| This paper uses public value theory (PVT) as a lens for examining the role of informal professional networks in shaping organizational decisions that deliver public value. PVT has emerged as a viable theory for explaining outcomes and/or processes in public organizations. Bryson et al. (2014, p. 445) suggest that PVT is ‘a response to the challenges of a networked, multi-sector, no-one-whollyin-charge world and to the shortcomings of previous public administration approaches’. Some argue that PVT addresses the shortcoming of previous public administrative approaches, such as new public management, by adding a new focus on creating public value (Bryson et al., 2014; Denhardt and Denhardt, 2015). This paper uses the ‘creating public value’ perspective of PVT that focuses on examining whether ‘how’ and ‘what’ is being delivered to society is of value to the public (Benington and Moore, 2011a; 2011b). In addition, for efficiently and effectively operated public sector organizations, it is important to examine whether such operations are delivering value to the public. There is an entire body of knowledge devoted to defining ‘value’. However, in this paper, we adhere to the definition of ‘public value’ as delivering benefits to society in a just way (Moore, 1995). Within the context of critical infrastructure asset management amid widespread publicity about the role of poor management in asset disasters, two public values appear important—public safety and asset longevity (Zuashkiani et al., 2011; Novak et al., 2014). The process for determining whether public value is being created depends on ensuring that the right stakeholders have the power, legitimacy and vision to ensure public interests are a determinant in deciding how and what is delivered (Meynhardt and Bartholomes, 2011). While much of Moore’s (1995) interpretation of PVT related to public managers taking responsibility to deliver public value as well as efficiency and effectiveness, this paper examines whether informal professional networks have inadvertently adopted the responsibility to ensure that critical infrastructure asset organizations managing and maintaining public utilities (for example power, water, sewage) also deliver public value. We examine the proposition that informal professional networks modify how these essential utilities are delivered to ensure value for, and the safety of, the public. The context of the research is that essential utilities are delivered to the public by organizations that are either publicly owned, or operating as a public–private consortia, or undertaken by private contractors on behalf of the government (Brunetto et al., 2014a; Xerri et al., 2014). However, a growing list of disasters resulting from, in part, poor safety management and a ‘cutting corners mentality to ensure high profits/low costs’ (Zuashkiani et al., 2011; Novak et al., 2014), has recently raised the profile and ethical responsibility of professionals (Zuashkiani et al., 2011; Brunetto et al., 2016). |