Reputation Management and the Formation of Interagency Collaboration Network in China

Existing literature on collaborative governance, collaborative networks, and inter-organizational cooperation has extensively explored various aspects of collaborations, including their evolution, processes, formulation, negotiation, governance, implementation, as well as substantial outcomes and evaluation. However, the influence of different media reputation dimensions (performative, moral, procedural, and technical) on the formulation of interagency collaborations remains relatively unexplored. This study integrates insights from bureaucratic reputation theory and interagency collaboration theory to investigate how agencies strategically select collaborative partners based on reputation dimensions in the context of joint issue documentation among central agencies in China. The reputation dimensions of central agencies were assessed using advanced machine learning coding of 495,384 articles published in the People's Daily, focusing on 449 central agencies, while interagency collaborations were measured through a self-organizing network derived from 96,619 documents issued by these central agencies from 1949 to 2019. Findings from Dynamic Exponential Random Graph Analysis (TERGMs) reveal significant associations. Higher performative reputation of agencies increases the likelihood of joint publications with other agencies (significant at the 1% level). Conversely, higher procedural reputation of agencies hampers collaborative publications with other agencies (significant at the 1% level). Larger disparities in performance reputation between two agencies enhance the likelihood of joint publications between them (significant at the 1% level). Smaller disparities in procedural reputation between two agencies favor joint publications (significant at the 1% level). These findings suggest that joint publications between agencies are primarily motivated by performance considerations and the need to address practical challenges. There is a heterogeneous distribution of performative reputation among these agencies, meaning that the more diverse the performative reputation between agencies, the more likely they are to collaborate on joint publications. On the other hand, there is a homogenous distribution of procedural reputation among these agencies. Excessive emphasis on procedural aspects may increase the costs of communication and coordination for joint publications, rendering such agencies less desirable as collaboration partners. In this context, agencies with similar procedural reputation often prefer joint publications. Previous studies have emphasized the diverse impacts of reputation dimensions on agency termination. Performance and technical reputation, which emphasize actual performance, have received attention, while moral and procedural reputation, which are closely related to audience sentiments, are sometimes even more influential. However, in the context of joint publications between agencies, the dynamics are distinct. Familiarity between agencies drives the choice for joint publications, primarily aimed at addressing challenges rather than showcasing reputation dimensions to decision-makers or the public.