IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/lpadxx/v44y2021i3p202-214.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cultivating Optimal Collaborative Decision Making in Counterterrorism Contexts: An Empirical Investigation

Author

Listed:
  • Nancy Achieng Odhiambo
  • Nixon Muganda Ochara
  • Armstrong Kadyamatimba

Abstract

Collaborative decision making (CDM) is an important facilitator of effective response in emergencies. However, due to institutional differences, attainment of optimal CDM (OCDM) remains problematic. Thus, based on previous literature on CDM and institutional theory, this study examines the influence of enablers (e.g. organizational form, information and knowledge sharing, technical infrastructure, and informal relationships) on OCDM. Partial least squares structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM) was used to examine the proposed hypotheses using a sample of 176 respondents. The results illustrated that attainment of OCDM is challenging since it is characterized by numerous organizational factors that agencies need to consider. Amongst the three pillars of institutional theory, the regulative pillar offers more insights on issues related to rules, discourse and practice and hence the challenges of OCDM attainment.

Suggested Citation

  • Nancy Achieng Odhiambo & Nixon Muganda Ochara & Armstrong Kadyamatimba, 2021. "Cultivating Optimal Collaborative Decision Making in Counterterrorism Contexts: An Empirical Investigation," International Journal of Public Administration, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(3), pages 202-214, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:lpadxx:v:44:y:2021:i:3:p:202-214
    DOI: 10.1080/01900692.2019.1676777
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/01900692.2019.1676777
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/01900692.2019.1676777?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:taf:lpadxx:v:44:y:2021:i:3:p:202-214. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/lpad .

    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.