Structure, context, and centrality in interorganizational networks

https://doi.org/10.1016/0148-2963(90)90010-BGet rights and content

Abstract

This study explored the relationship among organization structure, context, and network centrality in four interorganization networks: 1) clients sent, 2) clients received, 3) director contracts, and 4) joint programs. Analyses covered 52 youth service delivery agencies in a large metropolitan area. Results indicated that formalization and organization size were positively related to centrality in the clients sent network, and organization age was positively associated with centrality in the joint programs and director contracts networks. Organization domain was also an important variable, as agencies with a high percentage of female clients were central in both the clients sent and clients received networks, while agencies with a high percentage of minority clients were central in the clients sent network. Overall, the results suggest that organization structure and context are important considerations in the study of network centrality.

References (35)

  • M. Aiken et al.

    Organizational Interdependence and Intraorganizational Structure

    American Sociological Review

    (1968)
  • H. Aldrich

    Organizations and Environments

    (1979)
  • H. Aldrich et al.

    Organization-set, Action-sets, and Networks: Making the Most of Simplicity

  • J.K. Benson

    The Interorganizational Network as a Political Economy

    Administrative Science Quarterly

    (1975)
  • D. Boje et al.

    Effects of Organizational Strategies and Constraints on Centrality and Attributions of Influence in Interorganizational Networks

    Administrative Science Quarterly

    (1981)
  • R.S. Burt

    Models of Network Structure

    Annual Review of Sociology

    (1980)
  • K. Cook

    Exchange and Power in Networks of Interorganizational Relations

    Sociological Quarterly

    (1977)
  • K. Cook et al.

    Power, Equity, and Commitment in Exchange Networks

    American Sociological Review

    (1978)
  • R. Emerson

    Power-dependence Relations

    American Sociological Review

    (1962)
  • J. Galaskiewicz

    Exchange Networks and Community Politics

    (1979)
  • R.H. Hall

    Organizations: Structure and Process

    (1982)
  • D. Knoke et al.

    Network Analysis

    (1982)
  • D. Knoke et al.

    A Block Model Analysis of Interorganizational Networks

    Sociology and Social Research

    (1979)
  • E.O. Laumann et al.

    Community Structure as Interorganizational Linkages

    Annual Review of Sociology

    (1978)
  • M. Lefton et al.

    Organizations and Clients: Lateral and Longitudinal Dimensions

    American Sociological Review

    (1966)
  • M. Lehman

    Coordinating Health Care: Explorations in Interorganizational Relations

    (1975)
  • S. Levine et al.

    Exchange as a Conceptual Framework for the Study of Interorganizational Networks

    Administrative Science Quarterly

    (1961)

    • Cited by (27)

    • Cross-departmental collaboration in one-stop service center for smart governance in China: Factors, strategies and effectiveness

      2018, Government Information Quarterly
      Citation Excerpt :

      The last section comprises implications and conclusions for governance. Cross-departmental collaboration in government has been studied for several decades, especially by western researchers (Alexer, 1993; Hoffman, Stearns, & Shrader, 1990; Lowndes & Skelcher, 1998; Sanchez, 2012; Weiss, 1987; Yang, Zheng, & Pardo, 2012). Existing literature provides insights on motivations for collaboration, factors that could promote or prohibit collaboration processes and collaboration strategies.

    • Cooperation by design: Structure and cooperation in interorganizational networks

      2005, Journal of Business Research

    • Managing networking

      1992, Scandinavian International Business Review

    • Exploring the Renewal of IT-enabled Resources from a Structural Perspective

      2023, Communications of the Association for Information Systems

    • Comparing protein–protein interaction networks of SARS-CoV-2 and (H1N1) influenza using topological features

      2022, Scientific Reports

    • How much do social connections matter in fundraising outcomes?

      2021, Financial Innovation
    View all citing articles on Scopus
    ∗

    The authors would like to thank James R. Lincoln, Ramon J. Aldag, and the anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments.

    View full text
    Copyright © 1990 Published by Elsevier Inc.