Summary IOR 2022 – Kaatje van Wijk
Lecture 1 – exploring the field
A relational perspective on adaptive organizations (4 I’s)
• Intra-organizational relationships: interaction within organizations, in projects, and teams
• Inter-organizational relationships: network’s, alliances, value chains, or project networks
• Institutional context of organizations: norms values and regulations + how dealing with
them
• Innovation: how do org renew, how do they react and anticipate technology, commercial
and societal developments and how to connect to the other three I’s
1. Network as social structure
• A network is defined as a set of nodes and the set of ties representing some relationship, or
lack of relationship, between the nodes. Nodes can be individuals, teams, units,
organizations
• If you watch this structure, what do you see? What structural features? Not one central focal
actor, several brokers but not one. Separate network is not good, we want it to be connected
for info flow. A lot of clustering. A set of connectors forming a small network inside the
network.
Serendipitous networks = Social systems on the basis of dyadic or triadic interactions between
organizations but without having necessarily a common goal, a joint identity or even conscious
knowledge of each other beyond the direct contacts.
Designed/Engineered (purpose-oriented) networks = Inter-organizational networks that are
consciously created often by a lead organization or more bottom up by professionals in different
organizations to achieve network level goals that none of the organizations could achieve on their
own.
What is an interorganizational relationship?
Relationship between two more or less autonomous organizations to achieve their goals more
efficiently and more effectively
• Organizations can be competitors, suppliers, customers, service providers, knowledge
institutes, ...
• Organizations can cooperate or collaborate horizontally or vertically with regard to the value
chain)
1
,Why do organizations collaborate with other organizations? (EXAM QUESTION)
• Strengthening their own power position (SNT)
• Gaining and managing legitimacy (Inst. Theory)
• Reduce uncertainty (RDT)
• Increasing efficiency (TCE)
• Access to knowledge and resources (RBV)
• Enhancing effectiveness
o Achieving something you’re not capable of doing alone
Managerial functions with regard to IOR
• Selection: and deselection of partners
• Allocation: and reallocation of tasks, resources and responsibilities between partners
• Regulation: negotiation and renegotiation of rules for collaboration
• Evaluation: of exchange relationships
2. Networks as perspective and empirical tool
• Focused on uncovering the patterning of people’s interaction
Heading towards a society of networks?
• 1970 we had the tools to really study the networks and organizations started using it,
creating a society of organizations
• 2000 networks are created, and everyone knows we are part of networks
Kilduff and Brass (2010): Organizational Social Network Research
Core Ideas and Key Debates
• Social relations (in contrast to attribute-oriented approaches)
• Embeddedness (economic transactions occur in context of social relationships)
• Structural patterning
• Utility of network connections (opportunities and constraints that affect outcomes important
to actors)
2
, - Humans are not slaves of their environment instead, they are conscious of their action and
embedded in environment
- Agency has some control over what you do, but your network provides opportunities and
constraint
- Social relationships matter in explaining performance structure provides opportunities and
constraints
- i.e. cluster can provide safeguards and can have constraints
The study of social networks: Assumptions!!!
• Relations are at least as important for the explanation of social, political, and
organizational phenomena as attributes
• Actros and their actions are viewed as interdependent rather than independent,
autonomous units
• Individuals position determines opportunities and constraints
o Social network analysis is therefore not a collection of “neutral” statistical
procedures, but an analytical toolbox resting on very specific sociological
assumptions
Most central network:
j = degree centrality
h = betweenness centrality
I = closeness centrality
Network data:
Sources and research traditions:
• Survey research → questionnaires
• Ethnographic research → observations
• Documentary research → texts and documents, statistical databases
• Experimental research → experiments, simulations
Example: networks of festivals and bands
To what extent is music festival performance related to the status of the
music festival and the status of the performing artist?
- Festivals who exist longer attract more visitors
- Some bands perform at other big festivals, visitors are likely to visit
- All bands perform at other big festivals, visitors already saw the bend and do not come
anymore (U shape)
3
, Critique IOR/N research
Kilduff & Brass (2010):
• Where is the agency?
• Actor characteristics are neglected (self monitoring capacity, strategic choice)
• Cognition: Accurate knowledge of third party ties
• Boundary specification
• Relations are dynamic
Are we perhaps guilty of anthropomorphization/do we attribute human behavior and outcomes to
non-human entities?
→ YES, influenced interorganizational researchers to attribute individually oriented behaviors (such
as communication or learning) to organizations” (Ghosh & Rosenkopf, 2015)
In the context of innovation and knowledge flows:
➢ We overlooked the issue of friction: defined as the resistance that one surface or object
encounters when moving over another
Four sources of friction (Ghosh & Rosenkopf 2015)
• Friction in dyads: Sender and receiver need to be motivated and reliable
• Knowledge complexity: e.g. degree of tacitness
• Network embeddedness of dyads increases friction
• Friction varies with type of tie: e.g. interlock vs. alliance
Knowledge may not flow intraorganizationally to facilitate interorganizational transfer
Organizations are NOT unitary actors!
B is the broker between A, D, C and E.
It’s not given that all actors in the organization talk to each other
3. Networks as a form of governance
Governance = the use of institutions, structures of authority and even collaboration to allocate
resources and coordinate or control activity in society or the economy.
Governance occurs in three broad ways:
1. Through top-down methods.
2. Through the use of market mechanisms.
3. Through networks of collaboration.
Transaction Cost Economics “Governance structures that have better transaction cost economizing
properties will eventually displace those that have worse, ceteris paribus” (Williamson, 1981, p. 574).
Make (Hierarchy/Firm), Buy (Market), or Ally (Partnership) decision based on: (I) uncertainty; (II)
frequency; (III) asset specificity
4
Lecture 1 – exploring the field
A relational perspective on adaptive organizations (4 I’s)
• Intra-organizational relationships: interaction within organizations, in projects, and teams
• Inter-organizational relationships: network’s, alliances, value chains, or project networks
• Institutional context of organizations: norms values and regulations + how dealing with
them
• Innovation: how do org renew, how do they react and anticipate technology, commercial
and societal developments and how to connect to the other three I’s
1. Network as social structure
• A network is defined as a set of nodes and the set of ties representing some relationship, or
lack of relationship, between the nodes. Nodes can be individuals, teams, units,
organizations
• If you watch this structure, what do you see? What structural features? Not one central focal
actor, several brokers but not one. Separate network is not good, we want it to be connected
for info flow. A lot of clustering. A set of connectors forming a small network inside the
network.
Serendipitous networks = Social systems on the basis of dyadic or triadic interactions between
organizations but without having necessarily a common goal, a joint identity or even conscious
knowledge of each other beyond the direct contacts.
Designed/Engineered (purpose-oriented) networks = Inter-organizational networks that are
consciously created often by a lead organization or more bottom up by professionals in different
organizations to achieve network level goals that none of the organizations could achieve on their
own.
What is an interorganizational relationship?
Relationship between two more or less autonomous organizations to achieve their goals more
efficiently and more effectively
• Organizations can be competitors, suppliers, customers, service providers, knowledge
institutes, ...
• Organizations can cooperate or collaborate horizontally or vertically with regard to the value
chain)
1
,Why do organizations collaborate with other organizations? (EXAM QUESTION)
• Strengthening their own power position (SNT)
• Gaining and managing legitimacy (Inst. Theory)
• Reduce uncertainty (RDT)
• Increasing efficiency (TCE)
• Access to knowledge and resources (RBV)
• Enhancing effectiveness
o Achieving something you’re not capable of doing alone
Managerial functions with regard to IOR
• Selection: and deselection of partners
• Allocation: and reallocation of tasks, resources and responsibilities between partners
• Regulation: negotiation and renegotiation of rules for collaboration
• Evaluation: of exchange relationships
2. Networks as perspective and empirical tool
• Focused on uncovering the patterning of people’s interaction
Heading towards a society of networks?
• 1970 we had the tools to really study the networks and organizations started using it,
creating a society of organizations
• 2000 networks are created, and everyone knows we are part of networks
Kilduff and Brass (2010): Organizational Social Network Research
Core Ideas and Key Debates
• Social relations (in contrast to attribute-oriented approaches)
• Embeddedness (economic transactions occur in context of social relationships)
• Structural patterning
• Utility of network connections (opportunities and constraints that affect outcomes important
to actors)
2
, - Humans are not slaves of their environment instead, they are conscious of their action and
embedded in environment
- Agency has some control over what you do, but your network provides opportunities and
constraint
- Social relationships matter in explaining performance structure provides opportunities and
constraints
- i.e. cluster can provide safeguards and can have constraints
The study of social networks: Assumptions!!!
• Relations are at least as important for the explanation of social, political, and
organizational phenomena as attributes
• Actros and their actions are viewed as interdependent rather than independent,
autonomous units
• Individuals position determines opportunities and constraints
o Social network analysis is therefore not a collection of “neutral” statistical
procedures, but an analytical toolbox resting on very specific sociological
assumptions
Most central network:
j = degree centrality
h = betweenness centrality
I = closeness centrality
Network data:
Sources and research traditions:
• Survey research → questionnaires
• Ethnographic research → observations
• Documentary research → texts and documents, statistical databases
• Experimental research → experiments, simulations
Example: networks of festivals and bands
To what extent is music festival performance related to the status of the
music festival and the status of the performing artist?
- Festivals who exist longer attract more visitors
- Some bands perform at other big festivals, visitors are likely to visit
- All bands perform at other big festivals, visitors already saw the bend and do not come
anymore (U shape)
3
, Critique IOR/N research
Kilduff & Brass (2010):
• Where is the agency?
• Actor characteristics are neglected (self monitoring capacity, strategic choice)
• Cognition: Accurate knowledge of third party ties
• Boundary specification
• Relations are dynamic
Are we perhaps guilty of anthropomorphization/do we attribute human behavior and outcomes to
non-human entities?
→ YES, influenced interorganizational researchers to attribute individually oriented behaviors (such
as communication or learning) to organizations” (Ghosh & Rosenkopf, 2015)
In the context of innovation and knowledge flows:
➢ We overlooked the issue of friction: defined as the resistance that one surface or object
encounters when moving over another
Four sources of friction (Ghosh & Rosenkopf 2015)
• Friction in dyads: Sender and receiver need to be motivated and reliable
• Knowledge complexity: e.g. degree of tacitness
• Network embeddedness of dyads increases friction
• Friction varies with type of tie: e.g. interlock vs. alliance
Knowledge may not flow intraorganizationally to facilitate interorganizational transfer
Organizations are NOT unitary actors!
B is the broker between A, D, C and E.
It’s not given that all actors in the organization talk to each other
3. Networks as a form of governance
Governance = the use of institutions, structures of authority and even collaboration to allocate
resources and coordinate or control activity in society or the economy.
Governance occurs in three broad ways:
1. Through top-down methods.
2. Through the use of market mechanisms.
3. Through networks of collaboration.
Transaction Cost Economics “Governance structures that have better transaction cost economizing
properties will eventually displace those that have worse, ceteris paribus” (Williamson, 1981, p. 574).
Make (Hierarchy/Firm), Buy (Market), or Ally (Partnership) decision based on: (I) uncertainty; (II)
frequency; (III) asset specificity
4
