Abstract

The question of how a network is managed is a relevant issue in network governance as the implementation of a certain governance regime induces sunk costs, path dependencies, and lock-in effects. Therefore, I analyse in this conceptual study what form of network governance fits to which kind of networks. I examine from an economic perspective two important forms of network governance with regard to their incentive systems: 1 lead-firm governance 2 third-party governance. In (1) I identify rather strong incentives for the network manager to foster the network’s development, but also to exploit his or her discretionary freedom, whereas (2) implies somewhat weaker incentives to actively promote the network, but also to act opportunistically. As a result, the article discusses that the conditions in a cooperative, vertical network with stable relationships tend to favour a lead-firm network manager despite the large discretionary freedom that the network manager has. By contrast, horizontal networks that are characterised by flexible and more competitive relations seem to require a neutral, third-party network manager.

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.