Resources
Data Collection Instruments
The instruments below were developed over three years by working groups within the Across the PONs collaborative and are openly available on the Open Science Framework. They are free to use.
Our aim in developing them is simple. If enough scholars collect data on purpose-oriented networks using common measures, the field gains a comparative evidence base no single individual could build. Translations of the instruments and codebooks into Spanish and Dutch are in progress. With other languages planned.
Instruments exist in parallel versions for the two policy domains, human services and environmental governance, since some measures require domain-specific wording.
PON Leader Interview Guide
A semi-structured interview guide for the network manager or convener, covering the history of and motivation for the network, the environment it operates in, its primary activities and theory of change, and how it is managed. This is typically the entry point into a network, conducted before either survey. The guide applies across policy domains, so a single version serves both human services and environmental networks.
PON Leader Survey
A short survey of the network’s leadership team, capturing mandate details, resource munificence, and governance arrangements.
| Domain | Link |
|---|---|
| Human services | View on OSF |
| Environmental | View on OSF |
Organizational Member Survey
A survey of all organizational members of the network, capturing organizational characteristics, member satisfaction and commitment, network functioning, and member perceptions of network performance.
| Domain | Link |
|---|---|
| Human services | View on OSF |
| Environmental | View on OSF |
Using the Instruments
Scholars are welcome to deploy these instruments in their own research. The collaborative operates under a data-use and sharing agreement that allows new members to join and contribute cases to the shared database.
If you plan to use an instrument, or are interested in contributing data, please contact members of the coordinating committee:
Michael D. Siciliano, Jörg Raab, Michelle Shumate, and Robin LeMaire.
We can provide access to a Qualtrics version of the survey along with a guide on how to launch it with your particular PON.
Working Papers
Alongside the instruments, the Across the PON’s working groups have produced a series of papers taking stock of the field and setting out directions for future research.
How the Forest Shapes the Trees: Context Mechanisms and Purpose-Oriented Networks
Context is usually treated as a static backdrop in PON research. This paper argues instead that context is an active force that permeates network boundaries and conditions their trajectories, and develops a framework identifying three classes of contextual mechanism — norms, resources, and historical dynamics — operating across five nested layers from the supranational to the community.
Albrecht, K., Raab, J., Sánchez, J., Nowell, B., Kapucu, N., Milward, H. B., & Shumate, M. (April 2026). Read on SSRN
Linking Inputs to Network Dimensions in Purpose-Oriented Networks
Research on PONs has largely treated network structure as a predictor of effectiveness. This paper reverses that direction, asking what gives rise to different relational patterns in the first place, and links five inputs — purpose, organizational capacity, resource munificence, degree of mandate, and external stability — to network structure, composition, and dynamics.
Medina, A., Siciliano, M., Hu, Q., Morçöl, G., & Whetsell, T. (April 2026). Read on SSRN
From Modes to Myths: Untangling Governance, Management, and Institutional Elements in the Modes of Network Governance Typology
Provan and Kenis’s governance mode typology remains the dominant framework for analyzing how PONs are governed, yet what counts as governance — and how it differs from network management — remains persistently ambiguous. Drawing on an institutional perspective, this paper separates governance as constitutional and collective-choice rules from management as operational process, and argues for more rigorous justification of how governance modes are classified.
Sánchez, J., Lemaire, R., Mannak, R., Medina, A., van den Oord, S., Kenis, P., Kapucu, N., Milward, H. B., & Raab, J. (December 2025). Read on SSRN