© The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, Inc. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com. 433 Journal of Public Administration Research And Theory, 2016, 433–447 doi:10.1093/jopart/muv023 Article Advance Access publication August 25, 2015 Article Examining the Links between Senior Managers’ Engagement in Networked Environments and Goal and Role Ambiguity Randall S. Davis*, Edmund C. Stazyk †   *Southern Illinois University; † University at Albany – SUNY Address correspondence to the author at rsdavis@siu.edu. Abstract Public management scholars consistently argue that public organizations must now deliver ser- vices in the context of networks that span multiple jurisdictions and sectors and that they are subjected to greater degrees of goal and role ambiguity as compared to private organizations. Yet, limited research examines the degree to which these phenomena are connected. We seek to develop a perspective that merges these two research traditions by asserting that the extent to which managers engage their networked environment clarifes their interpretations of goals and work roles within the home organization. Findings from a series of structural equation models reveal that increases in perceived goal clarity are associated with increased engagement with actors in the networked environment, and increased interaction in networked environments is associated with enhanced role clarity by virtue of clarifying organizational goals. Introduction Conventional wisdom among public management scholars is that the mode for delivering public ser- vices has increasingly shifted away from solitary bureaucracies and toward complex networks encom- passing actors at all levels of government and across sectors (Agranoff and McGuire 2001; Bogason and Musso 2006; Koliba, Meek, and Zia 2011; Milward and Provan 2000; Milward, Provan, and Else 1993; Mosher 1980). Many scholars observe that networks emerged in an attempt to foster high-quality service delivery as well as to respond to increasingly complex problems that frequently surpass the capacity of any single organization (Agranoff 2012; Bryson, Crosby, and Stone 2006; Frederickson 1999; Frederickson et al. 2012; Kettl 2000, 2006; McGuire 2006; Stazyk et al. 2014). Evidence generally supports the assertion that networks can, under the right conditions, provide public managers the means necessary to improve ser- vice delivery quality and organizational performance (Agranoff and McGuire 2001; Hicklin, O’Toole, and Meier 2008; Meier and O’Toole 2001; O’Toole and Meier 2004b; Stazyk et al. 2014). Consequently, scholars continue to develop strategies and recom- mendations intended to promote and facilitate effec- tive network engagement (Agranoff 2006, 2007, 2012; O’Leary and Bingham 2007; McGuire 2006; Silvia and McGuire 2010). Over time, we have learned a great deal about the costs and benefts of networks as well as of the trade- offs inherent in different network arrangements. Less attention, however, has been allocated to assessing whether and how participation in networks shapes and alters employees’ organizational experiences. For example, organizations frequently participate in net- works because collaboration helps them achieve their own missions and goals. Yet, networks themselves may have goals and interests that differ in important and considerable ways from those of individual network partners. Further, those employees tasked with par- ticipating in networks are generally responsible for Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jpart/article/26/3/433/2579858 by guest on 12 May 2023