Journal of Public Administration

Journal of Public Administration

Beyond Single-Agency Governance: Developing a Network Governance Model for Employment in Iran through Actor and Institutional Analysis

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors
Hamza Khastar 1
Mohammad Farsi 2
Akbar Hassanpoor 3
Saeed Jafarinia 4
1 Associate Prof., Department of Business Administration, Faculty of Management, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran.
2 Ph.D. Candidate, Department of HRM, Faculty of Management, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran.
3 Associate Prof., Department of HRM., Faculty of Management, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran.
4 Prof., Department of HRM, Faculty of Management, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran.
10.22059/jipa.2026.419530.3974
Abstract
Objective
This study aims to develop a context-sensitive model of network governance for employment in Iran and to explain the strategic positions of actors, power and dependency relations, their potential for convergence, and the coordination mechanisms among them. The study is grounded in the premise that employment, contrary to single-agency approaches, is not the outcome of the performance of one organization or the implementation of a single policy. Rather, it emerges from the interaction of multiple actors and economic, political, budgetary, production, trade, educational, social, and infrastructural subnetworks.
Methods
In terms of purpose, the study is applied and developmental; in terms of research design, it adopts a multistage exploratory mixed-methods approach with priority given to the qualitative phases. Data were collected through a systematic review of the literature, analysis of upstream policy documents, laws and regulations, the Delphi method, and a structured expert questionnaire. The participants consisted of 17 managers, policymakers, executive experts, and scholars in the fields of employment, the labour market, economic planning, and public governance, selected through purposive and snowball sampling. The initial list of domains, actors, and network objectives was refined and validated through two Delphi rounds. The MACTOR strategic actor analysis method was then used to examine direct and indirect influence and dependence, the relative power of actors, their positions toward the objectives, and their potential for convergence and coalition formation. In the final stage, the MACTOR findings were integrated with theoretical, documentary, and expert evidence.
Results
Iran’s employment governance network consists of 12 institutional subnetworks whose actors occupy four strategic positions: driving, linkage, dependent, and low-interaction. The security–political and anti-smuggling subnetwork and the revenue and budget subnetwork occupy driving positions and have greater capacity to shape the behaviour of other parts of the network. The subnetworks for employment network policymaking and planning, economic affairs, trade, investment, and production and services occupy linkage and intermediary positions and can transmit or amplify the effects of the driving domains across the network. The subnetworks for resource management and productivity, and civil and technical infrastructure are positioned as low-interaction actors, whereas the education, research and innovation; labour–employer–government relations; and social–cultural subnetworks are classified as dependent actors. The analysis of actors’ positions further showed that all 12 subnetworks held positive positions toward the overarching employment objectives, although their levels of strategic mobilisation were not equal. This pattern points to a gap between normative convergence at the level of objectives and operational coordination in terms of resource allocation, acceptance of responsibility, and changes in organizational procedures. The convergence analysis also indicated the potential formation of security–economic–budgetary and economic–production coalitions. By integrating the findings, a six-layer model was developed, comprising the nature and context of the problem, influential domains, actors and subnetworks, power and dependency relations, governance mechanisms, and expected outcomes. The model’s principal mechanisms include network leadership, horizontal and vertical coordination, institutional division of labour, a shared data and monitoring system, network accountability, conflict management, institutionalized stakeholder participation, and policy learning.
Conclusion
Formal responsibility for employment is not aligned with the actual power and resources held by actors within the network. Therefore, the central problem of the employment system is not the absence of a formally designated authority, but rather the weakness of mechanisms for governing relationships among actors who control the resources, authority, and instruments that shape employment outcomes. Moving from an agency-centred logic to network governance requires redefining the role of the Supreme Employment Council as a cross-sectoral steering hub, aligning responsibility with authority and resources, strengthening the participation of dependent actors, and establishing shared mechanisms for accountability, monitoring, and learning. Meeting these requirements can provide the institutional foundation for promoting sustainable, high-quality, and balanced employment.
Keywords
Actor analysis
Employment
Network accountability
Network governance
Policy network
Subjects
Acemoglu, D. & Autor, D. (2011). Skills, tasks and technologies: Implications for employment and earnings. In O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (Eds.), Handbook of labor economics (Vol. 4B, pp. 1043–1171). Elsevier.
Agranoff, R. & McGuire, M. (2003). Collaborative public management: New strategies for local governments. Georgetown University Press.
Aminimilany, M., Alipour, M. S. & Mahmoodzadeh, A. (2021). Evaluation of employment policies in Iran. The Journal of Economic Studies and Policies, 8(1), 83-110. https://doi.org/10.22096/esp.2021.127205.1343 (in Persian)
Andersson, L. (2022). Coordination patterns and institutional settings: A comparative study of labour market programs for unemployed youth in Sweden and the United Kingdom. Policy Studies, 43(1), 90–107.
Ansell, C. & Gash, A. (2008). Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(4), 543–571.
Bonoli, G. (2010). The political economy of active labor-market policy. Politics & Society, 38(4), 435–457.
Bovens, M. (2007). Analysing and assessing accountability: A conceptual framework. European Law Journal, 13(4), 447–468.
Buchanan, J., Finegold, D., Mayhew, K. & Warhurst, C. (2017). Skills and training: The great divide. In C. Warhurst, K. Mayhew, D. Finegold & J. Buchanan (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of skills and training. Oxford University Press.
Callens, C. (2024). Achieving collaborative innovation by controlling or leveraging network complexities through complexity leadership. Public Administration, 102(3), 936–952.
Card, D., Kluve, J. & Weber, A. (2018). What works? A meta-analysis of recent active labor market program evaluations. Journal of the European Economic Association, 16(3), 894–931.
Christensen, T. & Lægreid, P. (2007). The whole-of-government approach to public sector reform. Public Administration Review, 67(6), 1059–1066.
Creswell, J. W. & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Dalkey, N. & Helmer, O. (1963). An experimental application of the Delphi method to the use of experts. Management Science, 9(3), 458–467.
Deghati, A., Yaghoubi, N., Kamalian, A. R. & Dehghani, M. (2019). Presenting a Phased Development Pattern of Network Governance Using a Meta-synthesis Approach. Journal of Public Administration, 11(2), 203-230. doi: 10.22059/jipa.2019.277187.2501
(in Persian)
Emerson, K., Nabatchi, T. & Balogh, S. (2012). An integrative framework for collaborative governance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 22(1), 1–29.
Ezzati, M., Heydari, H. & Moridi, P. (2020). The effect of economic sanctions on industrial production and employment of in Iran. Quarterly Journal of The Macro and Strategic Policies, 8(1), 38-65. https://doi.org/10.30507/jmsp.2020.102274 (in Persian)
Farsi, M. & Khastar, H. (2023). Analyzing and examining the management structure and executive measures in the field of employment in Iran, Journal of State Studies of Contemporary Iran, 8(3), 45-64. (in Persian)
Farsi, M., Khastar, H., Hasanpour, A. and Jafariniya, S. (2025). A Systematic Review of Determinants of Employment in Iran: A Resilient Economy Perspective. Interdisciplinary Studies on Strategic Knowledge, 9(34), 9-50. (in Persian)
Finegold, D. (1999). Creating self-sustaining, high-skill ecosystems. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 15(1), 60–81.
Froy, F. & Giguère, S. (2010). Breaking out of policy silos: Doing more with less. OECD Publishing.
George, B., Klijn, E. H., Ropes, E. & Sattlegger, A. (2024). Do network management and trust matter for network outcomes? A meta-analysis and research agenda. Public Management Review, 26(11), 3270–3297.
Godet, M. (1991). Actors’ moves and strategies: The MACTOR method-an air transport case study. Futures, 23(6), 605–622.
Hall, P. A. (1993). Policy paradigms, social learning, and the state: The case of economic policymaking in Britain. Comparative Politics, 25(3), 275–296.
Hasson, F., Keeney, S. & McKenna, H. (2000). Research guidelines for the Delphi survey technique. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 32(4), 1008–1015.
Head, B. W. & Alford, J. (2015). Wicked problems: Implications for public policy and management. Administration & Society, 47(6), 711–739.
International Labour Organization. (2023). Public employment services and active labour market policies for transitions: Responses to mega trends and crises. International Labour Organization.
International Labour Organization. (2024). Social Dialogue Report 2024: Peak-level social dialogue for economic development and social progress. International Labour Organization.
Kanon, M. (2024). The networked bureaucracy: Reinventing formalization in the context of collaborative governance. Public Management Review, 26(10), 2921–2942.
Klijn, E. H. & Koppenjan, J. (2016). Governance networks in the public sector. Routledge.
Knox, S. & Arshed, N. (2022). Network governance and coordination of a regional entrepreneurial ecosystem. Regional Studies, 56(7), 1161–1175.
Lauringson, A. & Lüske, M. (2021). Institutional set-up of active labour market policy provision in OECD and EU countries: Organisational set-up, regulation and capacity (OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers No. 262). OECD Publishing.
Lee, S. & Ospina, S. M. (2022). A framework for assessing accountability in collaborative governance: A process-based approach. Perspectives on Public Management and Governance, 5(1), 63–75.
Lundgren, A. & Meijer, M. W. (2025). Skills ecosystems—A solution to the skills problem? Experiences from the Nordics. Nordic Journal of Working Life Studies.
Marsh, D. & Rhodes, R. A. W. (Eds.). (1992). Policy networks in British government. Clarendon Press.
McKenzie, D. (2017). How effective are active labor market policies in developing countries? A critical review of recent evidence. The World Bank Research Observer, 32(2), 127–154.
Mende, C., Oswald-Egg, M. E. & Caves, K. (2025). Vocational education and training system governance: A systematic literature review. Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 1–35.
Moghaddasi Kelishomi, A. & Nisticò, R. (2022). Employment effects of economic sanctions in Iran. World Development, 151, 105760.
Moghaddasi Kelishomi, A. & Nisticò, R. (2024). Economic sanctions and informal employment. Labour Economics, 89, 102581.
Paul, K. I. & Moser, K. (2009). Unemployment impairs mental health: Meta-analyses. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 74(3), 264–282.
Pfeffer, J. & Salancik, G. R. (1978). The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. Harper & Row.
Provan, K. G. & Kenis, P. (2008). Modes of network governance: Structure, management, and effectiveness. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(2), 229–252.
Rahnavard, F., Bayati Chaleshtari, T., Taherpour Kalantari, H. & Monavvarian, A. (2018). Accountability in Public Policy Networks. JMDP. 30(4), 35-68. (in Persian)
Rhodes, R. A. W. (1996). The new governance: Governing without government. Political Studies, 44(4), 652–667.
Rittel, H. W. J. & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155–169.
Sørensen, E. & Torfing, J. (2009). Making governance networks effective and democratic through metagovernance. Public Administration, 87(2), 234–258.
Sørensen, E. & Torfing, J. (Eds.). (2007). Theories of democratic network governance. Palgrave Macmillan.
Van Gestel, N. (2024). A persistent ideal of public services networks amid alternative reform strategies: A study over three decades. Public Management Review, 26(8), 2380–2401.
Waardenburg, M., Groenleer, M. & de Jong, J. (2025). Performance management in collaborative governance: A review of the literature and synthesis of the challenges. Public Performance & Management Review, 48(4), 735–767.
Wanberg, C. R. (2012). The individual experience of unemployment. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 369–396.
Weber, E. P. & Khademian, A. M. (2008). Wicked problems, knowledge challenges, and collaborative capacity builders in network settings. Public Administration Review, 68(2), 334–349.
Wegner, D. & Verschoore, J. (2022). Network governance in action: Functions and practices to foster collaborative environments. Administration & Society, 54(3), 479–499.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Journal of Public Administration
Volume 18, Issue 3
2026
Pages 665-696