This dissertation studies the role of organizational politics and power and their role in the success of public service Public Private Partnerships (PPPs). By doing so, it addresses two areas of research in network governance and organizational theory. On one hand it explores the role of public private partnerships in the emerging network governance paradigm of public administration. On the other hand it studies the widely discussed but considerably under-researched role of organizational power in network governance. The literature review establishes public service PPPs as a sub type of governance networks, and provides an initial framework to study the nature and dynamics of power in these PPPs. The research is descriptive in nature and uses inductive reasoning in the tradition of Kathleen Eisenhardt. Case studies in rural areas of Punjab, Pakistan are conducted on two very similar PPPs. A replication logic is used to understand how power contributed to the success of one of those projects and lack of success in the other. Based on analysis of the findings, the dissertation concludes that public service PPPs succeed when the goals of the PPP are aligned with the goals of the most powerful collaborators. This is because regardless of its structure, a public service PPP pursues the goals targeted by the sum total of the power of its politically active collaborators. The dissertation also provides insight into the complexity of the concept of success in public service PPPs and the donor control on the operation and outcomes of public service PPPs.

In 2008, South Korea suffered a great loss of public trust in government. Since May 2, 2008, street protests against U.S. beef imports and the April 2008 beef agreement continued for more than 100 days. These public protests started with peaceful candlelight vigils but some of them turned violent in the end of May. According to a white paper on the protests published by the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office, for 106 days from May 2 until Aug. 15, there were 2,398 separate rallies drawing 932,000 people. Among them, 1,476 protesters were indicted for participating in illegal and violent protests. 100 police officers suffered serious injuries and 401 light ones. 88 civilians were seriously injured. The South Korean National Assembly had to remain idle for more than 80 days due to numerous political debates and the approval rating of President Myung-Bak Lee plummeted from 40 percent range to near 20 percent during the protest period. This Dissertation started from a question of why people were so angry against their government. The whole process of the U.S.-South Korea Beef negotiation was reviewed, focusing on whether or not Korean government and its negotiators tried to make a domestic agreement with people. For the purpose, this dissertation developed an integrated framework by the combination of the two level-game theory with the advocacy coalition framework. The framework was also used to investigate the effect of external factors outside the Korean policy-making system of the beef negotiation. The framework reviewed win-set changes of both countries, especially focusing on the change of Korean win-set size. Then, the whole process of the beef negotiation in the dissertation framework was interpreted in the aspect of the New Public Service. This interpretation gave the dissertation the theoretical importance, showing the way in which the interpretation contributed to the decision-making theory. Findings in the dissertation revealed that there was a deep disagreement between what Korean government wanted and what Korean people actually desired. Finally, this dissertation considered how public administrators could increase communication with their people in the Korean policy-making system. Janet and Robert Denhardt's shared values approach to the public interest and the decision-making process would be one answer.

Over the past forty years the nonprofit sector has experienced a steady rise in the professionalization of its employees and its operations. Some have argued that this trend is in large part a reaction to the requirements foisted upon the nonprofit sector through the passage of the Tax Reform Act of 1969. While some scholars have detailed a number of unintended consequences that have resulted from this trend toward professionalization, in general scholars and practitioners have accepted it as a necessary step along the path toward ensuring that service is administered in an accountable and responsible manner. I analyze the contemporary trend in professionalization of the nonprofit sector from a different angle--one which seeks to determine how the nonprofit sector came to problematize the nature of its service beginning in the early twentieth century, as well as the consequences of doing so, rather than reinforce the existing normative arguments. To this end, I employ an "analytics of government" from an ethical and political perspective which is informed by Michel Foucault's conception of genealogy, as well as his work on governing rationalities, in order to reveal the historical and political forces that contribute to the nonprofit sector's professionalization and that shape its current processes, institutions, and norms. I ultimately argue that these forces serve to reinforce a broad movement away from the charitable impulse that motivates individuals to engage in personal acts of compassion and toward a philanthropic enterprise by which knowledge is rationally applied toward reforming society rather than aiding individuals. This movement toward institutional philanthropy and away from individual charity supplants the needs of the individual with the needs of the organization. I then apply this analysis to propose an alternate governing model for the nonprofit sector--one that draws on Foucault's exploration of ancient writings on love, self-knowledge, and governance--in order to locate a space for the individual in nonprofit life.

This research project provides a unique perspective of the role of the concept of collaborative leadership between the Arizona Subsidized Child Care Program and its key stakeholder network. The process involved was to frame the research and its findings using the Team Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire's (TMLQ's) Assessment Scales. The research project sought to explore whether collaborative leadership in the policy-making process between the Arizona Subsidized Child Care Program and its key stakeholders actually does exist and, if so, to what extent. The research questions for the dissertation are, as follows: (1) What leadership styles does the Arizona Subsidized Child Care Program, through its various managers, exhibit and are these styles truly collaborative?; and (2) Are the leadership relationships between the key child care stakeholder groups and the Arizona Subsidized Child Care Program actually collaborative? The study employed a mixed-method approach (both quantitative and qualitative research methods) by means of an online survey, interviews, and document analysis. ii Based on this study's findings, the program exhibits collaborative leadership concepts with its stakeholder network. In addition, a positive correlation between the use of collaborative leadership concepts and participant perceptions of satisfaction, extra effort, and effectiveness was documented.