United in the fight against a-krim : a case study of an interorganizational collaboration between Norwegian public entities

Abstract

In this master’s thesis we study the interorganizational collaboration (IoC) between Norwegian public entities in the fight against labor crime, or arbeidslivskriminalitet in Norwegian, further referred to as a-krim. The collaboration was established in 2015 as a result of The Government Strategy Against A-krim, and the strategy was revised and further strengthen in 2017, as the collaboration turned out to be value-adding and successful. The IoC mainly consist of Politiet, Skatteetaten, NAV and Arbeidstilsynet, whom all are affected by a-krim in some way, and these are the entities we study. Our general proposition was that characteristics of the individual entities were entrenched in the IoC, meaning the entities also used the collaboration as a tool to realize own priorities. We have made a model specifically designed for our study, which consists of six defined characteristics. The characteristics are; Mandate & Authority, Goals & Performance, Structure, Information Sharing, Resources, and A-krim Strategy & Practices. We have examined these characteristics in our analysis, in order to answer both how and why they affect the interorganizational collaboration. The model and characteristics are inspired and built on interorganizational theory, as well as earlier research on the a-krim collaboration. As we explore and describe a phenomenon, the a-krim collaboration, we have a qualitative study. Our research strategy is a single case study with multiple analysis units, whereas we have conducted 12 semi-structured interviews. We verified our general proposition; the entities’ characteristics affect the collaboration. Further, we find strategic anchorization of a-krim to be essential for the IoC’s efforts. Based on our empirical analysis we have seven overarching findings. We find: 1) Equivocal governance flow to be apparent, 2) Compounded complexity in the IoC, 3) Politiet holds a superior role while in a predicament, 4) Effects and efficiency of the IoC questionable, 5) Skatteetaten and Arbeidstilsynet as dominators and influencers, 6) The IoC’s time aspects as misaligned to fight a-krim, and 7) A collaboration that lacks (common) communication.