Making Invisible Work Visible: Using Social Network Analysis to Support Strategic Collaboration
description
Transcript of Making Invisible Work Visible: Using Social Network Analysis to Support Strategic Collaboration
Making Invisible Work Visible: Using Social Network Analysis to Support Strategic
Collaboration
By Rob Cross, Stephen P. Borgatti and Andrew Parker
Research Motivation
• Informal networks are becoming more important as organizations become less hierarchical
• Informal networks can promote organizational flexibility, innovation, and efficiency
• A variety of factors can cause these informal networks to break-down, such as formal network structures, work processes, geographic dispersion, human resource management, leadership style, and culture.
Data
• Consortium of Fortune 500 companies and government agencies
• 40 informal networks from 23 different organizations
Use of Social Networks
• Social Network Analysis can supplement traditional organizational diagrams in understanding the networks that are important within an organization
• SNA is a useful tool for assessing and intervening at critical points in informal networks
Surveys
• The best way to begin a social network analysis is to conduct surveys
• 10-15 minute questionnaires on information and knowledge flows between members of the group
• Each member of the group is asked about the relationships they have with other members of the group
An Example of SNA
• An information sharing network is revealed to have 2 separate sub-groups
• These groups had developed due to common interests• Members acting as bottle-necks• To fix this, the manager started a series of white-
papers written by one member of each group, implemented projects that required the two units to work together, and added new communication forums
Result of Intervention
Effect of Intervention
• Began to sell more work that integrated the two group’s expertise
• Allowed for differentiation of their consultancy from other firms
Collaboration across Functional Boundaries
• In order to develop a network in which each unit understood what other units did enough to combine appropriate resources, the authors constructed a table of the percentages of collaborative relationships
Collaborate Table
Strategic Benefit
• One of the most important aspects of SNA is that not all relationships should be developed
• Time required to develop relationships is a scarce resource
• Therefore, one of the most important decisions is which relationships are strategically the most important to develop
Hierarchies
• One of the most important boundaries to informal networks is the traditional hierarchy within organization
• The authors studied 62 executives of an organization with 9 top executives
• This can be useful to discover potential biases from top executives
Diagram
SNA After Strategic Change Initiatives
• The authors studied a firm that was combining smaller groups into one larger global network
• The firm wanted members of different groups to work together better in this new strategic structure
• Three tightly-knit social groups remained despite the restructuring
• One division between groups was based on politics, the other two on geographic separation
Diagram
Results of the SNA
• Partner informed managers of the problem• Made more of an effort to integrate across
groups• Started a skill-profiling system and a virtual
environment• Face-to-face meetings were conducted to help
members of different groups meet each other• Several steps were taken to bridge the political
problem
Informal Networks: The Company Behind the Chart
By David Krackhardt and Jeffrey R. Hanson
Types of Networks
• Advice Network- can uncover political conflicts and failures at strategic objectives
• Trust network- can reveal the causes of non-routine problems
• Communication network- can identify gap in information flow, the inefficient use of resources, or the failure to generate new ideas
Steps to Analyzing Informal Networks
• Step 1: Conduct a survey• Step 2: Cross-checking the Answers• Step 3:Processing the Information with a SNA
program
Sample Survey Question
• Whom do you talk to every day?• Whom do you go to for help or advice at least
once a week?• With one day of training, whose job could you
step into?• Whom would you recruit to support a proposal of
yours that could be unpopular?• Whom would you trust to keep in confidence
your concerns about a work-related issue?
Differences between Types of Networks
• Often different types of networks can cause success or failure of strategic proposal
• Sometimes, a person can be an expert but not trusted
• Employees would then rely on this person for technical advice but not trust them personally.
Quality not Quantity
• The quality of communication is what is important, not the quantity of communication
• Nonhierarchical organizations in which communication occurs regardless of level are often more profitable
• Two-way communication and encouragement of communication can be more important than sending out more communications from higher levels of a hierarchy
• The most important factor is fit with strategic goals
Network Holes
• Imploded Relationships: groups do not speak to people outside of their group
• Irregular Communication Patterns: employees only speak with those outside of their group
• Fragile Structures: employees only speak to their group and 1 other group
• Holes in the Network: places where you would expect relationships but don’t find them
• Bow Ties: many are dependent on one employee not on each other.
Questions?
Thank you.