Structures and Governance of Non-Profit Networks: Balancing Autonomy, Coordination, and Accountability

The sustainability of NGO collaboration depends on governance structures that balance autonomy with coordination and legitimacy with efficiency. This article analyzes the architecture of non-profit networks through three primary lenses—structure, accountability, and leadership. It contrasts centralized, decentralized, and polycentric governance models, exploring how each configuration affects decision-making, participation, and resilience. Centralized forms offer efficiency and coherence but risk exclusion and overconcentration of power; decentralized and polycentric models enhance inclusivity and legitimacy but may slow responses. Leadership emerges as both enabling and constraining, as brokers facilitate coordination but can create dependency. The analysis highlights that effective governance requires institutionalized mechanisms for decision-making, accountability, and conflict resolution. By integrating theoretical frameworks with real-world practices, the article positions governance not as a static design but as an adaptive process fundamental to network legitimacy, functionality, and sustainability.

Authors

Publication Details

Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.64357/neya-gjnps-ntallstrscimp-05
Primary Topic
Securities Regulation and Market Practices
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Structures and Governance of Non-Profit Networks: Balancing Autonomy, Coordination, and Accountability

Anna Neya Kazanskaia
Securities Regulation and Market Practices
article

Structures and Governance of Non-Profit Networks: Balancing Autonomy, Coordination, and Accountability

Anna Neya Kazanskaia
article en

Abstract

The sustainability of NGO collaboration depends on governance structures that balance autonomy with coordination and legitimacy with efficiency. This article analyzes the architecture of non-profit networks through three primary lenses—structure, accountability, and leadership. It contrasts centralized, decentralized, and polycentric governance models, exploring how each configuration affects decision-making, participation, and resilience. Centralized forms offer efficiency and coherence but risk exclusion and overconcentration of power; decentralized and polycentric models enhance inclusivity and legitimacy but may slow responses. Leadership emerges as both enabling and constraining, as brokers facilitate coordination but can create dependency. The analysis highlights that effective governance requires institutionalized mechanisms for decision-making, accountability, and conflict resolution. By integrating theoretical frameworks with real-world practices, the article positions governance not as a static design but as an adaptive process fundamental to network legitimacy, functionality, and sustainability.

Openalex Percentile: Top 64%
Securities Regulation and Market Practices
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Structures and Governance of Non-Profit Networks: Balancing Autonomy, Coordination, and Accountability — Anna Neya Kazanskaia · (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS