Every organization is different, yet often similar patterns emerge.
Attached is a network[*.GIF] from a project I just finished last week. The
ties are confirmed interactions around 'innovation and new ideas'. The magenta
node is the VP, the green nodes are Directors, and the blue nodes are all
Managers. This same pattern [higher levels clustered in the center] appeared
for most of the networks we mapped, including task, grapevine, decision-making,
innovation, customer voice -- most of these networks had higher density. The
upper levels also measured higher in centrality[Freeman], and lower[shorter] in
characteristic path length[Watts].
Yet, I'm sure I could dig up a network where level and centrality/path length
do NOT correlate so well!
Christian Waldstrøm wrote:
> Dear SOCNETers,
> Since this is my first post, an introduction is in order: I'm a
> PhD-student from Aarhus, Denmark, studying intraorganizational networks.
> I presented a paper at the Sunbelt Conference in New Orleans this
> February and had the pleasure of seeing/meeting some of you.
> My question is this: Does anybody know of any work done on the influence
> of management level on the structure, use and, content of social
> networks? In what ways do the networks differ from the CEO to the
> manager at the bottom of the hierarchy? Do top-level managers generally
> have a higher or lower centrality?
> Thanks in advance,
> Christian Waldstrøm
> The Aarhus School of Business
> Haslegaardsvej 10 - 8210 Aarhus V
> Tel: office 89486606 - home/mobile 86180349