Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Leveraging Networks May2013 for Skanska
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Leveraging Networks May2013 for Skanska


Published on

My slides used in an afternoon presentation on social networks and social network analysis for a group of managers at Skanska.

My slides used in an afternoon presentation on social networks and social network analysis for a group of managers at Skanska.

Published in: Business, Technology, Education

1 Comment
  • Thanks for sharing. I've been building a library of articles about network analysis and have had interns helping me map my networks over the past few years. See the group at
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

No notes for slide
  • Networks find everywhere… From Fas.research at Where do we find networks? physics, chemistry, biology : network laws of physics, animal food chains, metabolic networks of cells, neural networks of brain… technology, information technology : phone networks, information networks, railway networks… communication, sociology : communication networks, social networks, relationship networks… mathematics : network theory, graph theory… management, economics : networked enterprise, network strategy, supplier network… It ’ s a small (but complex) world… Better understanding of networks helps us in the modern world, as more complex phenomena demand faster reactivity (and preferably proactivity) every day Networks are everywhere – organizations are networks as well Every one of us is a part of a global network that connects all people
  • Refer to social networks here One of first Jacob Levy Moreno in the 1930s in attempt to quantify social relationships. Based on matrix algebra. Advanced statistics… Nodes can be people, departments, or organizations Networks consist of links that form a structure Links between nodes have different purposes , e.g., task or general advice, expertise, strategic information, navigating the organization (procedures, know-who, etc.) Links can be one or two directional Links can be both formal and informal Links can have different strengths
  • A summary of the progress of social networks and social network analysis has been written by Linton Freeman. [7] Precursors of social networks in the late 1800s include Émile Durkheim and Ferdinand Tönnies . Tönnies argued that social groups can exist as personal and direct social ties that either link individuals who share values and belief ( gemeinschaft ) or impersonal, formal, and instrumental social links ( gesellschaft ). Durkheim gave a non-individualistic explanation of social facts arguing that social phenomena arise when interacting individuals constitute a reality that can no longer be accounted for in terms of the properties of individual actors. He distinguished between a traditional society – "mechanical solidarity" – which prevails if individual differences are minimized, and the modern society – "organic solidarity" – that develops out of cooperation between differentiated individuals with independent roles. Georg Simmel , writing at the turn of the twentieth century, was the first scholar to think directly in social network terms. His essays pointed to the nature of network size on interaction and to the likelihood of interaction in ramified, loosely-knit networks rather than groups (Simmel, 1908/1971). After a hiatus in the first decades of the twentieth century, three main traditions in social networks appeared. In the 1930s, J.L. Moreno pioneered the systematic recording and analysis of social interaction in small groups, especially classrooms and work groups ( sociometry ), while a Harvard group led by W. Lloyd Warner and Elton Mayo explored interpersonal relations at work. In 1940, A.R. Radcliffe-Brown 's presidential address to British anthropologists urged the systematic study of networks. [8] However, it took about 15 years before this call was followed-up systematically. Social network analysis developed with the kinship studies of Elizabeth Bott in England in the 1950s and the 1950s–1960s urbanization studies of the University of Manchester group of anthropologists (centered around Max Gluckman and later J. Clyde Mitchell ) investigating community networks in southern Africa, India and the United Kingdom. Concomitantly, British anthropologist S.F. Nadel codified a theory of social structure that was influential in later network analysis. [9] In the 1960s-1970s, a growing number of scholars worked to combine the different tracks and traditions. One group was centered around Harrison White and his students at the Harvard University Department of Social Relations: Ivan Chase, Bonnie Erickson, Harriet Friedmann, Mark Granovetter, Nancy Howell, Joel Levine, Nicholas Mullins, John Padgett, Michael Schwartz and Barry Wellman. Also independently active in the Harvard Social Relations department at the time were Charles Tilly, who focused on networks in political and community sociology and social movements, and Stanley Milgram, who developed the "six degrees of separation" thesis. [10] Mark Granovetter and Barry Wellman are among the former students of White who have elaborated and popularized social network analysis. [11] Significant independent work was also done by scholars elsewhere: University of California Irvine social scientists interested in mathematical applications, centered around Linton Freeman, including John Boyd, Susan Freeman, Kathryn Faust, A. Kimball Romney and Douglas White; quantitative analysts at the University of Chicago, including Joseph Galaskiewicz, Wendy Griswold, Edward Laumann, Peter Marsden, Martina Morris, and John Padgett; and communication scholars at Michigan State University, including Nan Lin and Everett Rogers. A substantively-oriented University of Toronto sociology group developed in the 1970s, centered on former students of Harrison White: S.D. Berkowitz, Harriet Friedmann, Nancy Leslie Howard, Nancy Howell, Lorne Tepperman and Barry Wellman, and also including noted modeler and game theorist Anatol Rapoport.In terms of theory, it critiqued methodological individualism and group-based analyses, arguing that seeing the world as social networks offered more analytic leverage. [12]
  • Start at 10:06 start and then to 15.44 46% of variation in how many friends you have is explained by your genes – some born shy and some gregarious. 47% of variation in whether your friends know each other has to do with your genes. So do people knit networks of those around them or not…. 30% of variation in whether in middle or on edge of network has to do with your genes.
  • RT: Here is a quotation from Pierre Levy, a researcher who studies collective intelligence, or …. He says, ”No one knows……”, but I have adapted this to be that “all knowledge resides in networks”. What good is knowledge if you cannot access it? Knowledge is created and transferred through networks. How many of you have heard of six degrees of separation? (raise hands)…this means that we are collected to all other human beings on the face of the planet through six links, where a link is from me to person x in audience. Thus, each of us actually has access to all knowledge and resources that exist. (Next slide) mobile phone, internet, here could have farmer in Asia, President Obama, Zlatan, Pierre Lévy, Collective Intelligence: Mankind's Emerging World in Cyberspace , 1997 My example of how this presentation was made. Asked a question on Socnet and received many good answers with people ’s presentations and links to interesting sources
  • Large majority of work done through informal networks, some even say approx 80%.
  • Rob Cross, Nitin Nohria and Andrew Parker, Six Myths About Informal Networks -- and How to Overcome Them, Sloan Management Review, 2002 Most often managers do not know what going on. Moreover, we do not know what going on in our network beyond our first set of contacts.
  • First, the ONA identified mid-level managers that were critical in terms of information flow within the group. A particular surprise came from the very central role that Cole played in terms of both overall information flow within the group and being the only point of contact between members of the production division and the rest of the network. If he were hired away, the efficiency of this group as a whole would be significantly impacted as people in the informal network re-established important informational relationships. Simply categorizing various informational requests that Cole received and then allocating ownership of these informational or decision domains to other executives served to both unburden Cole and make the overall network more responsive and robust. Second, the ONA helped to identify highly peripheral people that essentially represented untapped expertise and underutilized resources for the group. In particular, it became apparent that many of the senior people had become too removed from the day-to-day operations of this group. For example, the most senior person (Jones) was one of the most peripheral in the informal network. This is a common finding. As people move higher within an organization their work begins to entail more administrative tasks that makes them both less accessible and less knowledgeable about the day-to-day work of their subordinates. However, in this case our debrief session indicated that Jones had become too removed and his lack of responsiveness frequently held the entire network back when important decisions needed to be made. Third, the ONA also demonstrated the extent to which the production division (the sub-group on the top of the diagram) had become separated from the overall network. Several months prior to this analysis these people had been physically moved to a different floor in the building. Upon reviewing the network diagram, many of the executives realized that this physical separation had resulted in loss of a lot of the serendipitous meetings that occurred when they were co-located. Structured meetings were set up to help avoid operational problems the group had been experiencing due to this loss of communication between production and the rest of the network.
  • Can use this to look at one organizational unit, this picture shows the programmers of the stockholm office of one IT multinational. See that well-connected. Good knowledge flows here as well. The Icon Stockholm programmer community was very well connected, indicating a high degree of knowledge flow. But I use this example, bc want to illustrate key players in this network. They are the central connectors. Central information source for everyone in network. In most cases, these individuals are not formally designated go-to people in unit. Provide help or pointers to others if can ’t help. In many cases these individuals are high performers. Interestingly when we showed this picture to management, they knew of three of these but the fourth one was a total surprise. Interesting bc this person was different from mgt, woman programmer. Challenge with these individuals is that even though recognized by their colleagues, often their efforts go unrecognized and unrewarded, yet spend a good amount of time filling this task. Organizations use different kinds of rewards, nominated for best helper, one example is bank that changed its bonus scheme rewarded individuals for their ability to improve communication within unit, to be connectors based on evaluations by fellow employees. McK in semi-annual evaluation process. Mostly positive roles but these individuals can also play power games, using connecting role for private benefit, pitting networks against each other, hoarding information. Sometimes even people just overloaded . Found that this person was a bottleneck, while many people went to this person for help, could not help everyone, so people frustrated. Think about how design teams or redesign jobs, rotating people also. One organization conducted analysis and restaffed teams combining members of both networks. If overloaded, can implement mailing lists, discussion boards to try to reduce workload on central connector Bottlenecks continue to create problems when trying to implement change bc people continue to go to them.
  • How well members of this organization are aware of each other ’ s skills and capabilities? Mari Mattsson, Master's Thesis. Transactive Memory - "know-who" as resource in work organization. 2004
  • Here show the multinational ’s networks of programmers. While large office of Stockholm was very well connected, c an see with this that many isolated islands of competence. Even though management spent considerable effort on IT systems to get people to communicate across units, very few doing so. However, we can see few individuals who did act as boundary spanners. These individuals serve as conduits of information between units. Rarely many boundary spanners in an organization. Difficult to become part of network across organization, time consuming, personality traits. Important because bring together different kinds of knowledge. Mgt often does not appreciate these inds. Have to spend considerable time maintaining network. Organizational stress because sitting often between two areas, different demands, etc. Or overload. To our surprise, after interviewing several key people in the community, we found that the boundary spanners, known as global advisors, were more information bottlenecks than connection facilitators. Are they making the right connections? Are they connected to connectors in own and other networks? But what happens if these individuals leave organization? Should reward individuals and acknowledge what doing. One company performed analysis and discovered who these boundary spanners are and helped them further develop their networks, also greater bonuses Can design work processes to bring individuals together. In this example, these inds talked with one another because the two in SF had been rotated from the Stockholm office.
  • If we return to our Stockholm office of programmers, I found that some of these communicated to a high degree with others outside of their firm. Some serve as experts in org, but do not connect a lot with others . story about programmer in SF, easier and faster to go outside and ask question than to bother person at next desk. But why else are these people on periphery? What doing? Could be new to organization, Interested in staying on ” bleeding edge ” . Organization have old friends there. Electronic network – embarassed in asking question internally. No one knows your a monkey on the internet. Many managers want to bring these people into the organization. Some may want to, e.g., those who new. But these individuals might not want to be brought into the group. Some want to stay at the cutting edge of their field, demands that they spend a lot of time in outside networks. Others may not be able to due to personal reasons, family, etc. Some organizations try to bring in these individuals by asking to attend internal events, be on committees, etc. But this may frustrate them. Role conflict, increased stress
  • Here I would like to show the results of a study in the construction industry with colleague, Andy Schenkel. This illustrates how two departments can have completely different informal networks and connectedness. The one to left did not meet the structural properties of a community, while the one to the right did . As you can visually see D epartment 1 is disconnected no clear core or periphery not particularly dense In contrast, D epartment 2 is well connected has a core with numbers 77 and 82 forming it and a periphery it also appears to be dense
  • While research that shows this relationship, thought it would be best to show what I have found in my research. Here have rd operations of three multinationals, Xerox, Ericsson, and HP. Found that HP had highest of three in terms of perf indicators that looked at. Can even talk about regional level – silicon valley vs rte 128 in Boston.
  • Did some research in which HP one of companies. Found that this company really understood the importance of informal networks both in terms of ” managing ” the informal structure but also in terms of the visionary organization. Interestingly, HP doing network maps based on email communication. Would like to do something similar here.
  • Source: There is a structured way of going about ” managing ” informal networks. Today share with you some of the findings from my research and from the gurus in the US. Identify informal network where effective collaboration adn kn sharing has sig impact on organization ’ s operations and strategy. So many networks out there but you don ’ t need to understand all of them. Good for up to 50 individuals, then should look at sub-networks Simple, 10-15 minutes to do, make list of people and ask all to characterize relationship with one another Make sure think through sensitivity of issues, do pretest Uncover networks Identify which networks are important to understand E.g., product development, merger integration Collect network data E.g., observe, interview people, conduct questionnaire Ask appropriate questions, e.g., advice, trust, innovation Analyze the causes of fragmented networks Leadership style, office layout, virtual work, politics, knowledge sharing attitudes, workflow processes, job descriptions Improve connectedness and u nplug bottlenecks Reevaluate formal structure, e.g., team desi gn, roles Rethink work processes Reassign tasks, rotate individuals, s hift responsibilities Are central connectors hoarding info? Is unit too isolated? Are boundary spanners talking with right people? Is unit losing technical expertise? Think about how design teams or redesign jobs, rotating people also. Restaff teams to override hoarding connectors. One organization conducted analysis and restaffed teams combining members of both networks. If overloaded, can implement mailing lists, discussion boards to try to reduce workload on central connector Shift responsibilities, Put in mailing list, discussion boards, socnet example
  • Interesting to think that just a few years ago, everyone was saying get people together informally, create venues for them to meet. But research in US has found that need to do more than random interventions. This not enough to align with organizational goals. Yes, this gets inds meeting, but may result in coups or negative spirals if mgt does not understand them.
  • Cross, Intro to ONA Identify a strategically important group. The first step is to identify a group within the organization where investments made to improve collaboration have the potential to yield a significant payback either strategically or operationally. We typically look for groups crossing functional, physical, hierarchical and organizational lines because networks often fragment at these junctures. 2. Assess meaningful and actionable relationships. The second step is to identify relationships that will meaningfully reveal a group's effectiveness as well as be actionable for managers once results are disclosed. Most companies are keenly interested in work-related collaboration. As a result, we almost always map information flow. We can also look at relationships that reveal the information sharing potential of a network, decision-making or power relations, or those that reveal well-being and supportiveness in a network such as friendship or trust networks. Organizational network information can be obtained in a variety of ways, from tracking e-mails to observing people over time. Often the most efficient means is to administer a 10-20 minute survey designed to assess relationships within and outside of a group. 3. Visually and quantitatively analyze results. Once the data have been collected, it can be analyzed using a network software package. There are a variety of different packages available, some of which combine drawing functionality with quantitative analysis and some of which specialize in one or the other. For more information on visual assessment see the interpreting a network diagram section. 4. Create meaningful feedback sessions. We typically conduct feedback sessions in two phases. In the first half of the workshop, we present an overview of network analysis to orient the participants, and then provide a summary presentation highlighting important points from the analysis of the specific group. The second half of the workshop consists of breakout sessions with smaller groups that brainstorm ways to promote appropriate connectivity and ensure that organizational design, culture and leadership will not push the network back to ineffective patterns. These subgroups then debrief the larger group, and ideas are catalogued for action planning. In this process, it is always important to focus on what can be done to improve the effectiveness of the group. Rather than questioning why someone or some department is peripheral or central, it is more constructive to focus on how the organization can overcome unproductive patterns. 5. Assess progress and effectiveness. Conducting an organizational analysis of a group indicates the level of connectivity only at a specific point in time. Repeating this process after six to nine months can reveal whether appropriate change has occurred in the network. It is also a good idea to track objective measures of performance over time.
  • Rob Cross, Nitin Nohria and Andrew Parker, Six Myths About Informal Networks -- and How to Overcome Them, Sloan Management Review, 2002
  • Picture courtesy of Richard McDermott, Text from Steve Borgatti on social networks, National Academy of Science Presentation, 2005, FAS.Research ( The availability of resources (money, knowledge, relationships) is determined by where one stands, which position one assumes. For the costs of -access to these resources (= the costs of a “ link ” ) as well as the yields to be expected are also defined by the position in the network and by the general structure of the network. This is the central economic and business-related message of network analysis. The second message in this context is that the methods of network analysis can be used to measure and depict both dimensions (position and structure) in quantitative terms. Social capital also reveals both of these dimensions which must also be taken into account in a SWOT analysis based on the methods of social network analysis. The possibilities of added value, of innovation, chances for successful search processes for better solutions as well as the costs of adaptation to changes are distributed differently for each actor within one and the same network. This is not just because each actor assumes a different position and thus the costs of access to the limited resources vary, but also because with each position the immediate environment changes. Thus the character of the network (the “ network profile ” ) is a different one from the local perspective of the actor. Each actor in the network finds a different space of possibilities and has better or worse access to the existing resources by virtue of his relationships to the other actors. The network thus creates the social infrastructure of the opportunities offered to an actor. Networks – relationships iwth others, Political, economical social relationship All have relationships with others, we are all embedded in nws, We retrieve information and knowledge to arrange our lives Decide on success of our activities SNA Networks and underlying relationships – network analysis – Talk about unique relationships that make each individual. Here is a network - can be medicament, interlocking directors of companies. Network is system of relationships Look at people and re Have to look beyond your friends, who are their friends and relatinoshsip
  • But avoid becoming a bottleneck!
  • Kenneth Lay delegated responsibility to those in his old boys network – failed to listen to someone outside the club – Sherron Watkins.
  • Speaker notes As a result, we are seeing significant pressure being put on traditional forms of organizing. On the left is what we are used to thinking about when we speak about organizations. A formal organization - a hierarchy in which information and knowledge goes up and down through the formal lines of an organization. Work tasks are broken down and coordinated through formal processes. However, research has shown that the large majority of work is actually done through informal networks – some say even 80% in knowledge-intensive organizations which is what we see on the right hand side. Here we have mapped the informal or social organization within one organization we were researching - how many of you have seen one of these sociograms or network diagrams before? This is what my research focuses on – investigating knowledge flows through social networks. In this diagram you can see the dots or nodes are individuals and the lines are the knowledge flows between these individuals. And this is becoming of increasing importance to understand and leverage these informal or social networks as the digital natives continue to enter the workforce – bringing with them their way of solving problems, organizing and learning. (Next slide) Screen shots: revolving social media sites and pictures of digital natives Other notes Org on the left is Built around the expert – put the expert in the box But in this new social organization – Large majority of work done through informal networks, some even say approx 80%. Important to understand both these worlds and how relate to one another… Suggests that as much as 90% of information that people take action on comes from people in their own network – Cross dissertation experts are all over the place and you need to find where the expertise lies in the org and how to connect these individuals
  • Transcript

    • 1. Leveraging Networks forLeveraging Networks forImproved PerformanceImproved PerformanceDr. Robin Teigland, akaDr. Robin Teigland, akaKarinda Rhode in SLStockholm School of EconomicsStockholm School of May 2013May
    • 2. Who am I? (LinkedIn Inmaps)Who am I? (LinkedIn Inmaps)22SSEIFLSwedishIndustryResearchWhartonStanfordTietoMcKinsey
    • 3. TodayToday’s discussion’s discussionBackgroundBackground Organizational network analysisOrganizational network analysis Personal network analysisPersonal network analysis33
    • 4. 44Everyone is talking about networksEveryone is talking about networksNationalInnovationNetworksFormalNetworksEntrepreneurialNetworksFacebook.LinkedIn,Twitter RegionalNetworksInfrastructureNetworksSocialNetworksFAS.researchElectronicNetworksInformalNetworksNetworksof PracticeNetworkedorganization
    • 5. What is a network?What is a network?A set of actors connected by tiesA set of actors connected by ties•Ties/LinksTies/Links−Knowledge, trust,Knowledge, trust,team, sit by, dislike,, sit by, dislike, etc.−Alliance, customer,Alliance, customer,investment, etc.investment, etc.Tie•Actors/NodesActors/Nodes−IndividualsIndividuals−Teams,Teams,organizations, etc.organizations, etc.Actor55
    • 6. Social network analysis has a long historySocial network analysis has a long historyand is based on matrix algebra and graph theoryand is based on matrix algebra and graph theory66
    • 7. Hidden influence of social networksHidden influence of social networks77 peopleIn between peopleUnhappy peopleChristakis & Fowler, 2011
    • 8. ””No one knows everything,No one knows everything,everyone knows something,everyone knows something,all knowledge resides in humanity.all knowledge resides in humanity.””networksnetworksAdapted from Lévy 1997Six degrees ofSix degrees ofseparationseparation- Milgram, 1967- Milgram, 1967
    • 9. TodayToday’s discussion’s discussionBackgroundBackground Organizational network analysisOrganizational network analysis Personal network analysisPersonal network analysis99
    • 10. 1010Uncovering networks in an organizationUncovering networks in an organizationFormal organization Informal organizationTeigland et al. 2005
    • 11. 1111Myths about networksMyths about networks I already know what is going on in my network.I already know what is going on in my network. We canWe can’’t do much to help informal networks.t do much to help informal networks. To build networks, you have to communicateTo build networks, you have to communicatemore.more.Adapted from Cross et al. 2002
    • 12. What do you notice about the informal network?What do you notice about the informal network?1212Cross, Introduction to organizational network analysisCross, Introduction to organizational network analysis
    • 13. Central connectors within one locationCentral connectors within one locationBottleneck Teigland 1998Surprise!!Stockholm1313
    • 14. 1414With which colleagues do you discuss everyday technical issues /work-related problems at least once a week?Schenkel & Teigland 2011Red=MaleBlue=Female=Left org
    • 15. 1515With which colleagues do you discuss exciting new ideas andbetter ways of getting things done?Schenkel & Teigland 2011Red=MaleBlue=Female=Left org
    • 16. ”Birds of a feather flock together”“Lika barn leka bäst”People find similar people attractive and developrelations with people like themselvesOur networks tend to be homogeneousand not heterogeneousMarsden 1987, Burt 1990Marsden 1987, Burt 1990 1717
    • 17. StockholmLondonBrusselsHelsinkiMadridCopenhagenBoundary spanners between locationsBoundary spanners between locationsTransferred fromStockholmTeigland 1998San Francisco1818
    • 18. 1919Proximal collaborationProximal collaborationWhen people are more than 50 feetWhen people are more than 50 feetapart, the likelihood of themapart, the likelihood of themcollaborating more than once acollaborating more than once aweek is less than 10%.week is less than 10%.- Allen 1984
    • 19. 2222What is the relationshipWhat is the relationshipbetween networks andbetween networks andperformance?performance?
    • 20. 2323BATwo individuals with the same number ofTwo individuals with the same number ofcontacts…contacts…
    • 21. ……but with very different access to resourcesbut with very different access to resourcesBA2424
    • 22. Network structure affects performanceNetwork structure affects performance2525Division 1Division 1 Division 2Division 2Improved efficiencyover timeStagnant performanceover timeSchenkel & Teigland 2008Schenkel & Teigland 2008Two divisions within Sundlink (Öresund Bridge)Two divisions within Sundlink (Öresund Bridge)
    • 23. 2828““Managing” networks in your organizationManaging” networks in your organizationBefore AfterAnklam & Welch 20051. Uncover networks2. Analyze networks3. Improve connectedness
    • 24. Informal networks in your organizationInformal networks in your organization Reflect on your organizationReflect on your organization− What informal network would you like to learn more about?What informal network would you like to learn more about? What do you think this informal network looks like?What do you think this informal network looks like?− Overarching structure?Overarching structure?− Key players: Central connectors, boundary spanners,Key players: Central connectors, boundary spanners,peripheral players?peripheral players? What do you think needs to be done to improveWhat do you think needs to be done to improveperformance, e.g., knowledge flows?performance, e.g., knowledge flows?− How would you like to do this?How would you like to do this?3030
    • 25. Conduct your own ONAConduct your own ONA1.1. Uncover strategically important networksUncover strategically important networks− Where is collaboration generally poor?Where is collaboration generally poor?AcrossAcross functional, physical, hierarchical, organizational lines?functional, physical, hierarchical, organizational lines?− What relationships would you like to uncover?What relationships would you like to uncover?Information flow, knowledge sharing, trust, decision-making?Information flow, knowledge sharing, trust, decision-making?1.1. Collect and analyze dataCollect and analyze data− How would you like to collect data?How would you like to collect data?E.g., email, survey, interview, observationE.g., email, survey, interview, observation− How often do you plan to collect data?How often do you plan to collect data?1.1. Improve connectednessImprove connectedness− How would you like to provide feedback to theHow would you like to provide feedback to theorganization?organization? 3131Cross, Introduction to organizational network analysisCross, Introduction to organizational network analysis
    • 26. Some questions to askSome questions to ask CommunicationCommunication: How often do you talk with the: How often do you talk with thefollowing people regarding (topic x)?following people regarding (topic x)? InformationInformation: Who do you typically seek work-related: Who do you typically seek work-relatedinformation from?information from? Problem-solvingProblem-solving: Who do you typically turn to for: Who do you typically turn to forhelp in thinking through a new or challenginghelp in thinking through a new or challengingproblem?problem? KnowKnow: How well do you understand this person: How well do you understand this person’s’sknowledge and skills?knowledge and skills? AccessAccess: Who is generally accessible to you within a: Who is generally accessible to you within asufficient amount of time to help solve a problem?sufficient amount of time to help solve a problem?3232Cross et al 2002Cross et al 2002
    • 27. Analyze and visualize dataAnalyze and visualize data3333
    • 28. Analyze and visualize dataAnalyze and visualize data3434NodeXL:
    • 29. Knowledge sharing across client teamsKnowledge sharing across client teams3535
    • 30. Actions•Identifying overly connected people•Bridging invisible network silos•Creating awareness of expertisedistributed in the network•Identifying and drawing in peripheralnetwork membersU.S.BrazilAngolaSaudiArabiaCanadaU.K.NigeriaU.S.Gulf ofMexicoBrazilAngolaUKCanadaSaudi ArabiaNigeriaU.S.BrazilAngolaSaudiArabiaCanadaU.K.NigeriaU.S.Gulf ofMexicoBrazilAngolaUKCanadaSaudi ArabiaNigeriaU.S.BrazilAngolaSaudiArabiaCanadaU.K.NigeriaU.S.BrazilAngolaSaudiArabiaCanadaU.K.NigeriaU.S.Gulf ofMexicoBrazilAngolaUKCanadaSaudi ArabiaNigeriaObtaining benefits of scale and lateral coordinationObtaining benefits of scale and lateral coordinationthrough communitiesthrough communitiesGulf ofMexicoBrazilAngolaUKCanadaSaudiArabiaNigeriaGulf ofMexicoBrazilAngolaUKCanadaSaudiArabiaNigeriaBusiness results•Lowered customer dissatisfaction by 24%•Reduced cost of poor quality by 66%•Increased new product revenue by 22%•Improved operational productivity bymore than 10%ONA results•Cohesion – average # steps for eachperson to get to another – improvedby 25%Cross 2010Cross 2010
    • 31. Informal networks in your organizationInformal networks in your organization Reflect on your organizationReflect on your organization− What informal network would you like to learn more about?What informal network would you like to learn more about? What do you think this informal network looks like?What do you think this informal network looks like?− Overarching structure?Overarching structure?− Key players: Central connectors, boundary spanners,Key players: Central connectors, boundary spanners,peripheral players?peripheral players? What do you think needs to be done to improveWhat do you think needs to be done to improveperformance, e.g., knowledge flows?performance, e.g., knowledge flows?− How would you like to do this?How would you like to do this?3737
    • 32. 3838Myths and reality checksMyths and reality checks I already know what is going on in my network.Those who think they know their network thebest are usually the ones who know the least. We can’t do much to help informal networks.Informal networks can be “managed” throughchanging the organizational context. To build networks, you have to communicate more.Networks can be strategically developed.Adapted from Cross et al. 2002
    • 33. 3939
    • 34. Importing Email to NodeXLImporting Email to NodeXL4040
    • 35. Help with NodeXLHelp with NodeXL Analyzing Social Media Networks with NodeXL:Analyzing Social Media Networks with NodeXL:Insights from a Connected WorldInsights from a Connected World− Book: Online:− Slides:
    • 36. TodayToday’s discussion’s discussionBackgroundBackground Organizational network analysisOrganizational network analysis Personal network analysisPersonal network analysis4242
    • 37. 4343So, what does this mean for you? An actor’s position in a social network, i.e.,social capital, determines in part the actor’sopportunities and constraintsCasper & Murray 2002Casper & Murray 2002Germanbiotechscientists
    • 38. Bridging unconnected groups brings advantagesBridging unconnected groups brings advantages•More rapid promotions•Greater career mobility•Higher salaries•More adaptable to changing environmentsBrass, Burt, Podolny & Baron, Sparrowe et al, Gargiulo & BenassiBrass, Burt, Podolny & Baron, Sparrowe et al, Gargiulo & Benassi 4444
    • 39. Avoid creating insular networksAvoid creating insular networks 4545
    • 40. Develop three forms of networkingDevelop three forms of networking4646OperationalOperational PersonalPersonal StrategicStrategicPurpose Getting work doneefficientlyEnhancing personaland professionaldevelopmentDeveloping andachieving futureprioritiesMembers Mostly internalcontacts andfocused on currentdemandsMostly externalcontacts andfocused on currentand future interestsBoth internal andexternal contactsand focused onfutureNetworkattributesDepth throughbuilding strongworkingrelationshipsBreadth throughreaching out tocontacts who canrefer you to othersLeverage throughcreating inside-outside linksIbarra & Hunter, HBR Jan 2007Ibarra & Hunter, HBR Jan 2007
    • 41. Build relationships with peopleBuild relationships with peopleat all hierarchical levelsat all hierarchical levelsLook for complementary skillsLook for complementary skillswhile maintaining a balance!while maintaining a balance!Cross, Parise, & Weiss 2006Cross, Parise, & Weiss 2006Higher: Help with making decisions,Higher: Help with making decisions,acquiring resources, developing politicalacquiring resources, developing politicalawareness, explaining organizationalawareness, explaining organizationalactivities beyond local settingactivities beyond local settingEqual: Help brainstorm and provideEqual: Help brainstorm and providespecific help, support, and neededspecific help, support, and neededinformationinformationLower: Provide best sources of technicalLower: Provide best sources of technicalinformation and expertiseinformation and expertise4747
    • 42. Tools to analyze one’s networksTools to analyze one’s networks FacebookFacebook− TouchGraph Facebook BrowserTouchGraph Facebook Browser LinkedInLinkedIn−
    • 43. Analyze your networksAnalyze your networks
    • 44. Leadership moving forward……Leadership moving forward……HierarchyHierarchyLinear, static, process-Linear, static, process-based organizationbased organizationHeterarchyHeterarchyDynamic, integratedDynamic, integratedcollaboration networkscollaboration networksTeigland 2010
    • 45. Karinda RhodeKarinda Rhodeaka Robin Teiglandaka Robin Lindholm, MetroPhoto:NordenskiöldPhoto:LindqvistIf you love knowledge,set it free…