One aspect that significantly influences cross-sector collaboration is governance structures (Moirano et al., 2020, p. 12). Cross-sector collaboration typically operates within a framework of collaborative governance, where decision-making authority is distributed among stakeholders from various sectors (Emerson et al., 2012). By integrating diverse perspectives, expertise, and resources into the decision-making process, the success of cross-sector collaborations is enhanced (Weber et al., 2022). However, little research has explored the inclusion of diverse participant groups as a critical element of successful interorganizational partnerships in education. One example are Straub and Ehmke (2021), who identified four types of team members for various actor groups across the teacher education system, demonstrating differences in ascribed importance of factors such as perceived trustworthiness or collective ownership of goals. In general, heterogeneity may arise in terms of goals, competencies, skills, knowledge bases, power dynamics, perceptions, and cultures (Corsaro et al., 2012). This description also applies to our target group (see details in chapter 3), referencing Emerson et al. (2012) who define collaborative governance as:

Emerson et al. (2012) developed an integrative framework for collaborative governance (see Figure 1), encompassing three dimensions: collaboration dynamics, collaborative governance regime (CGR) and system context (p. 6). This framework illustrates a broader system context influenced by political, legal, and socioeconomic conditions, with all dimensions interconnected. These dynamics collectively guide collaborative actions, aimed at achieving the shared purpose of the CGR (Emerson et al., 2012).

Key collaborative dynamics, including diverse perspectives, enrich the collaborative process despite “differing content, relational, and identity goals” (Emerson et al., 2012, p. 10). Shared motivation emphasizes interpersonal and relational aspects within collaborative dynamics, often initiated through principled engagement. These factors, among others, constitute “a collection of cross-functional elements that come together to create the potential for taking effective action” (Saint-Onge and Armstrong, 2004, p. 19).

Research consistently highlights stakeholder engagement as crucial for successful cross-sector collaborations (Acero et al., 2024; Huynh et al., 2023; Reed et al., 2018). Engagement involves active participation in decision-making processes that affect stakeholders. Success depends on institutional structures, available resources, a supportive culture, prior engagement experiences, and the capacities, needs and desires of the stakeholders involved (Eaton et al., 2021; Gugu and Dal Molin, 2016; Reed et al., 2018), alongside drivers of collaborative dynamics (Emerson et al., 2012).

In the Integrated Framework for Collaborative Governance (CGR), the identity and roles of actors are pivotal (Emerson et al., 2012, p. 11). Actors represent diverse entities such as themselves, constituencies, public agencies, NGOs, communities, or the public, each contributing unique expertise, resources, values, and goals to the collaboration (Bardach, 2001). Maintaining high levels of engagement ensures continued commitment, fosters creative problem-solving, sustainable solutions (Emerson and Nabatchi, 2015), and builds trust and mutual understanding (Harris and Albury, 2009).

Active engagement catalyzes resource mobilization, creating dynamic synergy that surpasses individual contributions (Bryson et al., 2016), enhancing collaboration by bolstering trust and resilience (Harris and Albury, 2009). Stakeholders’ motivations to participate hinge on perceiving a direct link between their involvement and effective outcomes (Ansell and Gash, 2008). Additionally, autonomous motivation strengthens collaborative efforts and leads to enhanced work satisfaction in general (Kolleck, 2019). Conversely, incentives to collaborate diminish when stakeholders input is seen as merely advisory (Futrell, 2003). Aligning diverse goals of participating actors is crucial for merging resources effectively (Baraldi and Strömsten, 2009), yielding collaborative advantages (Bryson et al., 2016).

Various scholars emphasize the importance of mutual understanding of goals and motives for successful cross-sector collaborations (Amabile et al., 2001; Bronstein, 2003; Katzenbach and Smith, 1996). Goals are future desired states that individuals strive to achieve through their competences and goal-oriented behavior (Kleinbeck and Kleinbeck, 2009), profoundly influencing human behavior (Elliot and Fryer, 2008). Goal alignment among stakeholders – shared, organizational, and individual – is crucial for effective collaboration dynamics (see Figure 1).

Bryson et al. (2016) categorize goals into organizational core goals, core goals shared across organizations, public value goals beyond core goals, negative-avoidance goals, negative public value consequences beyond shared core goals, and not-my-goals (Bryson et al., 2016, p. 914), stressing the need for alignment to maximize cross-sector collaboration potential. Their model advocates a holistic approach covering discovery, adaptation, commitment, and accomplishment, providing a strategic roadmap in dynamic landscapes.

Organizational, sectoral, or individual goals may diverge from jointly defined project goals (Bryson et al., 2015; Castañer and Oliveira, 2020; Meads et al., 2005; Winkler, 2006), sometimes remaining undisclosed during collaboration despite being critical in emerging conflicts (Bryson et al., 2015). Diversity in participation can enhance group processes but also introduces tensions such as autonomy vs. interdependence or self-interest vs. collective interest (Mannix and Neale, 2005). Vangen and Huxham (2012) describe a goals framework that captures goals in the collaboration arena as a tangled web of dynamic, ambiguous, and partially overlapping goal hierarchies. It thus suggests that a large variety of goals influence actions and behaviors in collaboration (p. 752). Furthermore, they distinguish between six dimensions of goals in collaboration, which are level, origin, authenticity, relevance, content and overtness. The tension between goal congruence and goal diversity is particularly important for the level and content dimension (Vangen and Huxham, 2012, p. 753) which we will discuss later in the results of our study.

Castañer and Oliveira (2020) made an attempt to differentiate goals and distinguish between the following three types of individual goals in collaborations:

The Bundesvereinigung Kulturelle Kinder-und Jugendbildung (2017) mentions shared goals as a central condition for the success of cross-sector work, in addition to a common culture of collaboration and suitable framework conditions. Fischer and Hübner (2019) name possible goals for different educational groups, which are mostly based on the systems they are working in: While schools may want to develop into an attractive location, art and cultural institutions may want to reach more audiences, cultural education institutions may want to secure their extracurricular offers, and art and culture professionals tend to focus on opening up new fields of activity. These presumed goals have an influence on collaborative dynamics and may challenge collaboration as it often is initiated by elected officials whose goals and motivations ‘differ widely, they often have competing stakes in cultural planning’ (Markusen and Gadwa, 2010, p. 385). This may impede collaborative actions in this specific field of cultural education or open up areas of conflict.

Although literature describes that there are both common and different goals in cross sectoral collaboration (see this chapter), there is a research gap with empirical studies on goal diversity and group-specific goals in cross-sectoral collaboration, especially for the field of cultural education. The empirical studies available to date relate to a more detailed exploration of shared goals and their significance for cross-sector collaboration. For example, Kolleck et al. (2020) highlight the importance of goal agreement and analyzed that more influential actors in cross-sector networks were more likely than less influential actors to show high identification with shared goals. Another survey was conducted by AbouAssi et al. (2024) who found evidence that, in the perceptions of local government and non-profit leaders, goal alignment is linked to collaborations achieving their goals. Dusdal and Powell (2021) investigated the motivations of researchers partaking in international collaborative research and identified several different motivations such as career advancement or networking, but did not differentiate between disciplines or groups. Another study looked at the reasons for the engagement in cross-sector coalitions, e.g., identifying complementary or common goals, building trust among each other or perceiving that other actors have important resources (Koebele, 2019, 2020).

There is a lack of understanding why different groups within a specific field as cultural education networks engage in a cross-sector network and which specific goals apart from the commonly shared goal they want to achieve. Addressing this research gap will create a better understanding of the reasons of engagement and collaborative dynamics at the beginning of a collaboration. Furthermore, the results can help develop more tailored and effective strategies for cross-sectoral collaboration in cultural education networks, thereby maximizing their potential to enrich their communities.

The interviews were conducted in four urban municipalities and two rural regions in Germany, each in a different federal state. Each municipality was studied in the context of a two-year consultancy process led by a mediating institution. The aim of this process was to build and strengthen cultural education collaborations and networks in order to address barriers to participation in cultural education and to promote participatory structures for disadvantaged children and youth at the local level. To this end, a team of actors from different sectors (administration, cultural education, coordination, schools, independent arts and culture scene) was formed in each of the six municipalities. Their collaborative efforts focused on fostering sustainable partnerships and incorporating diverse perspectives to develop cultural education opportunities tailored to the needs of local communities.

As researchers, our aim was to identify conducive conditions for fostering social relationships, collaboration and the formation of social networks. To gain deeper insights into collaboration and the emergent social networks, we conducted interviews with actors from all participating sectors (as outlined in the preceding sector). Our interviews focused on exploring perspectives, specifically targeting individuals actively engaged in the consultation process and most likely to facilitate emergent collaborations. Additionally, we employed purposive sampling (Flick, 2014, pp. 175–176), ensuring a maximum representation of cases. This involved selecting interviewees from various hierarchical levels across all sectors, while also including informal leaders and critical cases. Some of the interviewees were already more closely connected with other actors in the network at the time of the interview, while others had fewer contacts. What they all share is their involvement in cultural education within their working environment. Following the recruitment and interviewing of two or more actors from each sector, we reached a point of data saturation (Table 1).

In total, 24 interviews, ranging in duration from 27 to 78 min, were conducted between September and November 2018. Prior to this, three pretest interviews were conducted to refine the interview guide. The semi-standardized interview guide included four main questions, along with egocentric network maps adapted from Kahn and Antonucci (1980). These network maps were used to create a narrative-generating atmosphere. Semi-standardized interviews provide a structured framework allowing flexibility and openness to additional insights. The interviews were structured into five sections: description of institutional roles and tasks, perspectives on collaboration, visualization of social ties and network, goals and expectations related to the collaboration, and open topics. The first question aimed to stimulate narrative by asking about the interviewee’s role outside the collaborative network. Subsequent questions focused on network building, collaborative intentions, goals and expectations regarding participation in the collaborative process, allowing interviewees to share their personal stories. Narrative-generating questions and open-ended questions were used to support interviewees’ narratives. To gain more insight into network relationships, further questions were asked, for example ‘You have just mentioned person X. To what extent do you already know this person?’ or ‘You were just talking about idea X. What are your goals for this idea and for the collaboration as a whole?’

During the interviews, egocentric network maps were used to stimulate narration and help interviewees visualize their networks (Hollstein and Pfeffer, 2010). We used standardized-structured network maps that strike a balance between openness to enrich narratives and structure to elicit information relevant to the interview topic. The network maps were introduced when discussing social ties and visualizing the network using the hierarchical mapping technique (Hollstein and Pfeffer, 2010). Participants were tasked with placing their collaborative partners on the egocentric network map and explaining their choices. The main aim was not to map the entire network, but to gain deeper insights into social relationships, which are crucial for understanding social networks (Bernhard, 2018), and to visualize individual perspectives within the network. While using the network maps, interviewees frequently started talking about their relationships with the individuals they had positioned on the network map.

The data were analyzed using thematic qualitative content analysis, following Kuckartz (2014). This methodological approach aims at the development of a system of categories. Our analysis focused on this research method and the interview transcripts. Although the network maps were used primarily to gather additional information and complement the interviewees’ narratives, they were not directly used for the analysis presented in this article. Initially, the question about goals was explicitly asked during the interviews (‘What goals do you pursue with your participation in the collaboration?’). Subsequently, further insights into goals emerged during the interviews, prompting us to use the entire transcripts for a comprehensive analysis. Prior to coding, case summaries were written to condense the central characteristics of individual cases against the background of the research question (Kuckartz, 2014).

In order to address the research question regarding the identification of goals among actors from different sectors, the data were analyzed in two distinct phases. Initially, the main category ‘goals of the participating actors’ was developed and defined in a codebook and subsequently validated through consensual coding. The data was then systematically coded within the framework of the main category. First, the goals of the interviewees were analyzed without regard to group affiliation, focusing on the content and commonalities of the goals of all stakeholders. Then, four sub-categories were formed through inductive coding: target group-related goals, resource-related goals, competence-related goals and goals related to visibility and appreciation (Table 2).

Finally, the interview data coded under the main category were assigned to the respective subcategories. The second step of the analysis followed. Our aim here was to identify an overall goal for each of the groups involved. To do this, we created a qualitative cross tab, which Kuckartz (2014) describes in the last step of the thematic content analysis as simple and complex analyses and visualizations, and for which he offers different possibilities. We use the crosstab to show links between group characteristics and the coded thematic statements. The previously formed subcategories (Table 3, y-axis) were identified in each group (Table 3, x-axis). In a further step of interpretation and the last step of the analysis, these subcategories were condensed into an overall, group-specific goal for each group of actors (Table 3, last line).

According to the interviewees of the administration group, the emerging network’s primary goal is to improve access to educational services for children and youth and to establish and secure sustainable structures:

They emphasize considering the wishes and needs of the target group through direct input. Aligning services with the interests of children and young people aims to foster inclusion and engagement. Furthermore, interviewees express a collective motivation to optimize available cultural offerings by seeking financial support and sustainable funding:

Engagement in the network stems from the collective need to advocate for resources and funding. By presenting tangible results, they aim to secure municipal funds for cultural education. Another interviewee highlights the goal of creating a dedicated cultural budget approved by politicians to ensure long-term funding without competition from other areas. The actors’ engagement is driven by a desire to use their professional skills to promote cultural education, prioritizing community benefits over personal benefits. Furthermore, they emphasize the importance of structural interfaces, shared responsibility, and collaborative decision-making rather than centralization:

Additionally, they aim to enhance interactions with actors from different sectors, particularly the cultural sector, and strategize “how to advance in these areas” (B4_4) for the greater good of cultural education. The ultimate goal of the administrative actors is to create a vibrant network with inclusive structures that integrate various youth and cultural initiatives and attract families, as illustrated by the following statement:

Participation of various institutions and stakeholders enriches cultural education and community integration. The interviewees aim to unify disparate efforts into a structured framework. By creating a community of practice, they envision a more collaborative approach that enhances the accessibility and quality of cultural education. In summary, the administration group’s primary goal is to optimize the cultural education network within their municipality.

The interviewees in the coordination group hope that children and youth will benefit from the network’s offerings. One interviewee articulates the wish for children to feel ownership and belonging in these spaces:

More generally, the cultural network should aim to serve children and youth, facilitating identity-forming experiences and encouraging regular visits. To achieve this goal, the coordination group seeks to unlock the potential of local cultural collaborations and enhance the profile of core cultural institutions, which often face funding challenges despite their significant role:

Insufficient funding hampers the development of sustainable structures and impedes recognition of these actors as full members of the network by other stakeholders. This funding gap also means that not all needs of children and youth are met by programs:

This quote underscores the cultural scene’s importance for children’s and youth’s leisure activities and sense of belonging. Despite holding key resources, cultural actors’ involvement in networks is hindered by funding shortages. The interviewees from the coordination group stress this funding gap, which limits synergies with artists. They emphasize a desire for greater involvement of cultural education actors on equal terms. Their vision is a vibrant, cross-sector network fostering mutual support and resource sharing without hierarchies. One interviewee envisions a network where participants from different sectors can easily access support and expertise:

Due to uneven financial support, the coordination group seeks to create structures and synergies. They aim to build a network where other actors can easily access each other’s expertise and resources, leading to optimized resource use and enhancing collaboration. This well-connected network, as they imagine it, is expected to improve efficiency, knowledge sharing, and endure beyond temporary projects. The promotion of such a structure is also connected to hopes for long-term financial support and collaboration.

The interviewees envision lasting connections within the network that foster a sense of longevity beyond resource sharing. The overall goal of the actors is to create ‘synergies of resources’, harnessing collective cultural forces in the local community.

Interviewees from the cultural education group advocate for greater youth involvement in initiating and shaping cultural activities. They emphasize the importance of children and youth participation in decision-making processes to create genuine access through suitable collaboration methods:

Their participation aims to fill gaps in the community’s cultural offerings, benefiting both the target group and providers. Clarifying responsibilities is essential to protect cultural work from being overtaken by other actors. One suggested solution is a coordination center, “if everyone supports it” (B2_2). Network members should be empowered to realize their ideas, share influence and pool resources to develop sustainable structures:

The interviewee envisions a long-term collaboration that raises awareness and expands opportunities for other actors in cultural education. Poor coordination of existing structures led to disagreements due to a lack of knowledge. Perspectives and knowledge in cultural education are seen as important, and the interviewees explicitly wish to share knowledge and develop their skills.

The identified gap is in effectively working with schools, seen as crucial for reaching children. Assistance is sought in establishing sustainable, mutually beneficial relationships with educational institutions and streamlining their own work structures.

Additionally, on an interpersonal level, interviewees seek a supportive working atmosphere with colleagues:

The goal is to create valued structures that influence decision-making processes. Greater recognition is linked to hopes for a lasting impact on the community’s cultural education landscape. The cultural education group aims to build sustainable structures and secure the future of cultural education by increasing visibility and recognition, especially among hesitant policymakers.

Emphasizing the importance of creating meaningful activities, members of the school group aim to provide space for such activities within their institutions:

Their goal is to offer meaningful after-school activities that enrich pupils’ educational experiences and, in the long run, address social inequalities by fostering engagement. Members of the school group emphasize the need for minimal effort in terms of resources:

This highlights the group’s goal for a professional network with efficient responsibility allocation, acknowledging time constraints while emphasizing the importance of the network’s work. Another member, whose role depends on organizing afternoon activities in educational institutions, participates to secure funding for these activities, reflecting a role-related rather than personal goal. She suggests a fund managed by working group leaders and highlights the need for support in providing afternoon programs in all-day schools:

This underscores the need for a network of resources to support for organizing afternoon school activities. By fostering connections and leveraging capacities, members aim to provide diverse activities for pupils. Financial support is essential for the feasibility and sustainability of these afternoon programs. Another goal is to increase appreciation within their own working environment, as articulated by a member:

The quote reflects the school leader’s desire for acceptance, recognition, and appreciation to enhance his role and improve the reputation of his institution.

The interviewees stress that the network should not only care for achieving their own goals, but ‘to support each other and that we really build a professional structural network in which the work is distributed’ (B3_5).

Overall, the overarching goal of the school actors is to increase institutional and role attractiveness, optimizing resource use and time feasibility.

Artistic self-expression is at the heart of the interviewees’ engagement and work with children and youth:

Members aim to create a positive, empowering environment with lasting impressions and impactful experiences for children and youth by focusing on their interests and activities. They also seek to delegate tasks to reduce their workload or establish a coordination office to manage organizational and financial aspects, allowing them to focus on their “core business” (B3_3):

Based on this excerpt, the interviewee recognizes her expertise as an actress and aims to maintain within the network. Seeking support in areas outside her field of expertise would allow her to concentrate effectively on her core responsibilities and strengths while remaining an active network member. Interviewees of this group rely on collaboration with others to enhance their own work within the network.

By expanding her professional network and exploring new opportunities for partnerships, the interviewee aims to improve their work environment and create better working conditions. Additionally, they intend to leverage network contacts to advance tasks beyond their usual scope. In the following quote, the interviewee discusses a project he initiated that faced structural obstacles, preventing it from reaching the intended audience.

The interviewees emphasize the importance of collaboration to create a sustainable and efficient work environment. They adopt a proactive and persistent attitude toward improving their working conditions, as highlighted in the following quote:

The interviewee aspires to secure long-term funding alongside project-based support, prioritizing financial stability for both the network and their own work environment. This stability is crucial for fostering lasting partnerships and sustainable project funding.

By nurturing personal relationships, the interviewees seek to minimize uncertainties in working dynamics, especially among the actors of municipal administration. One interviewee reflects:

While members prioritize their own working conditions and sometimes view themselves as “lone fighters” (B3_3), they also value reducing unfamiliarity. Building familiarity and comfort among colleagues is seen to foster communication, trust, and productivity within networks or collaborations. The overarching goal of the arts and culture group can be summarized as “improving their own working conditions.”