This literature refers to organizations rather than networks. It is argued that organizational capabilities and constraints largely influence goal setting and determine outcomes and performance (Wilson 1989 Wilson, J. Q. 1989. Bureaucracy: What Government Agencies Do and Why They Do It. New York: Basic Books.[Crossref] , [Google Scholar]). Capacity is also associated with organizational performance (Ingraham, Joyce, and Donahue 2003 Ingraham, P. W., P. G. Joyce, and A. K. Donahue. 2003. Government Performance: Why Management Matters. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. [Google Scholar]; O'Leary, Durant, Fiorino, and Weiland 1999 O'Leary, R., F. Durant, D. J. Fiorino, and P. S. Weiland. 1999. Managing for the Environment. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. [Google Scholar]; Pew Center on the States 2010; Rainey 2009 Rainey, H. G. 2009. Understanding and Managing Public Organizations, 4^th ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. [Google Scholar]) and the adoption of performance measurement (Bingham, O'Leary, and Nabatchi 2005 Bingham, L. B., R. O'Leary, and T. Nabatchi. 2005. “The New Governance: Practices and Processes for Stakeholder and Citizen Participation in the Work of Government.” Public Administration Review 65(5): 547–558.[Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]; Julnes and Holzer 2001 Julnes, P. L. and M. Holzer. 2001. “Promoting and Utilization of Performance Measures in Public Organizations: An Empirical Study of Factors Affecting Adoption and Implementation.” Public Administration Review 61(6): 693–708.[Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]).

Nevertheless, participation relies on models of deliberative and consensus-building processes which could take time and resources away from other network activities.

For example, support from citizens might be likely to increase the legitimacy and feasibility of policy programs; support from managers and employees is critical because they are in charge of network activities and their efforts can greatly influence resource attainment; support from department heads or politicians can directly influence the funding level and sources of programs. Finally, support from business and nonprofit actors can help to build social capital and to expand network ties and relations in order to tackle complex public issues (Wang et al. 2012 Wang, F. and H. T. Yin. 2012. “A New Form of Governance or the Reunion of the Government and Business Sector? A Case Analysis of the Collaborative Natural Disaster Insurance System in Zhejiang Province of China.” International Public Management Journal 15(4): 429–453.[Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]).

In China, this strategy exerts various influences on network implementation capacity since the Chinese administrative system is decentralized and there is a large variation of control among different levels of governments.

One interesting empirical finding of this research is the limited impact of mobilizing political support on network outcomes. Support from a diversified range of actors can help networks to gain legitimacy and has a positive impact on network outcomes, but this is not the case in intergovernmental networks. A possible explanation is that large government-led networks maintain high internal stability (created through policy mandate) and obtaining external legitimacy becomes less urgent; getting a broad range of stakeholders to be involved in network operations could distract network manager's attention and hamper their ability to steer key stakeholders in network management.