LITERATURE NETWORKS 1
The Network Paradigm in Organizational Research: A Review and
Typology
Shift in research to more relational, contextual and systematic understandings.
Network: set of actors connected by a set of ties. Ties can be directed / undirected and
dichotomous (present of absent) / valued (measured on a scale).
Research streams
Social capital: the value of connections. It mediates the relationship between race
and social support among organization managers.
Embeddedness: closer and more exclusive business relationships. Repetitive market
relations and the linking of social and business relationships generate embedded
logics (differ from traditional arms-length market).
Network organizations and organizational networks: repetitive exchanges among
semi-autonomous organizations that rely on trust and embedded social relationships
to protect transactions and reduce costs. But with the globalization is become
inefficient organizational networks, balance the flexibility of markets.
Board interlocks: ties among organizations through a member sitting on the board of
another organization. Organizations reduce uncertainties and share information.
Joint ventures and inter-firm alliances: provide information and knowledge
resources improve form performance and innovation.
Knowledge management: store, share and create new knowledge through the
interaction of individuals. This is under attack.
Social cognition: perception of networks.
Group processes: how physical proximity, similarity of beliefs and attitudes, amount
of interaction and affective ties are interrelated. Homophily, the tendency for people
to interact more with their own kind, maintains the inequality of status for minorities
within organizations.
Dimensions of network research
Levels of analysis: network data are dyadic (pair of nodes, not per node).
Consequences of networks: explanatory goals, differences between the fields. Social
capital studies seek to explain variation in success, whereas social influence studies
seek to explain homogeneity.
Explanatory mechanisms, how ties and their functions are treated. Structuralist focus
on the structure of ties, with connectionist the focus is on the resources that flow
through social ties.
Typology of studies focusing on network consequences:
o Structural capital: focus on the benefits to actors. The actor is seen as a
rational, active agent who exploits her position to maximize gain. Abstract
pattern of ties.
1
, o Resource access: an actor’s success is a function of the quality and quantity of
resources controlled by the actor’s alters. Actors are seen as rational and
active who instrumentally form and exploit ties to reach objectives. Research
on the individual.
o Convergence: explain common attitudes and practices in terms of similar
network environment. Actors are connected to the same third parties.
o Contagion: explain shared attitudes, culture and practice through interaction.
Ties are conceived along where information or influence flows.
2
,On Network Theory
Ties interconnect through shared end point to form paths that indirectly link nodes that are
not directly tied. Networks can be disconnected, known as components.
Realist position: true network of relationships.
Nominalist position: every network question generates its own network.
In basic there are 2 basic types: states, continue over time (open-ended persistence), and
events, discrete and transitory nature and can be counted over periods of time (e.g., phone
conversation).
Network theorizing
Strength of weak ties theory (SWT):
o The stronger the tie between people, the more likely their social worlds will
overlap transitivity.
o Bridging ties are a potential source of novel ideas. Through a
bridging (weak) tie, you can hear things that aren’t circulating
among your friends.
Structural holes theory (SH):
o Concerned with ego networks
o It’s better to have more different connections than all in the
same ‘world’.
Characterizing network theory
Weak ties are useful because it tends to bridge network clusters. The shape of the ego
network around a person confers advantages to that person.
SWT and SH rely on an underlying model of a social system as a network of paths that act as
conduits for information to flow flow or pipes model.
The network tie servers as a bond that aligns and coordinates action. By working together,
you can accomplish more than you could alone bond model.
Goals of network theorizing
Choice: behaviors, attitudes, beliefs and internal structural characteristics.
Success: performance and rewards.
3
, o Contagion: flow-based explanations of (similarity of) choice.
o Convergence: bond-based explanations of homogeneity. Nodes adapt to their
environment nodes with similar environments will demonstrate
similarities.
o Capitalization: flow-based explanations of achievement. Social position in a
network provides access to resources.
o cooperation: bond-based explanations of achievement. Combinations of
nodes act as a unit, excluding others.
4
The Network Paradigm in Organizational Research: A Review and
Typology
Shift in research to more relational, contextual and systematic understandings.
Network: set of actors connected by a set of ties. Ties can be directed / undirected and
dichotomous (present of absent) / valued (measured on a scale).
Research streams
Social capital: the value of connections. It mediates the relationship between race
and social support among organization managers.
Embeddedness: closer and more exclusive business relationships. Repetitive market
relations and the linking of social and business relationships generate embedded
logics (differ from traditional arms-length market).
Network organizations and organizational networks: repetitive exchanges among
semi-autonomous organizations that rely on trust and embedded social relationships
to protect transactions and reduce costs. But with the globalization is become
inefficient organizational networks, balance the flexibility of markets.
Board interlocks: ties among organizations through a member sitting on the board of
another organization. Organizations reduce uncertainties and share information.
Joint ventures and inter-firm alliances: provide information and knowledge
resources improve form performance and innovation.
Knowledge management: store, share and create new knowledge through the
interaction of individuals. This is under attack.
Social cognition: perception of networks.
Group processes: how physical proximity, similarity of beliefs and attitudes, amount
of interaction and affective ties are interrelated. Homophily, the tendency for people
to interact more with their own kind, maintains the inequality of status for minorities
within organizations.
Dimensions of network research
Levels of analysis: network data are dyadic (pair of nodes, not per node).
Consequences of networks: explanatory goals, differences between the fields. Social
capital studies seek to explain variation in success, whereas social influence studies
seek to explain homogeneity.
Explanatory mechanisms, how ties and their functions are treated. Structuralist focus
on the structure of ties, with connectionist the focus is on the resources that flow
through social ties.
Typology of studies focusing on network consequences:
o Structural capital: focus on the benefits to actors. The actor is seen as a
rational, active agent who exploits her position to maximize gain. Abstract
pattern of ties.
1
, o Resource access: an actor’s success is a function of the quality and quantity of
resources controlled by the actor’s alters. Actors are seen as rational and
active who instrumentally form and exploit ties to reach objectives. Research
on the individual.
o Convergence: explain common attitudes and practices in terms of similar
network environment. Actors are connected to the same third parties.
o Contagion: explain shared attitudes, culture and practice through interaction.
Ties are conceived along where information or influence flows.
2
,On Network Theory
Ties interconnect through shared end point to form paths that indirectly link nodes that are
not directly tied. Networks can be disconnected, known as components.
Realist position: true network of relationships.
Nominalist position: every network question generates its own network.
In basic there are 2 basic types: states, continue over time (open-ended persistence), and
events, discrete and transitory nature and can be counted over periods of time (e.g., phone
conversation).
Network theorizing
Strength of weak ties theory (SWT):
o The stronger the tie between people, the more likely their social worlds will
overlap transitivity.
o Bridging ties are a potential source of novel ideas. Through a
bridging (weak) tie, you can hear things that aren’t circulating
among your friends.
Structural holes theory (SH):
o Concerned with ego networks
o It’s better to have more different connections than all in the
same ‘world’.
Characterizing network theory
Weak ties are useful because it tends to bridge network clusters. The shape of the ego
network around a person confers advantages to that person.
SWT and SH rely on an underlying model of a social system as a network of paths that act as
conduits for information to flow flow or pipes model.
The network tie servers as a bond that aligns and coordinates action. By working together,
you can accomplish more than you could alone bond model.
Goals of network theorizing
Choice: behaviors, attitudes, beliefs and internal structural characteristics.
Success: performance and rewards.
3
, o Contagion: flow-based explanations of (similarity of) choice.
o Convergence: bond-based explanations of homogeneity. Nodes adapt to their
environment nodes with similar environments will demonstrate
similarities.
o Capitalization: flow-based explanations of achievement. Social position in a
network provides access to resources.
o cooperation: bond-based explanations of achievement. Combinations of
nodes act as a unit, excluding others.
4
