PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS: ADDED VALUE BY ORGANIZATIONAL FORM OR MANAGEMENT?

By B. Steijn, E. Klijn, J. Edelenbos. 2011

149 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Political Science and International Relations, Public Administration, Strategy and Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/996b0766ca970999da7a9d23ab028fb55924fdc3

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Political Science and International Relations

1. J. Koppenjan
2. E. Klijn
3. T. Hahn

In Public Administration

1. J. Koppenjan
2. E. Klijn
3. Amelia Clarke
4. A. MacDonald
5. J. Roehrich
6. M. Lewis
7. T. Hahn

In Strategy and Management

1. J. Koppenjan
2. E. Klijn
3. Amelia Clarke
4. A. MacDonald
5. J. Roehrich
6. M. Lewis

Citations in the corpus

• MIXED COMPANIES AND LOCAL GOVERNANCE: NO MAN CAN SERVE TWO MASTERS (2012, unknown): “Steijn et al. (2011) claim that ‘management’ is more important than ‘organizational form’ in PPPs.”
• What makes public-private partnerships work? Survey research into the outcomes and the quality of cooperation in PPPs (2018, background): “These dimensions have often been mentioned by scholars in earlier research (e.g. Skelcher and Sullivan 2008; Steijn, Klijn, and Edelenbos 2011) and include effectiveness of the solution offered, support, integral character of the solution, robustness (durable solution for the future), and cost…”
• Outcomes to Partners in Multi-Stakeholder Cross-Sector Partnerships: A Resource-Based View (2019, background): “Physical Capital Cost savings and improved efficiency (Clemens, 2006; Rotheroe, Keenlyside, & Coates, 2003; Steijn et al., 2011) (Lavie, 2006)”
• The impact of contract characteristics on the performance of public–private partnerships (PPPs) (2016, methodology): “We took this approach following earlier work by Steijn et al. (2011), whose measurement scales built on different dimensions of project performance—see table 1.”