Project and Process Management of Public-Private Partnerships: Managerial Tensions and Coping Strategies

• Author: Andreas Hagedorn Krogh,Svante Aasbjerg Thygesen
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/00953997221100393
• Published date: 01 November 2022
• Date: 01 November 2022
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/00953997221100393

Administration & Society

2022, Vol. 54(10) 1993 –2020

© The Author(s) 2022

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/00953997221100393

journals.sagepub.com/home/aas

Article

Project and Process

Management of Public-

Private Partnerships:

Managerial Tensions

and Coping Strategies

Andreas Hagedorn Krogh1

and Svante Aasbjerg Thygesen2

Abstract

Western governments increasingly use public-private partnerships (PPPs)

to solve complex social problems. This article examines how public

managers handle conflicting demands for classical project management and

collaborative process management in PPPs for preventing negative social

control. Building on theories of public governance, PPP management, and

paradox management, it develops an analytical framework for studying

managerial tensions in PPPs. Applying the framework in a case study of

three Danish PPPs, it shows how partnership managers handle managerial

tensions through strategies of opposition, separation, and synthesis. The

study demonstrates a promising path of integrating paradox management

theory in public governance hybridity research.

Keywords

public-private partnerships, project management, process management,

paradox management, negative social control, hybrid governance

1Institute for Leadership and Organisation, Royal Danish Defence College, Denmark

2Department of Social Sciences and Business, Roskilde University, Denmark

Corresponding Author:

Andreas Hagedorn Krogh, Institute for Leadership and Organisation, Royal Danish Defence

College, Ryvangs Allé 1, Copenhagen Ø, 2100, Denmark.

Email: ahkrogh@ruc.dk

1100393AAS0010.1177/00953997221100393Administration & SocietyKrogh and Thygesen

research-article2022

1994 Administration & Society 54(10)

Introduction

Honor-based violence and negative social control in vulnerable communities

is an emergent and intractable problem that attracts increasing political atten-

tion in Western societies (Keskinen, 2011; Mayeda & Vijaykumar, 2016).

Due to its complex and socially embedded nature, governments cannot effec-

tively solve the problem through classical forms of policing (Verhage et al,

2010; Webster, 2015). Instead, they must collaborate with private actors

through various forms of public-private partnerships (PPPs) in order to

develop effective, innovative, and sustainable solutions that enjoy legitimacy

and support from the local community (Crawford & Cunningham, 2015;

Eshareturi et al., 2014; Webster, 2015).

An illustrative case is found in Denmark. In the spring of 2019, the

Ministry of Immigration and Integration funded five municipal PPPs for pre-

venting negative social control in various immigrant communities. Launching

the partnership initiative, the Ministry stressed the need for cross-sector col-

laboration between public authorities and civil society organizations in order

to effectively tackle the emergent, elusive, and inherently complex problem

of negative social control (Ministry of Immigration and Integration [MII],

2019). Through its funding requirements, the Ministry charged the partner-

ships with the ambitious goals of building resilient communities and devel-

oping long-term solutions that enjoyed the support and ownership of local

community actors. At the same time, however, it required the partnership

managers to formulate SMART-goals and detailed plans for obtaining them

within a two years period.

The example goes to illustrate a central managerial clamp in government-

funded PPPs addressing wicked problems of crime and vulnerability. Though

central and local governments increasingly recognize the need for localized

and collaborative processes of mutual trust building and open-minded explo-

ration in developing innovative, legitimate, and tailor-made solutions, they

still expect expedient goal attainment, value-for-money, and performance

efficiency when launching new PPPs (Edelenbos & Klijn, 2009; Weihe,

2008). Public managers of these PPPs thus find themselves caught in the

crossfire between opposing managerial demands. On the one hand, they must

conduct new forms of facilitative process management in order to build com-

munity resilience and broad ownership to robust solutions that fit the dynamic

development of the intrinsically wicked problem (Head & Alford, 2015;

Krogh & Torfing, 2015; Rittel & Webber, 1973). On the other hand, they

must perform classical project management in order to ensure strict financial

control, decisiveness, and speed in the PPP projects (Andrews & Entwistle,

2010; Brinkerhoff & Brinkerhoff, 2011;Van den Hurk et al., 2016; Verhoest

et al., 2015).