Katherine R. Cooper

Interorganizational Collaboration Explored Through the Bona Fide Network Perspective

This research proposes a bona fide network perspective for examining interorganizational collaboration. This perspective emphasizes that (a) network boundaries are fuzzy and membership is dynamic, (b) interorganizational networks are embedded in a complex environment that enables some configurations and constrains others, (c) interorganizational networks are multiplex and different types of relationships are mutually influential, (d) these networks are dynamically restructured over time, and (e) outcomes of networks occur at the individual and whole network levels. An interorganizational collaboration network among gender-based violence NGOs in Zambia is used as an illustrative case. Using a mixed-method design, this research finds substantial differences between donor-driven and grassroots coalitions; in addition, NGOs report a number of obstacles to collaboration and outcomes at individual and network levels.

Two Paths Diverged: Examining the Antecedents to Social Entrepreneurship

This research examines the antecedents that motivate and prepare social entrepreneurs to begin social ventures. Drawing from in-depth interviews with 20 social entrepreneurs, this research reveals that there are two paths to social entrepreneurship: the activist path and the business path. Both activist and business social entrepreneurs were motivated by a family legacy or a transformative early adulthood experience as the moral basis for forming a social venture, and both suggested that prior work experience was instrumental in helping them launch their social venture. However, activist social entrepreneurs were likely to form their social venture as a continuation of their ongoing work on a social issue. In contrast, business social entrepreneurs’ first activity on a social issue was to form a social venture. This research suggests that these two different paths to social entrepreneurship result in different types of social ventures.

Mixing Methods in Organizational Communication Research: Current State and Prospects for Advancing Knowledge

In this review, we examine current practices in mixing methods in communication research. We examined 209 mixed-method organizational communication articles published between 1994 and 2014. Our analysis revealed four trends: (1) the dominance of single-paradigm, interpretive studies; (2) the preponderance of triangulation, complementarity, and development as purposes for mixing methods; (3) varied combinations of methods; and (4) a lack of mixed methods citations. In response to findings, we clarify the value proposition of mixing methods, suggest criteria for when communication researchers should or should not consider mixing methods, and recommend strategies for greater transparency in the reporting of mixed-method research.

Interorganizational network portfolios of nonprofit organizations

Despite a body of scholarship that focuses on the characteristics of both within-sector and cross-sector partnerships for nonprofit organizations at the collaborative dyad or whole network level, we know little about the patterns of relationships that a focal organization maintains with other organizations at the meso-level. This research drew upon surveys from 520 nonprofit organizations and employed the Ward Cluster method to introduce interorganizational network portfolios, which we define as the number, type, and character of interorganizational relationships that organizations purposefully develop. Based on organizations’ similarity across 12 network dimensions, cluster analysis revealed three distinct network portfolios. These portfolios characterize nonprofit organizations as high-level collaborators that engage in within- and cross-sector collaboration characterized by frequent communication and greater intensity (n = 120, 23.08%), traditional collaborators that rely almost entirely within-sector ...

Nonprofit participation in collective impact: A comparative case

Abstract Collective impact represents an increasingly common approach to cross-sector collaboration that relies upon coordinated efforts and shared measurement, yet questions remain as to the role of nonprofits in these partnerships. This case study explores nonprofit participation across two collective impact sites. Findings suggest that nonprofit leaders participate, but the conditions of collective impact partnerships impact their participation. Variations in collective impact conditions limit nonprofit participation as expressed through authority, data and financial resources, and discursive legitimacy.

Policy Brief: The Case for Using Robust Measures to Evaluate Nonprofit Organizations

Abstract Although nonprofit organizations are expected to engage in continuous evaluation, its effectiveness is hampered by limited resources and competing and untested instruments. This paper makes the case for the creation and use of more robust measures in nonprofit evaluation. Specifically, we argue for the involvement of nonprofits in the development of reliable and valid instruments that can be used to benchmark nonprofit organizations against one another and for funders and government to support these efforts through their investment in nonprofit measurement. We cite a particular measure, The Nonprofit Capacities Instrument, as an exemplar.

The Case for a Two-Step Approach to Agricultural Campaign Design

Development campaigns designed to scale up effective agricultural solutions often rely on media. Information and communication technologies for development (ICT4D) proponents argue that increased media penetration is necessary for such campaigns to succeed. Interviews of 63 extension agents and 200 farmers in Burkina Faso about their disparities in media ownership, access, skills, and preferences suggest that agricultural development campaigns should account for the different media environments and preferences of target populations within countries. This research presents such an alternative approach, a two-step campaign design intended to address digital divides within countries and target population preferences.