IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jorgde/v12y2023i4d10.1007_s41469-023-00140-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Harnessing self-management to tackle grand challenges: the points-based participation architecture of São Paulo’s housing movement

Author

Listed:
  • Nuno A. Gil

    (The University of Manchester)

  • Maria C. Sousa

    (The University of Manchester)

  • Felipe G. Massa

    (Loyola University New Orleans)

Abstract

We propose that hierarchical organizations can engender and sustain the collaboration of large numbers of autonomous actors by establishing self-managed, mission-aligned collectives. Informing our claim are preliminary findings from an ongoing study of the housing movement in São Paulo, Brazil. Unexpectedly, we find that hierarchical Social Movement Organizations (SMOs) have, for more than three decades, incentivized broad-based voluntary engagement in protest actions aimed at formulating new housing policy by educating and encouraging low-income families to join collectives tasked with developing and self-managing new housing projects. We trace the sustainability of this participation architecture to an SMO-designed, points-based system, which functions as an integrating mechanism affording: (1) goal alignment between large numbers of autonomous actors and the leadership of a hierarchical organization; (2) voluntary engagement by autonomous actors in activities that simultaneously address local and higher order goals; (3) role and task allocation without legal control or close oversight; and (4) retention within the participation architecture by equipping autonomous actors with structure and measurable progress towards local goals and fairly distributing benefits of collective work. We discuss implications to our understanding of how to achieve concerted action at scale towards a grand challenge.

Suggested Citation

  • Nuno A. Gil & Maria C. Sousa & Felipe G. Massa, 2023. "Harnessing self-management to tackle grand challenges: the points-based participation architecture of São Paulo’s housing movement," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 12(4), pages 245-253, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:jorgde:v:12:y:2023:i:4:d:10.1007_s41469-023-00140-2
    DOI: 10.1007/s41469-023-00140-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s41469-023-00140-2
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s41469-023-00140-2?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Øystein D. Fjeldstad & Charles C. Snow & Raymond E. Miles & Christopher Lettl, 2012. "The architecture of collaboration," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(6), pages 734-750, June.
    2. Gerard George & Anita M. McGahan & Jaideep Prabhu, 2012. "Innovation for Inclusive Growth: Towards a Theoretical Framework and a Research Agenda," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(4), pages 661-683, June.
    3. Paul Resnick & Christopher Avery & Richard Zeckhauser, 1999. "The Market for Evaluations," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(3), pages 564-584, June.
    4. Hansmann, Henry, 1988. "Ownership of the Firm," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 4(2), pages 267-304, Fall.
    5. Joel West & Siobhan O'mahony, 2008. "The Role of Participation Architecture in Growing Sponsored Open Source Communities," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(2), pages 145-168.
    6. Ranjay Gulati & Phanish Puranam & Michael Tushman, 2012. "Meta‐organization design: Rethinking design in interorganizational and community contexts," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(6), pages 571-586, June.
    7. Steven Tadelis, 2016. "Reputation and Feedback Systems in Online Platform Markets," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 8(1), pages 321-340, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Britta Hoyer & Dirk van Straaten, 2021. "Anonymity and Self-Expression in Online Rating Systems - An Experimental Analysis," Working Papers Dissertations 70, Paderborn University, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics.
    2. Hou, Hong & Shi, Yongjiang, 2021. "Ecosystem-as-structure and ecosystem-as-coevolution: A constructive examination," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    3. Gesche, Tobias, 2018. "Reference Price Shifts and Customer Antagonism: Evidence from Reviews for Online Auctions," VfS Annual Conference 2018 (Freiburg, Breisgau): Digital Economy 181650, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    4. Fabian Schueler & Dimitri Petrik, 2022. "Objectives of platform research: A co-citation and systematic literature review analysis," Papers 2202.08822, arXiv.org.
    5. Bonomi, Sabrina & Sarti, Daria & Torre, Teresina, 2020. "Creating a collaborative network for welfare services in public sector. A knowledge-based perspective," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 440-449.
    6. Sigrid Endres & Jürgen Weibler, 2020. "Understanding (non)leadership phenomena in collaborative interorganizational networks and advancing shared leadership theory: an interpretive grounded theory study," Business Research, Springer;German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 13(1), pages 275-309, April.
    7. Donal Crilly & Pamela Sloan, 2014. "Autonomy or Control? Organizational Architecture and Corporate Attention to Stakeholders," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(2), pages 339-355, April.
    8. Svetlana Klessova & Sebastian Engell & Catherine Thomas, 2022. "Dynamics of couplings and their implications in inter-organizational multi-actor research and innovation projects," Post-Print hal-03690108, HAL.
    9. Pierre Garaudel, 2020. "Exploring meta-organizations’ diversity and agency: A meta-organizational perspective on global union federations," Post-Print halshs-02474817, HAL.
    10. Hoyer, B. & van Straaten, D., 2022. "Anonymity and self-expression in online rating systems—An experimental analysis," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    11. De Noni, Ivan & Ganzaroli, Andrea & Orsi, Luigi, 2013. "The evolution of OSS governance: a dimensional comparative analysis," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 247-263.
    12. Clauss, Thomas & Ritala, Paavo, 2023. "Network governance institutionalization: Creating mutual value by harnessing and avoiding conflicts in interorganizational networks," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    13. Andrey Fradkin & David Holtz, 2023. "Do Incentives to Review Help the Market? Evidence from a Field Experiment on Airbnb," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(5), pages 853-865, September.
    14. Garaudel, Pierre, 2020. "Exploring meta-organizations’ diversity and agency: A meta-organizational perspective on global union federations," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(1).
    15. Oliver Alexy & Joel West & Helge Klapper & Markus Reitzig, 2018. "Surrendering control to gain advantage: Reconciling openness and the resource‐based view of the firm," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(6), pages 1704-1727, June.
    16. Vegard Kolbjørnsrud, 2018. "Collaborative organizational forms: on communities, crowds, and new hybrids," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 7(1), pages 1-21, December.
    17. Mike Valente & Christine Oliver, 2018. "Meta-Organization Formation and Sustainability in Sub-Saharan Africa," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(4), pages 678-701, August.
    18. Helfen, Markus & Wirth, Carsten, 2020. "Management von Arbeit in pluralen Netzwerkorganisationen: Trends, Deutungen und Handlungsoptionen," Working Paper Forschungsförderung 185, Hans-Böckler-Stiftung, Düsseldorf.
    19. Feuerstein Patrick & Hanekop Heidemarie, 2017. "Koordination überbetrieblicher Wissensproduktion: Zum Spannungsverhältnis zwischen Unternehmen und Communities in Open-Source-Projekten mit Unternehmensbeteiligung," Arbeit, De Gruyter, vol. 26(1), pages 111-136, April.
    20. Antoine Kauffmann, 2017. "La stratégie collective vue par la communication : le cas de HAROPA," Post-Print hal-02369208, HAL.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:jorgde:v:12:y:2023:i:4:d:10.1007_s41469-023-00140-2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.