This thesis examines whether and how it is possible to lead interdisciplinary cooperation in a municipality through goal management in relation to creating added value - more welfare for the same or fewer re-sources. The field of study that forms the framework for this qualitative study is the administrative cooperation in the Social and Health area, across three specialist centers in a medium-sized Danish municipality.
The analysis is inspired by social constructivism and phenomenology for the meta-theoretical foundation, and method-wise the dissertation falls within the field of action research. The method is qualitative. The collection of empirical material is done through document analysis, observations and focus group interviews.
The study applies three analysis strategies. Firstly, the discursive conditions for interdisciplinary collaboration are examined through a discourse analysis of the political strategy for the area. Here the intentional perspective is unfolded. Next, sense making about the interdisciplinary collaboration in practice is examined. In order to do this I observe a workshop where leaders of the three specialist centers aim to under-stand the policy document in order to create a strategy for implementation of the policy. I focus on how the policy document creates conditions for sense making when it comes to value creation and leadership. Lastly, the potential perspective is established, where I let myself be inspired by affective studies and through a welfare action examines potentiality in the interdisciplinary collaboration.
On the discourse analysis level the thesis shows that the policy committee strategy defines a move from health inequality to equality in health, but the strategy does not provide any tools to produce the mindset for this shift. In this way, the policy committee strategy acts as a management technology that makes the individual leader the actual management technology, while problems and meaning formation are shifted to the operational level. A condition for interdisciplinary cooperation thus also becomes that the managers themselves must "do something". They must act and find the solutions through their practice in the meeting with citizens and partners.
The level of action is central, but the structures are not defined. They must be created by the leaders through the administrative targets. However, the conclusion regarding the workshop observation shows that the traditional policy framework with set management goals and targets for values and leadership does not open up to new potential welfare creation or leadership. Leaders are expected in the policy committee strategy to lead others to create new opportunity spaces, but the workshop model does not allow for this.
Based on concepts such as social and aesthetic drama, attunement and affective fellowship, a welfare action was designed. Through a welfare action, the leaders' shared value creation was made possible, and they managed to shape potentiality and create new openings for the development of the interdisciplinary collaboration. There was a forward-looking movement between what is and what is becoming.
The analysis of this welfare action showed that one can go from understanding strategy as an intentional action with an effect to understanding strategy as a series of affective welfare actions. The welfare action turned out to be a strategy, with which it was possible to create conditions for interdisciplinary cooperation and for value and leadership. Welfare actions thus appear as a complementary strategy for performance management, which makes it possible to create conditions for interdisciplinary cooperation and for value and management.
|Educations||Master of Public Governance, (Executive Master Programme) Final Thesis|
|Number of pages||45|