artici ate0 1ompliance% on the other hand% is a $ery different form of coo eration% /here o/er is neither shared nor is artici ation% strictly s ea*ing% $ol'ntary0 Instead of the reci rocal relations /e find in collaboration% the dominant partner uses its power to regulate weaker parties which have no choice but to cooperate. 1onflict In this section% /e examine conflict more closely0 +e first sho/ ho/ conflict bet/een the 9ef'gee &or'm and other organizations emerged as a res'lt of a new contender trying to enter and influence the domain. &inally% /e de ict a arent conflict bet/een the 7ritish 9ef'gee Co'ncil and the go$ernment that mas*s a far less ad$ersarial relationshi % /hich /e call contestation0 1ontentionL1he 9ef'gee &or'm0 1he 9ef'gee &or'm engaged in ad$ersarial relations% not only /ith the go$ernment b't also other agencies: it challenged the legal basis not only of the go$ernmentKs determination system% b't of its entire immigration olicy thro'gh its s' ort of illegal aliens6 it em o/ered ref'gees to mn their o/n organizations6 and it lobbied to c't established nongo$ernment organizations o't of the f'nding relationshi by channeling money directly to ref'gees0 Conse4'ently% it s'b3ected most of the established /hite2r'n agencies to intense% 'blic criticism0 G9"-NIH-1IGN SCIENCEDAGI0 <% No0 C% !arch2- ril (<<=

CIN1HI- H-9DI -ND NELSGN PHILLIPS Strategies of Engagement 1he fact that all the money goes directly to the Oestablished agenciesP ma*es it $ery diffic'lt for the Oref'gee comm'nity organizationsP to coo erate /ith them 00 0 the 7ritish 9ef'gee Co'ncil has the ref'gee associations by the short and c'rlies beca'se it dis enses the f'nds0 1hey are frightened to bite the hand that feeds them and if they do attac* the Co'ncil% they /ill lose /hat little benefits they already ha$e /hich is an extension of colonialism ;9ef'gee &or'm member:0 1hese attit'des reflected a olicy of Bno coo eration0B IK$e ne$er act'ally met the &or'm b't IK$e been on the recei$ing end of their letters that condemn e$erybody in sight0 ItKs a bit /earing really0 +eK$e made o'r o$ert'res% /eK$e s'ggested meetings% /eK$e s'ggested /ays of co2existing /hen they /ere more of a force0 1hey ha$e a $ery straightfor/ard $ie/: if yo' ta*e the go$ernmentKs money% then yo'Kre the go$ernmentKs creat're and thatKs it ;7ritish 9ef'gee Co'ncil official:0 1he 9ef'gee &or'm considered that the 7ritish 9ef'gee Co'ncilKs reformist a roach reinforced the go$ernmentKs control o$er the domain and the stat's 4'o% at the ex ense of ref'gees0 1he 7ritish 9ef'gee Co'ncil has been a disaster6 /hen there is any arliamentary debate% the go$ernment can al/ays say the 7ritish 9ef'gee Co'ncil is dealing /ith the roblem ;9ef'gee &or'm member:0 1o coo erate /ith the 7ritish 9ef'gee Co'ncil% and other agencies li*e it% /o'ld 'ndermine the $ery basis of the 9ef'gee &or'mKs ob3ect of em o/ering ref'gees0 Instead% it /anted to introd'ce ne/ contendersLthe ref'gees and% of co'rse% itselfLinto the domain on an e4'al footing0 1he res onse of the established agencies /as one of marginalization0 1he established gro' s try to marginalize the 9ef'gee &or'm0 I donKt really *no/ /hy0 I donKt see them as a threat0 !aybe they see the &or'mKs fairly straightfor/ard /ay of ex ressing things as dangero's to the rocess of negotiations0 I donKt see /hy b't they do see it as a roblem and there /ere sotne fairly hairy ro/s ; olitician:0 In this /ay% these gro' s ho ed to Bre elB the 9ef'gee &or'mKs BextremeB demands ;+arren et al (<@>: /hich% if acted on% /o'ld res'lt in the transformation of the domain to the detriment of both go$ernment and N"Gs0 Des ite these actions% the &or'm did ha$e an im act on the domain0 It /as highly s'ccessf'l in romoting ref'gee em o/erment thro'gh its -frican 9ef'gees Ho'sing -ction "ro' /hich% in (<==% became the first ref'gee2led ho'sing association ;among C%,)) ho'sing associations: to be registered /ith the Ho'sing Cor oration ;a LC billion% go$ernment2f'nded agency that ro$ides grants for non rofit ho'sing:0 In (<<C it /as the only ref'gee2led ho'sing organization among the s'bset of .)) ho'sing associations that recei$ed f'nding for ro erty de$elo ment0 1he &or'm /as also im ortant in embarrassing established agencies% li*e the 7ritish 9ef'gee Co'ncil% into sharing o/er /ith ref'gees% engaging in initiati$es li*e the Comm'nity De$elo ment 1eam% and em loying more ref'gees0 ( tried to loo* at the &or'm as an instr'ment to get the 7ritish 9ef'gee Co'ncil r'nning aro'nd0000 the years of criticism made the Co'ncil ner$o's eno'gh to ma*e changes0 - lot of change Oin increasing ref'gee artici ationP% /e co'ld say /e o/e to the for'm indirectly ;co'ncil em loyeeLformer ref'gee:0

In other /ords% the 9ef'gee &or'm% des ite minimal reso'rces and d'bio's legitimacy in the eyes of established agencies% 'shed its /ay into the domain and hel ed to sha e the constit'tion of that domain0 1he 9ef'gee &or'm is 'sef'l0 It stems from the grass roots /hich res'lts in an enormo's commitment /hich is sometimes more effecti$e than the 7ritish 9ef'gee Co'ncil0 ItKs more radical so it canKt attract a lot of f'nding% /hile the Co'ncil has f'nding b't is b'rea'cratic0 7oth ha$e their limits0 ItKs im ortant to ha$e the for'm beca'se it challenges the other system0 It ro$ides a chec* and *ee s them honest0 -lso% it sometimes identifies the real iss'es beca'se it doesnKt ma*e the same ass'm tions that the Co'ncil does ;ref'gee comm'nity organization re resentati$e:0 In s'mmary% the 4efugee !orum introduced conflict into the domain as it engaged in a strategy of contention and the more established organizations tried to marginalize it. 1he confiict signaled the for'mKs im act on the domain% an im act com letely o't of ro ortion to its a'thority and reso'rces0 1ontestationL1he 7ritish 9ef'gee Co'ncil and the "o$ernment0 In many res ects the 7ritish 9ef'gee Co'ncil and 9ef'gee Legal Centre are similarLboth are publicly3funded charities and sub/ect to similar legal and financial constraints. 1he 7ritish 9ef'gee Co'ncil /as% ho/e$er% more acti$e in its o osition to go$ernment olicies% artic'larly the ne/ legislation0 +hat disting'ishes its relationshi from that of the 9ef'gee Legal Centre is not so m'ch inde endence from the go$ernment% ho/e$er% but a countervailing dependency on the refugee community organizations that comprised one3third of its membership. -t the 7ritish 9ef'gee Co'ncil% ref'gees /ere artners /ithin a broader ohtical for'm% and not sim ly clients d'ring a legal rocess as at the 9ef'gee Legal Centre ;Philh s and Hardy (<<@:0 +hereas the 9ef'gee Legal Centre did not 'r ort to s ea* for the ref'gee comm'nity and% in any case% had little legitimacy to do so% the 7ritish 9ef'gee Co'ncil so'ght s'ch a role0 G9"-NIH-1IGN SCIENCEDAGI0 <% No0 C% !arch2- ril (<<=

CIN1HI- H-9DI -ND NELSGN PHILLIPS Strategies of Engagement 1hese as irations embedded it in a more com lex /eb of o/er relationshi s and necessitated a more acti$e a roach to/ards managing its legitimacy0 1here is a different constit'ency here0 +e are res onsible for asyl'm2see*ing ref'gees and /e are acco'ntable to o'r membershi 0 0 0 G'r credibility is based on the s' ort and bac*ing of o'r membershi 0 If /e do not $oice their concerns /e /ill be dead% and so the Home Gffice has to let 's ha$e o'r say ;co'ncil em loyee:0 +hile the Co'ncil a eared to engage in an ad$ersarial relationshi /ith the go$ernment% it /o'ld be inacc'rate to describe it in the same terms as the actions of the 9ef'gee &o9im0 1he latter re resented Bnot merely a hardfo'ght contest to see /ho /ins a artic'lar chess game6 Ob'tP a threat to the game itself0 It is one thing to fight hard to /in a game6 it is another thing to o$ert'rn the chess boardB ;+arren et al (<@>% 0 .(:0 +e refer to the Co'ncilKs actions as an attem t to /in the game% as o 2 osed to o$ert'rning the chessboard0 So% /hile the 7ritish 9ef'gee Co'ncil lobbied acti$ely% it /as selecti$e in the ca'ses it s' orted0 It concentrated on s ecific B/innableB iss'es ;e0g0% the ro osal to end legal aid and to change the a eal system:% thereby reaffirming the go$ernmentKs o$erall legislati$e frame/or*0 Nor co'ld it afford to re3ect the go$ernmentKs agenda o't of hand if it /anted to contin'e to artici ate in olicy disc'ssions0 Gnce a year /e ha$e an ha$e an off2the2record disc'ssion /ith ci$il ser$ants0 It ta*es lace in a barristerKs chambers /ith a glass of /ine0 Some eo le might see that as com romising /ith the enemy0 7't 4'ite fran*ly% /e ha$e so many iss'es of concern /hich /e try to infl'ence the go$ernment on% /e /o'ld be m'ch less infl'ential and ers'asi$e if /e sim ly treated them as the enemy ;co'ncil official:0 Certainly% the go$ernment had less control o$er the Co'ncil than the 9ef'gee Legal Centre% and the Co'ncil did mo'nt a $igoro's cam aign against certain go$ernment meas'res0 7't% by coo erating /ith the go$ernment% the 7ritish 9ef'gee Co'ncil /as effecti$ely coo ted: the go$ernment /as /illing to share the symbols of o/er by allo/ing the Co'ncil to artici ate in decision and olicy ma*ing b't% for ractical 'r oses% the asymmetrical o/er relationshi /as maintained ;see Selznic* (<??% 0 (,2(?:0 1his enabled the go$ernment to Bbl'ntB any threats osed by the Co'ncil by redefining them /ithin the confines of the go$ernmentKs interests ;+arren et al (<@>: as% for exam le% /ith its demand for a radically ne/ a roach to settlement0 G'r relationshi /ith the Home GfficeM 1hatKs a tric*y one0 1hey go on f'nding 's0 +e 't in o'r s'bmission Ofor f'ndsP e$ery three years and /e more or less get it0 7't to the extent that /e ha$enKt got a national olicy on settlement 00 0 o'r infl'ence has been marginal0 00 0 7y that criterion% /eKre a fail're ;co'ncil em loyee:0 1he 7ritish 9ef'gee Co'ncilKs strategy oi contestation allo/ed it to ha$e some im act on the go$ernment% /hile managing its legitimacy in the eyes of other sta*eholders to /hom it /as connected by other o/er relationshi s0 1he ad$antages of s'ch a strategy re$ol$e aro'nd being incl'ded in disc'ssions by dominant sta*eholders% /hile disad$antages relate to dil'ting ro osals to ma*e them more alatable to o/erholders0 So% /hile some inno$ation may occ'r% a radical o$erha'l of the domain is 'nli*ely0 1he Co'ncil th's faced the classic dilemma of reformist organizations: in order to be ta*en serio'sly% it ris*ed coo tation by the go$ernment0 In s'mmary% o'r analysis 'nco$ers t/o *inds of confiict . In contention, new entrants struggle to overturn existing domain parameters in order to make space for themselves

and% in so doing, challenge dominant stakeholders. -s ne/ contenders% s'ch organizations may not ossess either formal a'thority or critical reso'rcesLif they did% they /o'ld robably already be acti$e in the domain0 *hey may, therefore, use discursive legitimacy to secure a voice ;e0g0% Elsbach and S'tton (<<C% Philli s and Hardy (<<@: /hich% in t'rn% may both de end ' on% and lead to% a s'bstantial o$erha'l of existing domain arameters0 +e s'ggest that the likely response to such a threat is marginalization, at least initially, when the new contender2s legitimacy is most vulnerable and tenuous ;cf0 +arren et al (<@>:0 If the ne/ contender is s'ccessf'l in establishing its legitimacy% the definition of the roblem that frames the domain /ill change and its lace /ithin it /ill become more sec're0KK In the case of contestation% a stakeholder challenges existing powerholders, but only within the limits of existing domain parameters % allo/ing it to maintain legitimacy in the eyes of 4'ite different sta*eholders0 1his strategy may rod'ce some concessions% b't it runs the risk of cooptation by powerholders. Concl'sions -s Hazen ;(<<>% 0 ,<=: oints o't% interorganizational relationshi s and net/or*s are B$ital to the /or* and comm'nity li$es of most eo le0B It is critical% therefore% that researchers deal /ith their com lexity0 *his study of strategies of engagement is intended to move the discussion beyond the simple dichotomy of collaboration and conflict % and to foc's attention on the com lex dynamics of interorganizational domains0 +hile more em irical in$estigation is re4'ired% /e identify fo'r strategies of engagementL collaboration% com liance% contention% and G9"-NIH-1IGN SCIENCEDAGI0 <% No0 C% !arch2- ril (<<=

CIN1HI- H-9DI -ND NELSGN PHILLIPS Strategies of Engagement contestationLand describe fo'r co'nter$ailing strategies% layerLmay lead less o/erf'l organizations to com ly ta*en either to defend the domain from change or to infl'ence the direction that change takes0reciprocal collaboration, regulation, marginalization, and cooptation0 ;See 1able (:0 Collaboration and contention a ear to re resent the greatest otential for synergy and inno$ation6 contestation rod'ces limited change6 /hile com liance means that one organization sim ly acts as the instmment of the other0 7y as*ing /ho has formal a'thority% /ho controls *ey reso'rces% and /ho is able to tnanage legitimacy disc'rsi$ely% /e can also identify $ario's o/er dynamics0 In the #5 ref'gee domain% collaboration /as associated /ith a dis ersal of a'thority% reso'rces% and legitimacy among organizations% /hich suggests that collaboration may be easier when the various aspects of power are widely distributed. In the case of a significant power imbalance, com liance a ears more li*ely% as in the case of the 9ef'gee Legal Centre0 It /as highly de endent on the go$emment regarding all as ects of o/er: the go$emment had a'thority and reso'rces% and the Centre de ended on it to manage its legitimacy $is2a2$is other agencies0 If o/er is not dis ersed% collaboration may still be if o/erholders exercise $ol'ntary restraint% b't socializationL *no/ing that yo' aiKe 'ltimately the /ea*er /ith the actions they thin* their more o/erf'l co'nter arts /ish to see% e$en /hen they do not exercise their o/er0 Contention is a $iable strategy% e$en /hen actors do not ossess formal a'thority or critical reso'rces if they ha$e some disc'rsi$e legitimacy% as in the case of the 9ef'gee &or'm0 Grganizations cannot afford to ignore this as ect of o/er% e$en /hen they ha$e a'thority and reso'rces% as the 7ritish 9ef'gee Co'ncil sho/s in its attem ts to rotect its right to s ea* on behalf of ref'gees0 -s far as research on interorganizational interactions is concerned% /e first s'ggest that power and politics are inseparable from the most fundamental processes of domain definition. 1he ability to artici ate in domain de$elo ment and to define the roblems that characterize it% de ends either on having the power to make oneself heard or on the goodwill of powerful domain members to allow low3power participants to participate. +e% ho/e$er% sa/ no e$idence of the latter in o'r field/or*% and s'ggest that research sho'ld consider more directly the role of power in the development of interorganizational domains, as /ell as the im act of the different as ects of o/er% /hich may com lement and offset another0 3., edification Second% researchers m'st ta*e care not to ado t the 1able ( Strategies of Engagement in the #5 9ef'gee System Comm'nity De$elo ment 9ef'gee Legal 9ef'gee &or'mD-genoies 7ritishQ 9ef'gee 1eamD9ef'gee Grganizations CentreD"o$ernment and "o$ernment Co'ncilD"o$ernment S'rface dynamics Coo eration Coo eration Conflict Conflict Strategy of Collaboration by the Com iiance by the 9ef'gee Contention by the 9ef'gee Contestation by the 7ritish engagement Comm'nity De$elo ment Legai Centre &or'm 9ef'gee Co'ncil 1eam Co'nter$ailing strategy 9ef'gee organizations 9eg'lation by go$emment to !arginaiization by other Coo tation by the go$ernment engage in reci rocal re$ent threats from the organizations to re el to bl'nt threats from the collaboration 9ef'gee Legal Centre threats osed by the 7ritish 9ef'gee Co'ncil 9ef'gee &or'm Po/er distrib'tion No concentration of a'thority% 1he 9ef'gee Legal Centre is &ormal a'thority regarding "o$ernment ossesses reso'rces% or legitimacy: all highly de endent on the /ho has the right to s ea* formal a'thority and as ects of o/er are go$ernment regarding all for ref'gees is 'nclear6 reso'rces

$is2a2$is Co'ncil6 /idely distrib'ted among as ects of o/er: the other agencies ossess Co'ncil has some formal organizations go$ernment has a'thority reso'rces% b't the 9ef'gee a'thority and reso'rces $isand reso'rces6 also the &or'm is not de endent on a2$is ref'gee organizations% 9ef'gee Legal Centre them6 the for'm has some b't has to manage its de ends on the go$ernment disc'rsi$e legitimacy to legitimacy /ith these to manage its legitimacy s ea* for ref'gees gro' s to be allo/ed to $is2a2$is other agencies and beca'se it is r'n by s ea* for them ref'gees ref'gees Change to domain Probable% conse4'ential Possible% limited #nli*ely% s' erficial Possible% significant

G9"-NIH-1IGN SCIENCEDAGI0 <% No0 C% !arch2- ril (<<=

CIN1HI- H-9DI -ND NELSGN PHILLIPS Strategies of Engagement ers ecti$e of the most o/erf'l sta*eholders in 3'dging the Bs'ccessB of the collaboration0 "i$en the im ortance of o/er in defining the roblem and identifying sta*eholders% it is all too easy to acce t the stated goals of the collaboration% /hich means s'ccess is meas'red from the osition of the o/erf'l /hile e4'ally legitimate o'tcomes% /hich fa$o'r lo/2 o/er sta*eholders% are excl'ded0 !oreo$er% /hile collaboration can be highly rod'cti$e in sol$ing interorganizational roblems% conflict also has a clear role in challenging existing frame/or*s and forcing domain change in directions considered by at least some members to be ositi$e0 7oth as ects deser$e e4'al attention% since fail're to recognize the im ortance of conflict leads to a reference for the stat's 4'o and an im licit ado tion of the $ie/ oint of o/erf'l sta*eholders0 !oreo$er% since early choices in the de$elo ment of the domain can ha$e a lasting effect as rocesses of instit'tionalization s' ort their contin'ance% the /or* on domain de$elo ment and strategies of engagement may benefit from a connection /ith the instit'tional theory literat're ;e0g0% Phili s et al% (<<?:0 - n'mber of ractical im lications also exist0 -s far as o/erholders are concemed% there are t/o im ortant oints0 &irst% /hile o'r research fo'nd collaboration only in a sit'ation /here o/er /as already /idely dis ersed% in some circumstances high3power organizations may be willing to share power in order to achieve synergy and innovation ;Hardy% Philli s% and La/rence% (<<=:0 Gb$io'sly% there are ris*s to s'ch a strategy: for exam le% not being able to control the direction of change6 the increased ris* of an escalation of conflict as sta*eholders ac4'ire s'fficient o/er to resist6 and the greater time and effort re4'ired to manage s'ch relationshi s0 Conse4'ently% research might address the iss'es associated /ith sharing o/er0 Second% /hile dominant artners may see* the sec'rity of com liance from their artners% it is 'nli*ely to rod'ce inno$ati$e change0 In a relationshi based on reg'lation and com liance% the /ea*er organization sim ly acts as the tool of the former0 *his may be perfectly appropriate where issues of implementation are at stake, but it will be ineffective when more creative solutions are sought. Po/erf'l organizations m'st% therefore% leam to identify the circ'mstances 'nder /hich they co'ld benefit from some relin4'ishing of control0 1he lessons for members of less o/erf'l organizations are e4'ally im ortant0 Collaboration is one /ay to deri$e benefit from changes to interorganizational domains0 So% too% is conflict6 b't both re4'ire o/er0 Gften a lac* of access to reso'rces and formal a'thority ma*e the ros ects of either seem im ossible0 Ho/e$er% disc'rsi$e legitimacy also ro$ides a /ay to ens're recognition and artici ation ;e0g0% Elsbach and S'tton (<<C:0 S'ch a strategy em hasizes the importance of managing meaning, communication, and impression management in acquiring power. 1he exam le of the 9ef'gee &omm sho/s ho/ a relati$ely B o/erlessB organization can ma*e a mar* thro'gh this form of o/er ;also see Philli s and Hardy (<<@:0 cknowledgment 1he a'thors /ish to ac*no/ledge the financial s' ort of the Social Sciences and H'manities 9esearch Co'ncil of Canada% les &onds o'r la &ormation des Cherche'rs et (K-ide a la 9echerche of R'ebec% and !c"ill #ni$ersity in carrying o't this research0 Endnotes KData on the #5 ref'gee system /as collected thro'gh inter$ie/s /ith ci$il ser$ants% oliticians% N"G officials% and ref'gees that too* lace bet/een (<<) and (<<,% In addition% doc'mentary and archi$al e$idence /as collected% incl'ding 'blished material in

the form of go$ernment statistics% ann'al re orts% and min'tes from ann'al meetings% Hansard re orts of arliamentary s eeches and ne/s a er articles0 Indi$id'al inter$ie/ees also ro$ided internal re orts% memos% etc0 1he sit'ation described in this a er refers to ref'gee determination and settlement in the early (<<)s% B1he terminology 'sed here is as follo/s0 -n asyl'm see*er or ref'gee claimant is an indi$id'al see*ing asyl'm0 9ef'gee refers to an indi$id'al granted asyl'm% /hether as a ref'gee or some other category0 Determination refers to the rocess /hereby an indi$id'alKs stat's is ascertained0 Nongo$ernment organizations and la/yers /ho re resent and ad$ise claimants concerning their rights in this rocess are *no/n as rotection agencies0 Settlement refers to the serSKices ro$ided to ref'gees to hel them settle in their ne/ co'ntry% incl'ding training% ho'sing% and other s' ort ser$ices0 9ef'gee comm'nity organizations are small% 's'ally ethnic2based% ref'gee2led organizations that ro$ide both rotection and settlement ser$ices to ref'gees0 K+e obser$e similar sit'ations in the case of the en$ironment% /here organizations that once had no role in interorganizational decision ma*ing are no/ ro'tinely cons'lted: and in the case of the &irst Nations in Canada% /ho /ere excl'ded from constit'tional tal*s in (<=@0 b't as their legitimacy /as established% became art of disc'ssions in (<<C% 9eferences -ltheide% D% L% ;(<==:0 B!ediating C'tbac*s in H'man Ser$ices: - Case St'dy in the Negotiated Grder%B Sociological R'arterly% C<% ,% ,,<2,,.0 -stley% +% "% ;(<=>:% B1o/ard an !anagement 9e$ie/% <% ,0 .C?2.,.% reciation of Collecti$e Strat2 egy%B -cademy of

and P% S0 Sachde$a ;(<=>:0 BStr'ct'ral So'rces of Intraorganizational Po/er: - 1heoretical Synthesis0B -cademy of !anagement 9e$ie/% <% (% ()>2((,% -lter0 C% ;(<<):% B-n Ex loratory St'dy of Conflict and Coordination in Interorganizational Ser$ice Deli$ery Systems%B -cademy of !anagement To'rnal% ,,% >@=2.)C% and T% Hage ;(<<,:% Grganizations +or*ing 1ogether% Ne/b'ry Par*0 C-: Sage0 7enard% C0 ;(<=?:% BPolitics and the 9ef'gee Ex erience%B Political Science R'arterly% ()(% >% ?(@2?,?0 7enson0 T% 50 ;(<@@:% B1he Interorganizational Net/or* as a Political Economy%B -dministrati$e Science R'arterly% C)% CC<2C><0 G9"-NIH-1IGN SCIENCEDAG(0 <% No0 C% !arch2- ril (<<=

CIN1HI- H-9DI -ND NELSGN PHILLIPS Strategies of Engagement ;(<@=:% B9e ly to !aines%B Sociological R'arterly% (<%><@2><<0 7erger% P0 L0 and 10 L'c*mann ;(<??:% 1he Social Constr'ction of 9eality% "arden City% NI: Do'bleday0 7l'mer% H0 ;(<@(:% BSocial Problems as Collecti$e 7eha$io'r%B Social Problems% (<% C<=2,)?0 7o'rdie'% P0 ;(<<,: Sociology in R'estion0 London% #5: Sage0 7resser% 90 50 ;(<==:% B!atching Collecti$e and Com etiti$e Strategies%B Strategic !anagement To'rnal% <% ,@.2,=.0 and T0 E0 Harl ;(<=?:% BCollecti$e Strategy: Aice or Airt'eMB -cademy of !anagement 9e$ie/0 ((% >)=JC@0 7ro/n% L0 D0 ;(<=,:% !anaging Conflict -t Grganizational Interfaces% 9eading0 !-: -ddison2+esley0 Carney% !0 "0 ;(<=@:% B1he Strategy and Str'ct're of Collecti$e -ction%B Grganization St'dies% =% >% ,>(2,?C% Clegg% S0 ;(<=<:% &rame/or*s of Po/er% London0 #5: Sage0 Cohen% 90 ;(<<>:% Erontiers of Identity: 1he 7ritish and the Gthers% London% #5: Longman0 Day% 90 and T0 Day ;(<@@:% B9e$ie/ of the C'rrent State of Negotiated Grder 1heory: -n - reciation and a Criti4'e%B Sociological R'arterly% (=% (C?2(>C0 and ;(<@=:% B9e ly to !aines%B Sociological R'arterly% (<% ><<2.)(0 D'tton% T0 E0 and 90 70 D'ncan ;(<=@:0 B1he Creation of !oment'm for Change 1hro'gh the Process of Strategic Iss'e Diagnosis%B Strategic !anagement To'rnal% =% C@<2 C<.0 Eisenhardt% 5athleen !0 ;(<=<: B7'ilding 1heories from Case St'dy 9esearch%B -cademy of !anagement 9e$ie/ (>% ,% .,C2..)0 Elsbach% 50 D0 and 90 I0 S'tton ;(<<C:% B-c4'iring Grganizational Legitimacy 1hro'gh Illegitimate -ctions: - !arriage of Instit'tional and Im ression !anagement 1heories%B 1he -cademy of !anagement To'rnal% ,.% >% ?<<2@,=0 Exile ;(<<(:% Ne/sletter of the 9ef'gee Co'ncil0 U.(0 &airclo'gh% Norman ;(<<C:% Disco'rse and Social Change0 Cambridge% #5: Polity Press0 &rench% T0 90 P0 and 70 9a$en ;(<?=:% B1he 7ases of Social Po/er%B in D0 Cart/right and -0 Hander ;Eds0:% "ro' Dynamics0 Ne/ Ior*: Har er and 9o/0 &rost% P0 T0 ;(<=@:% BPo/er% Politics and Infl'ence0B in &0 !0 1ablin0 L0 L0 P'tnam% 50 H0 9oberts and L0 +0 Porter ;Eds0:% Handboo* of Grganizational Comm'nications: -n Interdisci linary Pers ecti$e% London% #5: Sage0 "ray% 70 ;(<=.:% BConditions &acilitating Interorganizational Collaboration%B H'man 9elations% ,=% <((2<,?0 ;(<=<:% Collaborating% San &rancisco% C-: Tossey27ass0 "ray and 10 !0 Hay ;(<=?:% BPolitical Limits to Interorganizational Consens's and Change%B To'rnal of - lied 7eha$ioral Science% CC%<.2((C0 "ricar% 70 and L0 D0 7ro/n ;(<=(:% BConfiict% Po/er and Grganization in a Changing Comm'nity%B H'man 9elations ,>% =@@2=<,0 Hall% P0 !0 and D0 -0 S encer2Hall ;(<=C:% B1he Social Conditions of the Negotiated Grder%B #rban Life0 ((%,% ,C=2,><0 Hardy% C0 ;(<=.a:% B1he Nat're of #nobtr'si$e Po/er%B To'rnal of !anagement St'die02i0 CC% >% ,=>2,<<0 ;(<=.b:% !anaging Grganizational Clos're% -ldershot% England: "o/er Press% Hardy% C0 ;(<<>:% B#nderorganized Interorganization Domains: 1he Case of 9ef'gee Systems%B To'rnal of - lied 7eha$io'ral Science% ,)% ,% C@=2C<?0 Hardy% C0 and S0 Clegg ;(<<?:% BSome Dare Call It Po/er%B in C0 Hardy and S0 Clegg ;Eds0:% Handboo* of Grganization St'dies% London% #5: Sage0

Hardy% C0% N0 Philli s and 10 La/rence ;(<<=:% BDisting'ishing 1r'st and Po/er in Interorganizational 9elations: &orms and &acades of 1r'st%B in 1r'st +ithin and 7et/een Grganizations% C0 Lane and 90 7achmann ;Eds0:% Gxford% #5: Gxford #ni$ersity Press0 Harrigan% 50 90 ;(<=.:% Strategies for Toint Aent'res% Lexington% !-: D0C0 HeathDLexington 7oo*s0 Hasenfeld% I0 and !0 -0 Chesler ;(<=<:% BClient Em o/erment in the H'man Ser$ices: Personal and Professional -genda%B To'rnal of - lied 7eha$ioral Science0 C.% ><<2.C(0 Hazen% !0 -0 ;(<<>:0 B- 9adical H'manist Pers ecti$e of Interorganizational 9elationshi s%B H'man 9elations% >@% >% ,<,J(.0 Hic*son% D0 T0% C0 90 Hinings% C% -0 Lee% 90 E0 Schnec*% and T0 !0 Pennings ;(<@(:% BStrategic Contingencies 1heory of Intraorganizational Po/er%B -dministrati$e Science R'arterly% (?% C% C(?2CC<0 Home Gffice ;(<<(DC:0 -nn'al 9e ort0 London% #5: H!SG0 5anter% 90 !0 ;(<<):% B+hen "iants Leam Coo erati$e Strategies%B Planning 9e$ie/% (=% (% (.2C.0 5nights0 D0% &0 !'rray% and H0 +illmott ;(<<,:% BNet/or*ing as 5no/ledge +or*: - St'dy of Strategic Interorganizational De$elo ment in the &inancial Ser$ices Ind'stry%B To'rnal of !anagement St'dies0 ,)% ?0 <@.2<<.0 5no*e% D0 ;(<<):% Grganizing for Collecti$e -ction0 7erlin% "ermany: De "r'yter0 La'mann% E0 G0 and D0 5no*e ;(<=@:0 1he Grganizational State% !adison% +I: #ni$ersity of +isconsin Press0 Le$y% T0 -0 ;(<=C:% B1he Staging of Negotiations 7et/een Hos ice and !edical Instit'tions%B #rban Life% ((0,% C<,2,((0 L'*es% S0 ;(<@>:% Po/er: - 9adical Aie/0 London% #5: !acmillan0 !a3i*a% !0 ;(<<(:% Into the (<<)s: 1he Needs of 9ef'gee27ased Gr ganizations and 9ef'gees in 7ritain0 Gxford% #5: 9ef'gee St'dies Program0 !cCann% T0 E0 ;(<=,:% BDesign "'idelines for Social Problem2Sol$ing Inter$entions%B To'rnal of - lied 7eiia$ioral Science% (<% (@@ (=<0 !c"'ire% T% 70 ;(<==:% B- Dialectical -nalysis of Interorganizational Net/or*s%B To'rnal of !anagement% (>% ()<2(C>0 !'mby% D0 andC0 Stohl ;(<<(:% BPo/er and Disco'rse in Grganization St'dies: -bsence and the Dialectic of Control%B Disco'rse and .ocDenK% C% ,% ,(,2,,C0 Nathan% !0 L0 and I0 I0 !itroff ;(<<(:0 B1he #se of Negotiated Grder 1heory as a 1ool for the -nalysis and De$elo ment of an Interorganizational &ield0B To'rnal of - lied 7eha$ioral Science% C@% (?,2(=)0 G1oole% 90 and -0 +0 GK1oole ;(<=(:% BNegotiating Interorganiza tional Grders%B Sociological R'arterly% CC% (% C<J (0 Par*er% I0 ;(<<C:% Disco'rse Dynamics0 London% #5: 9o'tledge0 Pettigre/% -0 !0 ;(<@,:0 1lie Politics of Grganizational Decision !a* ing0 London0 England: 1a$istoc*0 ;(<@<:0 BGn St'dying Grganizational C'lt'res%B -dministrati$e Science R'arterly% C>% .@)2=(0 Pfeffer% T0 ;(<=(:% Po/er in Grganizations% !arshfield% !-: Pitman0

CIN1HI- H-9DI -ND NELSGN PHILLIPS Strategies of Engagement and "0 90 Salanci* ;(<@=:% 1he External Control of Grganizations% Ne/ Ior*: Har er and 9o/0 Philli 0s% N0 and T0 7ro/n ;(<<,:% B-nalyzing Comm'nication In and -ro'nd Grganizations: - Critical Hermene'tic - roach%B 1he -cademy of !anagement To'rnal% ,?%?% (.>@2(.@?0 and C0 Hardy ;(<<@:% B!anaging !'lti le Identities: Disco'rse% Legitimacy and 9eso'rces in the #050 9ef'gee System%B Grganization% >% C% (.<2(=.0 10 La/rence% and C0 Hardy ;(<<?:% #nderstanding Collaboration in Context: 1he Dynamic of Instit'tional &ields and Interorganizational Domains% #n 'blished /or*ing a er% !c"ill #ni$ersity0 ;Pa er a$ailable from a'thors0: 9ing% P0 S0 and -0 Aan de Aen ;(<<>:% BDe$elo mental Processes of Coo erati$e Interorganizational 9elationshi s%B -cademy of !anagement 9e$ie/% (<% <)2((=0 9ose% S0 !0 and 70 L0 7lac* ;(<=.:% -d$ocacy and Em o/erment: !ental Health Care in the Comm'nity% 7oston% !-: 9o'tledge and 5egan Pa'l0 Salinas% !0% D0 Pritchard% and -0 5ibedi ;(<=@:% 9ef'gee27ased Grganizations: 1heir &'nction and Im ortance for the 9ef'gee in 7ritain% Gxford0 #5: 9ef'gee St'dies Program0 Selznic*% P0 ;(<??:% 1A- and the "rass 9oots% 7er*eley% C-: #ni$ersity of California Press ;Cd ed0:0 Smircich% L0 and "0 !organ ;(<=C:% BLeadershi : 1he !anagement of !eaning%B To'rnal of - lied 7eha$ioral Science% (=% ,% C.@ C@,0 Stra'ss% -0% L0 Schatzman% D0 Ehrlich% 90 7'cher% and !0 Sabshin ;(<?,:% B1he Hos ital and Its Negotiated Grder%B in E0 &reidson ;Ed0:% 1he Hos ital in !odem Society% (>@2(?<% London% #5: Collier2!acmillan0 1hom son% T0 70 ;(<<):% Ideology and !odern C'lt're% Stanford% C-: Stanford #ni$ersity Press0 1rist% E0 ;(<=,:% B9eferent Grganizations and the De$elo ment of Interorganizational Domains%B H'man 9elations% ,?% C?<2C=>0 +addoc*% S0 -0 ;(<=<:% B#nderstanding Social Partnershi s: -n E$ol'tionary !odel of Partnershi Grganizations%B -dministration and Society% C(%@=2())0 +ai1en% 900 S0 9ose% and -0 7erg'nder ;(<@>:% 1he Str'ct're of #rban 9eform0 Lexington% !-: DC Heath0 +estley% &0 and H0 Aredenb'rg ;(<<(:% BStrategic 7ridging: 1he Collaboration 7et/een En$ironmentalists and 7'siness in the !ar*eting of "reen Prod'cts%B To'rnal of - lied 7eha$ioral Science% C@% ?.2<)0 -cce ted by Peter &rost6 recei$ed Se tember (<% (<<>0 1his a er has been /ith the a'thor for t/o re$isions0 G9"-NIH-1IGN SCIENCEDAGI0 <% No0 C% !arch2- ril (<<=