Discretion Within Constraint: Homophily and Structure in a Formal Organization

References

• Adams RB, Funk P (2012) Beyond the glass ceiling: Does gender matter? Management Sci. 58(2):219–235.Link, Google Scholar
• Adler PS, Goldoftas B, Levine DI (1999) Flexibility versus efficiency? A case study of model changeovers in the Toyota production system. Organ. Sci. 10(1):43–68.Link, Google Scholar
• Alderfer CP (1987) An intergroup perspective on group dynamics. , Lorsch JW, ed. Handbook of Organizational Behavior (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ), 190–222.Google Scholar
• Allen TJ (1977) Managing the Flow of Technology: Technology Transfer and the Dissemination of Technological Information Within the R&D Organization (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Aral S, Muchnik L, Sundararajan A (2009) Distinguishing influence-based contagion from homophily-driven diffusion in dynamic networks. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 106(51):21544–21549.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baron JN, Davis-Blake A, Bielby WT (1986) The structure of opportunity: How promotion ladders vary within and among organizations. Admin. Sci. Quart. 31(2):248–273.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bernard HR, Killworth PD, Sailer L (1981) Summary of research on informant accuracy in network data and the reverse small world problem. Connections 4(2):11–25.Google Scholar
• Bielby WT, Baron JN (1986) Men and women at work: Sex segregation and statistical discrimination. Amer. J. Sociol. 91(4):759–799.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Blau PM (1994) Structural Contexts of Opportunities (University of Chicago Press, Chicago).Google Scholar
• Blau PM, Schwartz JE (1984) Crosscutting Social Circles: Testing a Macrostructural Theory of Intergroup Relations (Academic Press, Orlando, FL).Google Scholar
• Borgatti SP, Cross R (2003) A relational view of information seeking and learning in social networks. Management Sci. 49(4):432–445.Link, Google Scholar
• Bossard JHS (1932) Residential propinquity as a factor in marriage selection. Amer. J. Sociol. 38(2):219–224.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brass DJ (1985) Men’s and women’s networks: A study of interaction patterns and influence in an organization. Acad. Management J. 28(2):327–343.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burt RS (1998) The gender of social capital. Rationality Soc. 10(1):5–46.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cairncross F (2001) The Death of Distance: How the Communications Revolution Is Changing Our Lives, new ed. (Harvard Business School Press, Boston).Google Scholar
• Cameron AC, Gelbach JB, Miller DL (2011) Robust inference with multi-way clustering. J. Bus. Econom. Statist. 29(2):238–249.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Casciaro T, Piskorski MJ (2005) Power imbalance, mutual dependence, and constraint absorption: A closer look at resource dependence theory. Admin. Sci. Quart. 50(2):167–199.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chandler AD (1962) Strategy and Structure: Chapters in the History of the Industrial Enterprise (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Cosslett SR (1981) Maximum likelihood estimator for choice-based samples. Econometrica 49(5):1289–1316.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eagly AH, Carli LL (2003) The female leadership advantage: An evaluation of the evidence. Leadership Quart. 14(6):807–834.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eckmann J-P, Moses E, Sergi D (2004) Entropy of dialogues creates coherent structures in e-mail traffic. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 101(40):14333–14337.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ely RJ (1994) The effects of organizational demographics and social identity on relationships among professional women. Admin. Sci. Quart. 39(2):203–238.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Feld SL (1981) The focused organization of social ties. Amer. J. Sociol. 86(5):1015–1035.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fernandez-Mateo I (2009) Cumulative gender disadvantage in contract employment. Amer. J. Sociol. 114(4):871–923.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Festinger L, Schachter S, Back K (1950) Social Pressures in Informal Groups: A Study of Human Factors in Housing (Harper, New York).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fischer CS (1982) To Dwell Among Friends: Personal Networks in Town and City (University of Chicago Press, Chicago).Google Scholar
• French MT, Maclean JC, Ettner SL (2008) Drinkers and bettors: Investigating the complementarity of alcohol consumption and problem gambling. Drug Alcohol Dependence 96(1–2):155–164.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Galbraith JR (1973) Designing Complex Organizations (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA).Google Scholar
• Galbraith JR (1994) Competing with Flexible Lateral Organizations, 2nd ed. (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA).Google Scholar
• Gefen D, Straub DW (1997) Gender differences in the perception and use of E-Mail: An extension to the technology acceptance model. MIS Quart. 21(4):389–400.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gibson DE, Lawrence BS (2010) Women’s and men’s career referents: How gender composition and comparison level shape career expectations. Organ. Sci. 21(6):1159–1175.Link, Google Scholar
• Goodreau SM, Kitts JA, Morris M (2009) Birds of a feather, or friend of a friend? Using exponential random graph models to investigate adolescent social networks. Demography 46(1):103–125.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gouriéroux C, Monfort A, Trognon A (1984) Pseudo maximum likelihood methods: Theory. Econometrica 52(3):681–700.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Groysberg B (2010) Chasing Stars: The Myth of Talent and the Portability of Performance (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gulati R, Puranam P (2009) Renewal through reorganization: The value of inconsistencies between formal and informal organization. Organ. Sci. 20(2):422–440.Link, Google Scholar
• Hackman JR, Oldham GR (1980) Work Redesign (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA).Google Scholar
• Han S-K (1996) Structuring relations in on-the-job networks. Soc. Networks 18(1):47–67.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hrebiniak LG, Joyce WF (1984) Implementing Strategy (Macmillan, New York).Google Scholar
• Ibarra H (1992) Homophily and differential returns: Sex differences in network structure and access in an advertising firm. Admin. Sci. Quart. 37(3):422–447.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ibarra H (1993) Personal networks of women and minorities in management: A conceptual framework. Acad. Management Rev. 18(1):56–87.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ibarra H (1995) Race, opportunity, and diversity of social circles in managerial networks. Acad. Management J. 38(3):673–703.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ibarra H (1997) Paving an alternative route: Gender differences in managerial networks. Soc. Psych. Quart. 60(1):91–102.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ibarra H, Smith-Lovin L (1997) New directions in social network research on gender and organizational careers. , Cooper CL, Jackson SE, eds. Creating Tomorrow’s Organizations: A Handbook for Future Research in Organizational Behavior (John Wiley & Sons, New York), 359–383.Google Scholar
• Imbens GW (1992) An efficient method of moments estimator for discrete choice models with choice-based sampling. Econometrica 60(5):1187–1214.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ingram P, Morris MW (2007) Do people mix at mixers? Structure, homophily, and the “life of the party”. Admin. Sci. Quart. 52(4):558–585.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Johnson R, Kovács B, Vicsek A (2012) A comparison of email networks and off-line social networks: A study of a medium-sized bank. Soc. Networks 34(4):462–469.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kalleberg AL, Knoke D, Marsden PV, Spaeth JL (1996) Organizations in America: Analyzing Their Structures and Human Resource Practices (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA).Google Scholar
• Kanter RM (1977) Men and Women of the Corporation (Basic Books, New York).Google Scholar
• Kaufman RL (2010) Race, Gender, and the Labor Market: Inequalities at Work (Lynne Rienner Publishers, Boulder, CO).Google Scholar
• Kaufman D, Sweet R (1974) Contrast coding in least squares regression analysis. Amer. Ed. Res. J. 11(4):359–377.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kenny DA, Kashy DA, Cook WL (2006) Dyadic Data Analysis (Guilford Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Killworth P, Bernard H (1976) Informant accuracy in social network data. Human Organ. 35(3):269–286.Crossref, Google Scholar
• King G, Zeng L (2001) Logistic regression in rare events data. Political Anal. 9(2):137–163.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kleinbaum AM (2012) Organizational misfits and the origins of brokerage in intra-firm networks. Admin. Sci. Quart. 57(4):1–45.Google Scholar
• Kleinbaum AM, Stuart TE (2013) Inside the black box of the corporate staff: Social networks and the implementation of corporate strategy. Strategic Management J., ePub ahead of print April 26.Google Scholar
• Kleinbaum AM, Stuart TE, Tushman ML (2009) Communication (and coordination?) in a modern, complex organization. Working paper, Tuck School of Business, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH.Google Scholar
• Kogut B, Zander U (1992) Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organ. Sci. 3(3):383–397.Link, Google Scholar
• Kono C, Palmer D, Friedland R, Zafonte M (1998) Lost in space: The geography of corporate interlocking directorates. Amer. J. Sociol. 103(4):863–911.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kossinets G, Watts DJ (2009) Origins of homophily in an evolving social network. Amer. J. Sociol. 115(2):405–450.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lancaster T, Imbens G (1996) Case-control studies with contaminated controls. J. Econometrics 71(1–2):145–160.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Laumann EO (1966) Prestige and Association in an Urban Community; an Analysis of an Urban Stratification System (Bobbs-Merrill, Indianapolis).Google Scholar
• Lazarsfeld PF, Merton RK (1954) Friendship as social process: A substantive and methodological analysis. , Berger M, Abel T, eds. Freedom and Control in Modern Society (Van Nostrand, New York), 18–66.Google Scholar
• Lewis K, Kaufman J, Gonzalez M, Wimmer A, Christakis N (2008) Tastes, ties, and time: A new social network data set using Facebook.com. Soc. Networks 30(4):330–342.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lin N (2001) Social Capital: A Theory of Social Structure and Action (Cambridge University Press, London).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lincoln JR, Miller J (1979) Work and friendship ties in organizations: A comparative analysis of relation networks. Admin. Sci. Quart. 24(2):181–199.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lindgren K-O (2010) Dyadic regression in the presence of heteroscedasticity—An assessment of alternative approaches. Soc. Networks 32(4):279–289.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Liu CC (2010) Essays on Network Antecedents in a Knowledge Production Context (Harvard University, Boston).Google Scholar
• Marmaros D, Sacerdote B (2006) How do friendships form? Quart. J. Econom. 121(1):79–119.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Marsden PV (1987) Core discussion networks of Americans. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 52(1):122–131.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Marsden PV (1988) Homogeneity in confiding relations. Soc. Networks 10(1):57–76.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Marsden PV (2005) Recent developments in network measurement. , Carrington PJ, Scott J, Wasserman S, eds. Models and Methods in Social Network Analysis (Cambridge University Press, New York), 8–30.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McGregor D (1960) The Human Side of the Enterprise (McGraw-Hill, New York).Google Scholar
• McGuire GM (2002) Gender, race, and the shadow structure. Gender Soc. 16(3):303–322.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McPherson JM, Smith-Lovin L (1987) Homophily in voluntary organizations: Status distance and the composition of face-to-face groups. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 52(3):370–379.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McPherson JM, Smith-Lovin L, Cook JM (2001) Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Rev. Sociol. 27(1):415–444.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mok D, Carrasco J-A, Wellman B (2010) Does distance still matter in the age of the internet? Urban Stud. 47(13):2747–2783.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Moody J, McFarland D, Bender-deMoll S (2005) Dynamic network visualization. Amer. J. Sociol. 110(4):1206–1241.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Quintane E, Kleinbaum AM (2011) Matter over mind? E-mail data and the measurement of social networks. Connections 31(1):22–46.Google Scholar
• Reagans R (2005) Preferences, identity, and competition: Predicting tie strength from demographic data. Management Sci. 51(9):1374–1383.Link, Google Scholar
• Reagans R (2011) Close encounters: Analyzing how social similarity and propinquity contribute to strong network connections. Organ. Sci. 22(4):835–849.Link, Google Scholar
• Reagans R, Zuckerman E, McEvily B (2004) How to make the team: Social networks vs. demography as criteria for designing effective teams. Admin. Sci. Quart. 49(1):101–133.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ridgeway CL (1997) Interaction and the conservation of gender inequality: Considering employment. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 62(2):218–235.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ruef M, Aldrich HE, Carter NM (2003) The structure of founding teams: Homophily, strong ties, and isolation among U.S. entrepreneurs. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 68(2):195–222.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Russell LB, Teutsch SM, Kumar R, Dey A, Milan E (2001) Preventable smoking and exercise-related hospital admissions: A model based on the NHEFS. Amer. J. Preventive Medicine 20(1):26–34.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shrum W, Cheek NHJrHunter SM (1988) Friendship in school: Gender and racial homophily. Sociol. Ed. 61(4):227–239.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Silva JMCS, Tenreyro S (2006) The log of gravity. Rev. Econom. Statist. 88(4):641–658.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Simmel G (1902) The Sociology of Georg Simmel [Reprinted 1950. Translated by Wolff KH. Free Press, Glencoe, IL.]Google Scholar
• Singh J, Hansen MT, Podolny JM (2010) The world is not small for everyone: Inequity in searching for knowledge in organizations. Management Sci. 56(9):1415–1438.Link, Google Scholar
• Soda G, Zaheer A (2012) A network perspective on organizational architecture: Performance effects of the interplay of formal and informal organization. Stragegic Management J. 33(6):751–771.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sorenson O, Stuart TE (2001) Syndication networks and the spatial distribution of venture capital investments. Amer. J. Sociol. 106(6):1546–1588.Crossref, Google Scholar
• South SJ, Bonjean CM, Markham WT, Corder J (1982) Social structure and intergroup interaction: Men and women of the federal bureaucracy. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 47(5):587–599.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Srivastava SB, Banaji MR (2011) Culture, cognition, and collaborative networks in organizations. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 76(2):207–233.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Taylor FW (1911) Scientific Management, 2nd ed. (Harper & Brothers, New York).Google Scholar
• Thomas DA (1990) The impact of race on managers’ experiences of developmental relationships (mentoring and sponsorship): An intra-organizational study. J. Organ. Behav. 11(6):479–492.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Thompson JD (1967) Organizations in Action: Social Science Bases of Administrative Theory, 2nd ed. (Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick, NJ).Google Scholar
• Turner AN, Lawrence PR (1965) Industrial Jobs and the Worker: An Investigation of Response to Task Attributes (Division of Research, Graduate School of Business Administration, Harvard University, Boston).Google Scholar
• Tushman ML, Nadler DA (1978) Information-processing as an integrating concept in organizational design. Acad. Management Rev. 3(3):613–624.Google Scholar
• Tzabbar D, Vestal A, Porter R, McMahon S (2010) The interdependencies of formal and informal structure and the exploration of new technological opportunities among geographically dispersed firms. Presentation, SMS 30th Annual International Conference, September 13, Strategic Management Society, Chicago.Google Scholar
• Wasserman S, Faust K (1994) Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications (Cambridge University Press, New York).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Williamson OE (1975) Markets and Hierarchies, Analysis and Antitrust Implications: A Study in the Economics of Internal Organization (Free Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Wooldridge JM (1997) Quasi-likelihood methods for count data. , Pesaran MH, Schmidt P, eds. Handbook of Applied Econometrics, Vol. 2 (Blackwell, Oxford, UK), 352–406.Google Scholar
• Wuchty S, Uzzi B (2011) Human communication dynamics in digital footsteps: A study of the agreement between self-reported ties and email networks. PLoS ONE 6(11):e26972.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yakubovich V, Shekshnia S (2010) Networks of task interdependence and promotion: A case of the Russian corporate bureaucracy. Wharton School working paper, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
• Zipf GK (1949) Human Behavior and the Principle of Least Effort; An Introduction to Human Ecology (Addison-Wesley Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar