Abstract
Studies of collaborative watershed groups show that effective leadership is an important factor for success. This research uses data from in-depth interviews and meeting observation to qualitatively examine leadership in a Midwestern collaborative watershed group operating with government funding. One major finding was a lack of role definition for volunteer steering-committee members. Lack of role clarity and decision-making processes led to confusion regarding project management authority among the group, paid project staff members, and agency personnel. Given the important role of government grants for funding projects to protect water quality, this study offers insight into leadership issues that groups with Clean Water Act Section 319 (h) funds may face and suggestions on how to resolve them.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Behn RD (1995) The big questions of public management. Public Administration Review 55:313–324
Bentrup G (2001) Evaluation of a collaborative model: A case study analysis of watershed planning in the intermountain west. Environmental Management 27:739–748
Bidwell R, Ryan C (2006) Collaborative partnership design: The implications of organizational affiliation for watershed partnerships. Society and Natural Resources 19:827–843
Bonnell JE, Koontz TM (2007) Stumbling forward: The organizational challenges of building and sustaining collaborative watershed management. Society and Natural Resources 20:153–167
Born SM, Genskow KD (2001) Toward understanding new watershed initiatives: A report from the Madison Watershed Workshop. University of Wisconsin–Extension, Madison, WI
Braun D, Guston DH (2003) Principal-agent theory and research policy: An introduction. Science and Public Policy 30:302–308
Brooks AC (2002) Can nonprofit management help answer public management’s “big questions”? Public Administration Review 62:259–266
Caers R, Du Bois C, Jegers M, De Gieter S, Schepers C, Pepermans R (2006) Principal-agent relationships on the stewardship-agency axis. Nonprofit Management and Leadership 17:25–47
Cheng AS, Mattor KM (2006) Why won’t they come? Stakeholder perspectives on collaborative national forest planning by participation level. Environmental Management 38:545–561
Chess C, Hance BJ, Gibson G (2000) Adaptive participation in watershed management. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 55:248–252
Chrislip DD, Larson CE (1994) Collaborative leadership: How citizens and civic leaders can make a difference. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA
Coleman JS (1990) Foundations of social theory. Belknap Press, Cambridge, MA
Conley A, Moote MA (2003) Evaluating collaborative resource management. Society and Natural Resources 16:371–386
Cook BJ, Wood BD (1989) Principal-agent models of political control of bureaucracy. American Political Science Review 83:965–978
Dakins ME, Long JD, Hart M (2005) Collaborative environmental decision making in Oregon watershed groups: Perceptions of effectiveness. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 41:171–180
Danter KJ, Griest DL, Mullins GW, Norland E (2000) Organizational change as a component of ecosystem management. Society and Natural Resources 13:537–547
Floress K, Mangun JC, Davenport MA, Williard KWJ (2009) Constraints to watershed planning: Group structure and process. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 45:1352–1360
Gray I, Williams R, Phillips E (2005) Rural community and leadership in the management of natural resources: Tensions between theory and policy. Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning 7:125–139
Griffin CB (1999) Watershed councils: An emerging form of public participation. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 35:505–518
Grigg NS (1999) Integrated water resources management: Who should lead who should pay? Journal of the American Water Resources Association 35:527–534
Hardy SD, Koontz TM (2008) Reducing nonpoint source pollution through collaboration: Policies and programs across the U.S. states. Environmental Management 41:301–310
Heifetz RA, Sinder RM (1988) Leadership without easy answers. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA
Heifetz RA, Kania JV, Kramer MR (2004) Leading boldly: Foundations can move past traditional approaches to create social change through imaginative–and even controversial–leadership. Stanford Social Innovation Review Winter 2004. Stanford Graduate School of Business
Huxham C, Vangen S (2000) Leadership in the shaping and implementation of collaboration agendas: How things happen in a (not quite) joined up world. The Academy of Management Journal 43:1159–1175
Inglis S, Alexander T, Weaver L (2003) Roles and responsibilities of community nonprofit boards. Nonprofit Management and Leadership 10:153–167
Korfmacher KS (2000) What’s the point of partnering? American Behavioral Scientist 44:548–564
Margerum RD (2008) A typology of collaboration efforts in environmental management. Environmental Management 41:487–500
Miller GJ (2005) The political evolution of principal-agent models. Annual Review of Political Science 8:203–225
Moe TM (1984) The new economics of organization. American Journal of Political Science 28:739–777
Moore EA, Koontz TM (2003) A typology of collaborative watershed groups: Citizen-based, agency-based, and mixed partnerships. Society and Natural Resources 16:451–460
Prokopy LS (2008) Ethical concerns in researching collaborative natural resource management. Society and Natural Resources 21:258–265
Ringquist EJ (1995) Political control and policy impact in EPA’s Office of Water Quality. American Journal of Political Science 39:336–363
Ryan CM (2001) Leadership in collaborative policy-making: An analysis of agency roles in regulatory negotiations. Policy Sciences 34:221–245
Schuett M, Selin S (2002) Developing a profile of collaborative natural resource initiatives and partners. Northern Journal of Applied Forestry 19:1–6
Schuett MA, Selin SW, Carr DS (2001) Making it work: Keys to successful collaboration in natural resource management. Environmental Management 27:587–593
Selin SW, Schuett M, Carr D (2000) Modeling stakeholder perceptions of collaborative initiative effectiveness. Society and Natural Resources 13:735–745
Strauss A, Corbin J (1998) Basics of qualitative research. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA
Weingast BR, Moran MJ (1983) Bureaucratic discretion or congressional control? Regulatory policymaking by the Federal Trade Commission. Journal of Political Economy 91:765–800
Wondolleck JM, Ryan CM (1999) What hat do I wear now? An examination of agency roles in collaborative processes. Negotiation Journal April:117–133
World Bank (online) Social capital assessment tool. Available at: http://www.go.worldbankorg/A77F30UIX0. Accessed: August 26, 2010
Yin RK (2009) Case study research: Design and methods, 4th edn. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA
Acknowledgements
Funding for this study was provided in part by the Indiana Department of Environ Management, the Department of Forestry and Natural Resources, the Midwest Crossroads Alliance for Graduate Education, and the Professoriate at Purdue University. We are thankful for the helpful feedback and suggestions of Melissa Baker, Aaron Thompson, and four anonymous reviewers.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Floress, K., Prokopy, L.S. & Ayres, J. Who’s in Charge: Role Clarity in a Midwestern Watershed Group. Environmental Management 48, 825–834 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-011-9724-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-011-9724-2