Stephen P. Borgatti

The Network Paradigm in Organizational Research: A Review and Typology:

In this paper, we review and analyze the emerging network paradigm in organizational research. We begin with a conventional review of recent research organized around recognized research streams. Next, we analyze this research, developing a set of dimensions along which network studies vary, including direction of causality, levels of analysis, explanatory goals, and explanatory mechanisms. We use the latter two dimensions to construct a 2-by-2 table cross-classifying studies of network consequences into four canonical types: structural social capital, social access to resources, contagion, and environmental shaping. We note the rise in popularity of studies with a greater sense of agency than was traditional in network research.

Network Analysis in the Social Sciences

Over the past decade, there has been an explosion of interest in network research across the physical and social sciences. For social scientists, the theory of networks has been a gold mine, yielding explanations for social phenomena in a wide variety of disciplines from psychology to economics. Here, we review the kinds of things that social scientists have tried to explain using social network analysis and provide a nutshell description of the basic assumptions, goals, and explanatory mechanisms prevalent in the field. We hope to contribute to a dialogue among researchers from across the physical and social sciences who share a common interest in understanding the antecedents and consequences of network phenomena.

Centrality and network flow

Centrality measures, or at least popular interpretations of these measures, make implicit assumptions about the manner in which traffic flows through a network. For example, some measures count only geodesic paths, apparently assuming that whatever flows through the network only moves along the shortest possible paths. This paper lays out a typology of network flows based on two dimensions of variation, namely the kinds of trajectories that traffic may follow (geodesics, paths, trails, or walks) and the method of spread (broadcast, serial replication, or transfer). Measures of centrality are then matched to the kinds of flows that they are appropriate for. Simulations are used to examine the relationship between type of flow and the differential importance of nodes with respect to key measurements such as speed of reception of traffic and frequency of receiving traffic. It is shown that the off-the-shelf formulas for centrality measures are fully applicable only for the specific flow processes they are designed for, and that when they are applied to other flow processes they get the “wrong” answer. It is noted that the most commonly used centrality measures are not appropriate for most of the flows we are routinely interested in. A key claim made in this paper is that centrality measures can be regarded as generating expected values for certain kinds of node outcomes (such as speed and frequency of reception) given implicit models of how traffic flows, and that this provides a new and useful way of thinking about centrality.

A Relational View of Information Seeking and Learning in Social Networks

Research in organizational learning has demonstrated processes and occasionally performance implications of acquisition of declarative (know-what) and procedural (know-how) knowledge. However, considerably less attention has been paid to learned characteristics of relationships that affect the decision to seek information from other people. Based on a review of the social network, information processing, and organizational learning literatures, along with the results of a previous qualitative study, we propose a formal model of information seeking in which the probability of seeking information from another person is a function of (1) knowing what that person knows; (2) valuing what that person knows; (3) being able to gain timely access to that persons thinking; and (4) perceiving that seeking information from that person would not be too costly. We also hypothesize that the knowing, access, and cost variables mediate the relationship between physical proximity and information seeking. The model is tested using two separate research sites to provide replication. The results indicate strong support for the model and the mediation hypothesis (with the exception of the cost variable). Implications are drawn for the study of both transactive memory and organizational learning, as well as for management practice.

Models of core/periphery structures

A common but informal notion in social network analysis and other fields is the concept of a core/periphery structure. The intuitive conception entails a dense, cohesive core and a sparse, unconnected periphery. This paper seeks to formalize the intuitive notion of a core/periphery structure and suggests algorithms for detecting this structure, along with statistical tests for testing a priori hypotheses. Different models are presented for different kinds of graphs (directed and undirected, valued and nonvalued). In addition, the close relation of the continuous models developed to certain centrality measures is discussed.

A Graph-theoretic perspective on centrality

The concept of centrality is often invoked in social network analysis, and diverse indices have been proposed to measure it. This paper develops a unified framework for the measurement of centrality. All measures of centrality assess a nodes involvement in the walk structure of a network. Measures vary along four key dimensions: type of nodal involvement assessed, type of walk considered, property of walk assessed, and choice of summary measure. If we cross-classify measures by type of nodal involvement (radial versus medial) and property of walk assessed (volume versus length), we obtain a four-fold polychotomization with one cell empty which mirrors Freemans 1979 categorization. At a more substantive level, measures of centrality summarize a nodes involvement in or contribution to the cohesiveness of the network. Radial measures in particular are reductions of pair-wise proximities/cohesion to attributes of nodes or actors. The usefulness and interpretability of radial measures depend on the fit of the cohesion matrix to the one-dimensional model. In network terms, a network that is fit by a one-dimensional model has a core-periphery structure in which all nodes revolve more or less closely around a single core. This in turn implies that the network does not contain distinct cohesive subgroups. Thus, centrality is shown to be intimately connected with the cohesive subgroup structure of a network.

Knowing What We Know: Supporting Knowledge Creation and Sharing in Social Networks

Abstract Many early knowledge management initiatives focused heavily on informationtechnology and codified knowledge and so missed performance improvementopportunities from interventions targeting knowledge embedded within networks ofemployees. Despite advanced technical solutions employed to manage organizationalknowledge, we continue to find that people are often more reliant on other people thanthey are on databases when seeking answers to unstructured questions. As a result,organizations creating more cohesive networks on knowledge related dimensions arebetter able to collectively solve problems, create new knowledge and transfer explicit andtacit knowledge embodied within employees. The following article reports on a cross-industry research program assessing ways to promote knowledge creation and transfer innetworks of employees. Specifically, we have found four characteristics of relationshipsimportant for knowledge creation in networks: 1) knowing what others know; 2) havingaccess to other people’s thinking; 3) having people be willing to actively engage inproblem solving; and 4) having a safe relationship to promote learning and creativity.Mapping these dimensions in social networks yields targeted social and technicalinterventions managers can employ to improve a network’s ability to create and shareknowledge.

Centrality in valued graphs: A measure of betweenness based on network flow

A new measure of centrality, C,, is introduced. It is based on the concept of network flows. While conceptually similar to Freeman’s original measure, Ca, the new measure differs from the original in two important ways. First, C, is defined for both valued and non-valued graphs. This makes C, applicable to a wider variety of network datasets. Second, the computation of C, is not based on geodesic paths as is C, but on all the independent paths between all pairs of points in the network.

Making Invisible Work Visible: Using Social Network Analysis to Support Strategic Collaboration

With efforts to de-layer organizations and reduce functional boundaries, coordination increasingly occurs through networks of informal relations rather than channels tightly prescribed by formal reporting structures or detailed work processes. However, while organizations are moving to network forms through joint ventures, alliances, and other collaborative relationships, executives generally pay little attention to assessing and supporting informal networks within their own organizations. Social network analysis is a valuable means of facilitating collaboration in strategically important groups such as top leadership networks, strategic business units, new product development teams, communities of practice, joint ventures, and mergers. By making informal networks visible, social network analysis helps managers systematically assess and support strategically important collaboration.

Network analysis of 2-mode data

Network analysis is distinguished from traditional social science by the dyadic nature of the standard data set. Whereas in traditional social science we study monadic attributes of individuals, in network analysis we study dyadic attributes of pairs of individuals. These dyadic attributes (e.g. social relations) may be represented in matrix form by a square 1-mode matrix. In contrast, the data in traditional social science are represented as 2-mode matrices. However, network analysis is not completely divorced from traditional social science, and often has occasion to collect and analyze 2-mode matrices. Furthermore, some of the methods developed in network analysis have uses in analysing non-network data. This paper presents and discusses ways of applying and interpreting traditional network analytic techniques to 2-mode data, as well as developing new techniques. Three areas are covered in detail: displaying 2-mode data as networks, detecting clusters and measuring centrality.