The development of network organizations is increasingly necessary in a global information-oriented economy. The network organization is a highly decentralized and densely integrated social system that maximizes mutual influence and communication. An intervention to develop a network organization in the context of a merger conducted by a major multinational corporation is evaluated here, using a network analysis of sociometric survey data. The computer program, STRUCTURE, developed by Burt, was used to compute indexes of the structure of social influence. Repeated measures multivariate analysis of variance indicated a decrease over time in structural differences between hierarchy levels and between geographic divisions. These changes in social networks may be attributable to the organizational merger, particularly the intervention designed to facilitate that merger. Leadership style appeared to be associated in a reciprocal fashion with the structure of social influence. Network analysis may be a practical tool in structural and process approaches to organizational development, especially in network-style organizations.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Alba, R.
(1982). Taking stock of network analysis: A decade's results. Research in the Sociology of Organizations1, 339-374.
2.
Allen, S.
(1978, September). Organizational choices and general management influence networks in divisionalized companies. Academy of Management Journal, pp. 341-365.
3.
Arabie, P.
(1984). Validation of sociometric structure by data on individuals' attributes. Social Networks, 6, 373-403.
4.
Bachrach, S. B.
, & Lawler, E. J. (1982). Power and politics in organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
5.
Barnes, J. A.
(1972). Socialnetworks. Addison-Wesley Module Publication in Anthropology, 26, 1-29.
6.
Bartunek, J. M.
(1984). Changing interpretive schemes and organizational restructuring: The example of a religious order. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29, 355-372.
7.
Beer, M.
, & Walton, E. (1990). Developing the competitive organization: Interventions and strategies. American Psychologist, 45, 154-161.
8.
Bem, D. J.
(1972). Self perception theory. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 6). New York: Academic Press.
9.
Burns, T.
, & Stalker, G. M. (1961). The management of innovation. London: Tavistock
10.
Burt, R.
(1980). Models of network structure. Annual Review of Sociology, 6, 79-141.
11.
Burt, R.
(1982). Toward a structural theory of action. New York: Academic Press.
12.
Burt, R.
(1983a). Network data from archival records. In R. Burt & N. J. Minor (Eds.), Applied network analysis (pp. 158-175). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
13.
Burt, R.
(1983b). Network data from informant interviews. In R. Burt & N. J. Minor (Eds.), Applied network analysis (pp. 133-157). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
14.
Burt, R.
(1986a). The medical innovation network data (Preprint No. 109). New York: Columbia University, Center for Social Sciences, Research Program in Structural Analysis.
15.
Burt, R.
(1986b). STRUCTURE [Computer program]. New York: Columbia University, Center for the Social Sciences, Research Program in Structural Analysis.
16.
Collins, B. E.
, & Raven, B. H. (1969). Group structure: Attraction, coalitions, communication, and power. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (Vol. 4, p. 102-204). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
17.
Evan, W. M.
(1978). Interorganizational relations. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
18.
Festinger, L.
(1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Evanston, IL: Row & Peterson.
19.
Galbraith, J. R.
, & Kazanjian, R. K. (1988). Strategy, technology, and emerging organizational forms. In J. Hage (Ed.), Futures of organizations: Innovating to adapt strategy and human resources to rapid technological change (pp. 29-41). Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
20.
Granovetter, M.
(1973). Strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78, 1360-1380.
21.
Hage, J.
(1988). The pathways of evolution in organizations. In J. Hage (Ed.), Futures of organizations: Innovating to adapt strategy and human resources to rapid technological change (pp. 44-65). Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
22.
Houghton, J. R.
(1989, September 24). The age of hierarchy is over. New York Times, Sec. 3, p. 3.
23.
Kilmann, R. H.
(1989, June 18). Tomorrow's company won't have walls. New York Times, Sec. 3, p. 3.
24.
Knoke, D.
, & Burt, R. (1983). Prominence. In R. Burt & M. J. Minor (Eds.), Applied network analysis (pp. 195-222). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
25.
Lawrence, P.
, & Davis, S. (1978). Matrix. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
26.
Mintz, B.
, & Schwartz, M. (1980). Interlocking directorates and interest group formation. American Sociological Review, 45, 479-496.
27.
Perrow, C.
(1986). Complex organizations: A critical essay. New York: Random House.
28.
Powell, W. W.
(1987). Hybrid organizational arrangements: New form or transitional development? California Management Review, 30, 67-87.
29.
Powell, W. W.
(1990). Neither market nor hierarchy: Network forms of organization. Research in Organizational Behavior, 12, 295-336.
30.
Power, D. J.
(1988). Anticipating organization structures. In J. Hage (Ed.), Futures of organizations: Innovating to adapt strategy and human resources to rapid technological change (pp. 67-79). Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
31.
Prahalad, C. K.
, & Doz, Y. L. (1981). An approach to strategic control in MNCs. Sloan Management Review, 22, 5-13.
32.
Roethlisberger, F. J.
, & Dickson, W. J. (1939). Management and the worker. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
33.
Schein, E. H.
(1990). Organizational culture. American Psychologist, 45, 109-120.
34.
Schrader, C. B.
, Lincoln, J. R., & Hoffman, A. N. (1989). The network structures of organizations: Effects of task contingencies and distributional form. Human Relations, 42, 43-66.
35.
Tichy, N.
(1981). Networks in organizations. In P. C. Nystram & W. H. Starbuck (Eds.), Handbook of organizational design (Vol. 2). New York: Oxford University Press.
36.
Tichy, N.
, & Fombrun, C. (1979). Network analysis in organizationalsettings. Human Relations, 32, 923-965.
