مقاله سال ۲۰۱۷

Reflecting on the evolving nature of a network perspective on individual, group, organization and industry interaction, Parkhe, Wasserman, and Ralston (2006, p. 560) highlight that “networks are reshaping the global business architecture”. This is particularly evident within management research and practice where networks and relational capabilities offer a fundamental and inherent mechanism for organizations to engage and interact within and across the global marketplace (Gulati, Lavie, & Madhavan, 2011). For example, theoretical developments on business networks have significantly enlightened the network dimensions of market-based transactions (Anderson, Håkansson, & Johanson, 1994; Hägg & Johanson, 1982; Håkansson & Ford, 2002; Johanson & Vahlne, 2009; Monaghan, Gunnigle, & Lavelle, 2014; Wilkinson & Young, 2002). Increasingly, social network analysis (SNA) is applied as a methodological tool and convenient heuristic to map relationships and quantify engagement between interdependent actors, resulting in an array of research endorsing the theoretical and mathematical components within management specific literature (Borgatti & Foster, 2003). Despite this “progressive phase” of network analysis (Kilduff & Brass, 2010, p. 344), the complexity of research streams in which this technique has been developed – including economics, mathematics, sociology and industrial psychology – has produced an abundance of perspectives and approaches to network analysis. Thus, the learning associated with utilizing SNA is highly dependent on the capacity, competence and enthusiasm of researchers to engage with the existing variety of technical and theoretical reviews available. Consequently, herein lies the current gap in the literature.

The specialization of contemporary research within SNA has resulted in limited general material for a network analyst to develop a more inclusive understanding of how SNA has previously been used within management studies, what the main points are that must be considered before engaging in such a research project and where they can be addressed within the network study. Rather than engage in a technical, mechanical or theoretical analysis of network data, the purpose of this paper is to explore some of the fundamental practical aspects of network analysis, aimed at familiarizing researchers and practitioners with some decisions surrounding the structure, collection, handling and analysis of network data prior to embarking on some of the more detailed dimensions of the tool. First, this paper seeks to profile the practical complexities associated with utilizing network analysis within management research. Drawing upon established network research, we consider some of the core decisions required prior to engaging with or performing SNA. Our second research objective centers on the creation of a guiding framework for network analysts of any tenure to assist with implementation of this methodological approach. This framework presents some suggestions and probing questions for analysts to consider prior to initiating SNA research and during the process.1 The article is directed towards readers who seek to apply, analyze or interpret social network data yet are limited in their knowledge of the broader methodological implications and decisions inherent to SNA.

As the schism between technical reviews and theoretical metaanalysis represents a significant concern when first engaging with SNA (Cross, Kase, Kilduff, & King, 2013; Halinen & Törnroos, 2005), the importance of this paper rests first in providing a more feasible and tangible tool for researchers embarking on SNA. As such, the paper offers a navigating template for the significant body of material available on this technique and presents an initial framework by which researchers and practitioners can traverse the complex practical decisions associated with this methodology. As businesses increasingly seek efficient forms of identifying and understanding interactive patterns and phenomena both within and outside of the organization (Krackhardt & Hanson, 1993; Parise, Whelan, & Todd, 2015), in addition to exploring and capitalizing on business networks (Håkansson & Ford, 2002; Johanson & Vahlne, 2009; Monaghan et al., 2014; Wilkinson & Young, 2002), this research illustrates the utility of SNA in providing an accessible and nuanced heuristic for managers, businesses and researchers to explore formal and informal relational engagement between actors within a well-constructed research design. By nuanced heuristic, we refer to the capacity for SNA to offer an engaged mechanism and tool for analysts to gather insights on the relationships, interactions and connections within their team, organization or community (Anklam, 2007; Baker, 2000). Among others, information of this nature has been used in organizational and management studies to further understand elements of job performance, team dynamics, employee turnover, innovation and creativity, organizational structures and customer relationships (Borgatti & Foster, 2003; Borgatti & Halgin, 2011). A second contribution rests in advancing the discourse beyond earlier technical studies, such as those offered by Conway (2014), Carpenter, Li, and Jiang (2012), Halinen and Törnroos (2005) and Håkansson and Ford (2002). This paper certainly does not seek to negate seminal and specific SNA papers, but rather to supplement them by synthesizing some of the key decisions available to network analysts prior to engaging with theoretical constructs or technical data. Thus, following an introductory review on the discussion of SNA within management research, four key practical concerns are identified, which in turn facilitates a customized framework for social network analysts as they engage with this methodology.