LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for SOCNET Archives


SOCNET Archives

SOCNET Archives


SOCNET@LISTS.UFL.EDU


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

SOCNET Home

SOCNET Home

SOCNET  September 2004

SOCNET September 2004

Subject:

Re: Data Collection Query on negative ties

From:

Joe Labianca <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Joe Labianca <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Wed, 1 Sep 2004 10:35:52 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (150 lines)

*****  To join INSNA, visit http://www.sfu.ca/~insna/  *****

Hi Vijaya,

I've already sent you some of the research I've been conducting on
negative ties directly, but I thought I'd respond to these questions
through SOCNET because they might be of wider interest.

I do believe that you can get reliable data on negative ties if you
carefully explain the IRB process and all of the precautions that you are
implementing to ensure respondent confidentiality. You'd be surprised what
people will report to a stranger that they wouldn't dare say to anyone
they know in the workplace. When I've collected negative ties, I've backed
up the sociometric survey with qualitative interviews. For a recent
dataset, I interviewed one out of every 4 respondents to get a better
sense of how reliable the data were. The notes below are from the 2000 AoM
meetings and they go through some of the things to think about when
conducting negative ties research.

When recruiting firms, don't focus on negative ties too much -- it will
make them overly nervous.  If you're collecting a broad array of network
measures, call it a network study. If you show them some NetDraw pictures,
they quickly get excited about the possibilities.  I once gave executives
a pictorial view of where they sat in the organization's network (with
none of the nodes identified except their node), and they felt that it
justified the entire study just to see that.  Point out that you are
examining things like A, B, and C, and that you are also examining who
people like and dislike, and how that relates to A, B, and C. If you are
collecting data on, for example, job satisfaction or citizenship
behaviors, you can feed that back to the organization. Just draw a
distinct boundary around what you can share with them (in aggregate form)
and what you can't.

When you present the research to respondents, you'll have to spend a good
amount of time on confidentiality issues. If people ask you why they
should reveal something so personal as who they dislike, apologize
profusely, and then explain that it is important to give future managers
an accurate portrait of the social landscape in organizations and that
interpersonal conflict is an important part of the social landscape. Keep
pointing out that if they feel very uncomfortable, they can always choose
to skip the question or choose not to participate. My experience is that
the more that you are honest with them and let them know that they are not
required to do this, but that they are doing it for the benefit of future
undergrad and graduate business students who will learn about this in
textbooks some day, the more likely you are to get a fantastic response
rate. Be sure to get at least one member of top management to attend each
meeting when you explain the study, as this will signal that they agreed
to the study and are backing the data collection. I won't lie to you -- it
takes a while to find a firm to agree. But you will eventually -- just be
persistent.

If you have more specific questions, please feel free to call me and we
can discuss directly.

Joe

Selected notes from Interactive Workshop on Issues in Conducting Research
on Negative Ties in Organizations (AoM, 2000):

Achieving high response rates:
Top management support is crucial
Paying respondents is helpful, but not absolutely necessary
Conduct introductory meetings with all employees explaining the purpose of
the study and its ultimate utility to mankind
stress confidentiality issues and point out that your study has been
approved under federal guidelines governing human subjects
stress that you are not a consultant, and that the results will not affect
their jobs in any way
Have respondents fill out surveys in small groups at scheduled times
during the workday if possible
Be extremely honest with the respondents; answer all questions thoroughly;
bring along sample Krackplots
Conducting qualitative interviews helps boost response rate
Cookies are helpful; smiles go a long way

What are negative ties?
Attitude towards another person
Affective, cognitive, or behavioral questions?
Who do you dislike?
With whom do you have an adversarial relationship?
Who do you prefer to avoid?
Should we measure all three?

Continuum vs. orthogonal
Psychologists have debated continuum (bipolar) vs. orthogonal (bivariate)
approaches to measuring attitudes and emotions (see Barrett & Russell,
1998; Cacioppo, et al., 1997)
Orthogonal approach
every relationship conveys both positive and negative aspects; therefore,
relationships should be measured using both positive and negative scales
(e.g., Rook, 1984, 1990; ASU studies)
Continuum approach
global judgments of like or dislike (e.g., Berscheid & Walster, 1969;
Homans, 1950, 1961; Tagiuri, 1958)



"Venkataramani, Vijaya" <[log in to unmask]> writes:
>*****  To join INSNA, visit http://www.sfu.ca/~insna/  *****
>
>Hi
>
>I am currently involved in social network research, specifically looking
>at negative ties among network members.In this regard, i had a few
>queries:
>
>1. Do respondents actually provide reliable data about negative ties? How
>can i minimize any social desirability issues?
>
> 2. I am running into some trouble getting field sites for my research as
>organizations are a little concerned about the fact that we would be
>asking employees about their negative ties, though they understand the
>value of the research.
>
>In this regard, i was wondering if someone could advise me about the kind
>of reciprocal benefit i could provide the organizations in return for
>using their field site. I may not be able to provide them with detailed
>information about the data collected without violating the privacy /
>confidentiality of responses. So, it would be great if someone who has
>done similar research could give me some suggestions.
>
>Thanks
>
>Vijaya Venkataramani
>Purdue University
>
>_____________________________________________________________________
>SOCNET is a service of INSNA, the professional association for social
>network researchers (http://www.sfu.ca/~insna/). To unsubscribe, send
>an email message to [log in to unmask] containing the line
>UNSUBSCRIBE SOCNET in the body of the message.
>



Giuseppe (Joe) Labianca
Assistant Professor of Organization and Management
Goizueta Business School
Emory University
1300 Clifton Road
Atlanta, GA 30322
Phone: (404) 727-7067
Fax: (404) 727-6663
[log in to unmask]

_____________________________________________________________________
SOCNET is a service of INSNA, the professional association for social
network researchers (http://www.sfu.ca/~insna/). To unsubscribe, send
an email message to [log in to unmask] containing the line
UNSUBSCRIBE SOCNET in the body of the message.

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008, Week 62
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTS.UFL.EDU

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager