Competing institutional logics of information sharing in public services: Why we often seem to be talking at cross-purposes when we talk about information sharing

Sharing information and data across organizational boundaries has proved hard to achieve. This is, in part, because we have framed the problem, and possible solutions, in one of three conflicting ways that draw on powerful institutional logics: design, governance and enculturation. Five strategies for addressing this conflict are presented—contingency, combination, conflict, ambiguity and synthesis. The conclusion links the problem of information sharing to the paradoxical nature of information.We often disagree about how to do information sharing because we approach the problem from one of three different points of view, each with its own logic. To resolve these disagreements we need to acknowledge different logics, understand their origins and their strengths and weaknesses. There is no single, correct way of combining perspectives and a number of alternative approaches needs to be considered.