Bridging Cultural Holes in Organizations: The Dynamic Structure of Social Networks and Organizational Vocabularies Within and Across Subunits

References

• Abbott A (1988) The System of Professions: An Essay on the Division of Expert Labor (University of Chicago Press, Chicago).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Abrahamson E, Hambrick DC (1997) Attentional homogeneity in industries: The effect of discretion. J. Organ. Behav. 18(S1):513–532.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aiken LS, West SG (1991) Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA).Google Scholar
• Amati V, Lomi A, Mira A (2018) Social network modeling. Annual Rev. Statist. Appl. 5:343–369.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Argote L, Ingram P (2000) Knowledge transfer: A basis for competitive advantage in firms. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 82(1):150–169.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Argote L, McEvily B, Reagans R (2003) Managing knowledge in organizations: An integrative framework and review of emerging themes. Management Sci. 49(4):571–582.Link, Google Scholar
• Ashforth BE, Rogers KM, Corley KG (2011) Identity in organizations: Exploring cross-level dynamics. Organ. Sci. 22(5):1144–1156.Link, Google Scholar
• Balogun J, Johnson G (2004) Organizational restructuring and middle manager sensemaking. Acad. Management J. 47(4):523–549.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barley SR (1990) The alignment of technology and structure through roles and networks. Admin. Sci. Quart. 35(1):61–103.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Basov N (2019) The ambivalence of cultural homophily: Field positions, semantic similarities, and social network ties in creative collectives. Poetics, ePub ahead of print May 2, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.poetic.2019.02.004.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bechky BA (2003) Sharing meaning across occupational communities: The transformation of understanding on a production floor. Organ. Sci. 14(3):312–330.Link, Google Scholar
• Bergami M, Bagozzi RP (2000) Self‐categorization, affective commitment and group self‐esteem as distinct aspects of social identity in the organization. British J. Soc. Psych. 39(4):555–577.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Berger PL, Luckmann T (1966) The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge (Doubleday, New York).Google Scholar
• Blau PM (1977) Inequality and Heterogeneity: A Primitive Theory of Social Structure (Free Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Blau PM, Blum TC, Schwartz JE (1982) Heterogeneity and intermarriage. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 47(1):45–62.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bowerman M, Choi S (2001) Shaping meanings for language: Universal and language-specific in the acquisition of spatial semantic categories. Bowerman M, Levinson SC, eds. Language Acquisition and Conceptual Development, Vol. 3 (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK), 475–511.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brass DJ, Galaskiewicz J, Greve HR, Tsai W (2004) Taking stock of networks and organizations: A multilevel perspective. Acad. Management J. 47(6):795–817.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Breiger RL (1974) The duality of persons and groups. Soc. Forces 53(2):181–190.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Breiger RL (2000) A tool kit for practice theory. Poetics 27(2–3):91–115.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Breiger RL, Mohr JW (2004) Institutional logics from the aggregation of organizational networks: Operational procedures for the analysis of counted data. Comput. Math. Organ. Theory 10(1):17–43.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burt RS (1987) Social contagion and innovation: Cohesion vs. structural equivalence. Amer. J. Sociol. 92(6):1287–1335.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burt RS (1992) Structural Holes (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burt RS (2008) Information and structural holes: comment on Reagans and Zuckerman. Indust. Corporate Change 17(5):953–969.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burt RS, Merluzzi J (2016) Network oscillation. Acad. Management Discoveries 2(4):368–391.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burt RS, Kilduff M, Tasselli S (2013) Social network analysis: Foundations and frontiers on advantage. Annual Rev. Psych. 64:527–547.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Caimo A, Lomi A (2015) Knowledge sharing in organizations: A Bayesian analysis of the role of reciprocity and formal structure. J. Management 41(2):655–691.Google Scholar
• Carley KM (1986) An approach for relating social structure to cognitive structure. J. Math. Sociol. 12(2):137–189.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carley KM (1994) Extracting culture through textual analysis. Poetics 22(4):291–312.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carley KM (1997) Extracting team mental models through textual analysis. J. Organizational Behav. 18(S1):533–558.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carley KM, Columbus D, Azoulay A (2012) Automap user's guide 2012. Report CMU-ISR-12-106, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh.Google Scholar
• Carnabuci G, Diószegi B (2015) Social networks, cognitive style, and innovative performance: A contingency perspective. Acad. Management J. 58(3):881–905.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Casciaro T, Lobo MS (2008) When competence is irrelevant: The role of interpersonal affect in task-related ties. Admin. Sci. Quart. 53(4):655–684.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Casciaro T, Lobo MS (2014) Affective primacy in intraorganizational task networks. Organ. Sci. 26(2):373–389.Link, Google Scholar
• Chua RY (2018) Innovating at cultural crossroads: How multicultural social networks promote idea flow and creativity. J. Management 44(3):1119–1146.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Collins J (2003) Cultural diversity and entrepreneurship: Policy responses to immigrant entrepreneurs in Australia. Entrepreneurship Regional Development 15(2):137–149.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cramton CD (2001) The mutual knowledge problem and its consequences for dispersed collaboration. Organ. Sci. 12(3):346–371.Link, Google Scholar
• Crilly D, Sloan P (2014) Autonomy or control? Organizational architecture and corporate attention to stakeholders. Organ. Sci. 25(2):339–355.Link, Google Scholar
• Demetry D (2017) Pop-up to professional: Emerging entrepreneurial identity and evolving vocabularies of motive. Acad. Management Discoveries 3(2):187–207.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dokko G, Kane AA, Tortoriello M (2014) One of us or one of my friends: How social identity and tie strength shape the creative generativity of boundary-spanning ties. Organ. Stud. 35(5):703–726.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dörnyei Z (2014) The Psychology of the Language Learner: Individual Differences in Second Language Acquisition (Routledge, New York).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Duncan OD, Haller AO, Portes A (1968) Peer influences on aspirations: A reinterpretation. Amer. J. Sociol. 74(2):119–137.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dunn MB, Jones C (2010) Institutional logics and institutional pluralism: The contestation of care and science logics in medical education, 1967–2005. Admin. Sci. Quart. 55(1):114–149.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fine GA, Kleinman S (1983) Network and meaning: An interactionist approach to structure. Symbolic Interaction 6(1):97–110.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gartner WB (1993) Words lead to deeds: Toward an organizational emergence vocabulary. J. Bus. Venturing 8(3):231–239.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gentner D, Goldin-Meadow S, eds. (2003) Language in Mind: Advances in the Study of Language and Thought (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Greenacre M, Blasius J (1994) Correspondence Analysis in the Social Sciences: Recent Developments and Applications (Academic Press, London).Google Scholar
• Groenewegen P, Ferguson JE, Moser C, Mohr JW, Borgatti SP, eds. (2017) Structure, Content and Meaning of Organizational Networks: Extending Network Thinking (Emerald Publishing, Bingley, UK).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
• Hansen MT (2002) Knowledge networks: Explaining effective knowledge sharing in multiunit companies. Organ. Sci. 13(3):232–248.Link, Google Scholar
• Hinds PJ, Carley KM, Krackhardt D, Wholey D (2000) Choosing work group members: Balancing similarity, competence, and familiarity. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 81(2):226–251.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hirsch P (1986) From ambushes to golden parachutes: Corporate takeovers as an instance of cultural framing and institutional integration. Amer. J. Sociol. 91(4):800–837.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Homans GC (1950) The Human Group (Harper & Row, New York).Google Scholar
• Ibarra H (1999) Provisional selves: Experimenting with image and identity in professional adaptation. Admin. Sci. Quart. 44(4):764–791.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ibarra H, Andrews SB (1993) Power, social influence, and sense making: Effects of network centrality and proximity on employee perceptions. Admin. Sci. Quart. 38(2):277–303.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jones C, Livne‐Tarandach R (2008) Designing a frame: Rhetorical strategies of architects. J. Organ. Behav. 29(8):1075–1099.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jones C, Maoret M, Massa FG, Svejenova S (2012) Rebels with a cause: Formation, contestation, and expansion of the de novo category “modern architecture,” 1870–1975. Organ. Sci. 23(6):1523–1545.Link, Google Scholar
• Khaire M (2010) Young and no money? Never mind: The material impact of social resources on new venture growth. Organ. Sci. 21(1):168–185.Link, Google Scholar
• Kilduff M, Tsai W, Hanke R (2006) A paradigm too far? A dynamic stability reconsideration of the social network research program. Acad. Management Rev. 31(4):1031–1048.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kirchner C, Mohr JW (2010) Meanings and relations: An introduction to the study of language, discourse and networks. Poetics 38(6):555–566.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Klein KJ, Lim BC, Saltz JL, Mayer DM (2004) How do they get there? An examination of the antecedents of centrality in team networks. Acad. Management J. 47(6):952–963.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kleinbaum AM (2017) Reorganization and tie decay choices. Management Sci. 64(5):2219–2237.Link, Google Scholar
• Kleinbaum AM, Jordan AH, Audia PG (2015) An altercentric perspective on the origins of brokerage in social networks: How perceived empathy moderates the self-monitoring effect. Organ. Sci. 26(4):1226–1242.Link, Google Scholar
• Kleinbaum AM, Stuart TE, Tushman ML (2013) Discretion within constraint: Homophily and structure in a formal organization. Organ. Sci. 24(5):1316–1336.Link, Google Scholar
• Kovacs B, Kleinbaum AM (2019) Language style similarity and friendship networks. Tuck School of Business Working Paper 3131715, Dartmouth University, Hanover, NH.Google Scholar
• Krackhardt D (1987) Cognitive social structures. Soc. Networks 9(2):109–134.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Krackhardt D (1998) Simmelian tie: Super strong and sticky. Kramer R, Neale M, eds. Power and Influence in Organizations (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA), 21–38.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Krackhardt D (1999) The ties that torture: Simmelian tie analysis in organizations. Res. Sociol. Organ. 16(1):183–210.Google Scholar
• Krackhardt D, Hanson JR (1993) Informal networks: The company behind the chart. Harvard Bus. Rev. 71(4):104–113.Google Scholar
• Krippendorff K (2004) Reliability in content analysis: Some common misconceptions and recommendations. Human Comm. Res. 30(3):411–433.Google Scholar
• Lockwood C, Giorgi S, Glynn MA (2019) “How to do things with words”: Mechanisms bridging language and action in management research. J. Management 45(1):7–34.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Loewenstein J (2014) Take my word for it: How professional vocabularies foster organizing. J. Professions Organ. 1(1):65–83.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Loewenstein J, Ocasio WC (2005) Vocabularies of organizing: How language links culture, cognition, and action in organizations. McCombs Working Paper OSSM-03-05, University of Texas at Austin, Austin.Google Scholar
• Loewenstein J, Ocasio W, Jones C (2012) Vocabularies and vocabulary structure: A new approach linking categories, practices, and institutions. Acad. Management Ann. 6(1):41–86.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lomi A, Tasselli S, Zappa P (2017) The network structure of organizational vocabularies. Groenewegen P, Ferguson JE, Moser C, Mohr JW, Borgatti SP, eds. Structure, Content and Meaning of Organizational Networks: Extending Network Thinking (Emerald Publishing, Bingley, UK), 65–85.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lomi A, Lusher D, Pattison PE, Robins G (2014) The focused organization of advice relations: A study in boundary crossing. Organ. Sci. 25(2):438–457.Link, Google Scholar
• Lorrain F, White HC (1971) Structural equivalence of individuals in social networks. J. Math. Sociol. 1(1):49–80.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Maitlis S, Christianson M (2014) Sensemaking in organizations: Taking stock and moving forward. Acad. Management Ann. 8(1):57–125.Crossref, Google Scholar
• March JG, Simon HA (1958) Organizations (John Wiley & Sons, Oxford, UK).Google Scholar
• Marsden PV (1988) Homogeneity in confiding relations. Soc. Networks 10(1):57–76.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McEvily B, Soda G, Tortoriello M (2014) More formally: Rediscovering the missing link between formal organization and informal social structure. Acad. Management Ann. 8(1):299–345.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McPherson M, Smith-Lovin LM, Cook J (2001) Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Rev. Sociol. 27:415–444.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mehra A, Kilduff M, Brass DJ (2001) The social networks of high and low self-monitors: Implications for workplace performance. Admin. Sci. Quart. 46(1):121–146.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Meyer RE, Höllerer MA (2010) Meaning structures in a contested issue field: A topographic map of shareholder value in Austria. Acad. Management J. 53(6):1241–1262.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mills CW (1939) Language, logic, and culture. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 4(5):670–680.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mills CW (1940) Situated actions and vocabularies of motives. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 5(6):904–913.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mische A (2003) Cross-talk in movements: rethinking the culture-network link. Diani M, McAdam D, eds. Social Movements and Networks: Relational Approaches to Collective Action (Oxford University Press, New York), 258–280.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mizruchi MS, Koenig T (1988) Economic concentration and corporate political behavior: A cross-industry comparison. Soc. Sci. Res. 17(4):287–305.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mohr JW, Wagner-Pacifici R, Breiger RL, Bogdanov P (2013) Graphing the grammar of motives in National Security Strategies: Cultural interpretation, automated text analysis and the drama of global politics. Poetics 41(6):670–700.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Morrison EW (2002) Newcomers’ relationships: The role of social network ties during socialization. Acad. Management J. 45(6):1149–1160.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nag R, Hambrick DC, Chen MJ (2007) What is strategic management, really? Inductive derivation of a consensus definition of the field. Strategic Management J. 28(9):935–955.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Oberg A, Korff VP, Powell WW (2017) Culture and connectivity intertwined: Visualizing organizational fields as relational structures and meaning system. Groenewegen P, Ferguson JE, Moser C, Mohr JW, Borgatti SP, eds. Structure, Content and Meaning of Organizational Networks: Extending Network Thinking (Emerald Publishing, Bingley, UK), 17–48.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ocasio W, Joseph J (2005) Cultural adaptation and institutional change: The evolution of vocabularies of corporate governance, 1972–2003. Poetics 33(3):163–178.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ocasio W, Laamanen T, Vaara E (2018) Communication and attention dynamics: An attention‐based view of strategic change. Strategic Management J. 39(1):155–167.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ocasio W, Loewenstein J, Nigam A (2015) How streams of communication reproduce and change institutional logics: The role of categories. Acad. Management Rev. 40(1):28–48.Crossref, Google Scholar
• O’Reilly CA III, Caldwell DF, Barnett WP (1989) Work group demography, social integration, and turnover. Admin. Sci. Quart. 34(1):21–37.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pachucki MA, Breiger RL (2010) Cultural holes: Beyond relationality in social networks and culture. Annual Rev. Sociol. 36:205–224.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Painter M, Pouryousefi S, Hibbert S, Russon JA (2019) Sharing vocabularies: Toward horizontal alignment of values-driven business functions. J. Bus. Ethics 155(4):965–979.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pettigrew AM (1979) On studying organizational cultures. Admin. Sci. Quart. 24(4):570–581.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Power B (2012) Get your team to work across organizational boundaries. Harvard Bus. Rev. (April 9), https://hbr.org/2012/04/building-a-team-across-organiz.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, McEvily B (2003) Network structure and knowledge transfer: The effects of cohesion and range. Admin. Sci. Quart. 48(2):240–267.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ryan L (2016) Looking for weak ties: Using a mixed methods approach to capture elusive connections. Sociol. Rev. 64(4):951–969.Google Scholar
• Sasovova Z, Mehra A, Borgatti SP, Schippers MC (2010) Network churn: The effects of self-monitoring personality on brokerage dynamics. Admin. Sci. Quart. 55(4):639–670.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sherif M (1958) Superordinate goals in the reduction of intergroup conflict. Amer. J. Sociol. 63(4):349–356.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shi W, Zhang Y, Hoskisson RE (2019) Examination of CEO–CFO social interaction through language style matching: Outcomes for the CFO and the organization. Acad. Management J. 62(2):383–414.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Simmel G (1971) On Individuality and Social Forms (University of Chicago Press, Chicago).Google Scholar
• Simon HA (1947) Administrative Behaviour (Macmillan, New York).Google Scholar
• Sonenshein S, Dholakia U (2012) Explaining employee engagement with strategic change implementation: A meaning-making approach. Organ. Sci. 23(1):1–23.Link, Google Scholar
• Srivastava SB, Banaji MR (2011) Culture, cognition, and collaborative networks in organizations. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 76(2):207–233.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stevenson WB, Greenberg D (2000) Agency and social networks: Strategies of action in a social structure of position, opposition, and opportunity. Admin. Sci. Quart. 45(4):651–678.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Strong P, Robinson J (1990) The NHS Under New Management (Open University Press, Buckingham, UK).Google Scholar
• Tajfel H (1972) La catégorisation sociale. Moscovici S, ed. Introduction à la psychologie sociale (Larousse, Paris), 272–302.Google Scholar
• Tasselli S (2015) Social networks and inter-professional knowledge transfer: the case of healthcare professionals. Organ. Stud. 36(7):841–872.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tasselli S (2019) At the end of an era: A model and three tales of memory, perception and reality. Acad. Management Rev. 44(3):701–717.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tasselli S, Caimo A (2019) Does it take three to dance the Tango? Organizational design, triadic structures and boundary spanning across subunits. Soc. Networks 59(October):10–22.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tasselli S, Kilduff M (2018) When brokerage between friendship cliques endangers trust: a personality–network fit perspective. Acad. Management J. 61(3):802–825.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tasselli S, Kilduff M, Menges JI (2015) The microfoundations of organizational social networks: A review and an agenda for future research. J. Management 41(5):1361–1387.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Thompson EP (1967) Time, work-discipline, and industrial capitalism. Past Present 38(December):56–97.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tortoriello M, Krackhardt D (2010) Activating cross-boundary knowledge: The role of Simmelian ties in the generation of innovations. Acad. Management J. 53(1):167–181.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tortoriello M, McEvily B, Krackhardt D (2014) Being a catalyst of innovation: The role of knowledge diversity and network closure. Organ. Sci. 26(2):423–438.Link, Google Scholar
• Tortoriello M, Reagans R, McEvily B (2012) Bridging the knowledge gap: The influence of strong ties, network cohesion and network range on the transfer of knowledge between organizational units. Organ. Sci. 23(4):1024–1039.Link, Google Scholar
• Travers J, Milgram S (1967) The small world problem. Psych. Today 1(1):61–67.Google Scholar
• Tsai W (2002) Social structure of “coopetition” within a multiunit organization: Coordination, competition, and intraorganizational knowledge sharing. Organ. Sci. 13(2):179–190.Link, Google Scholar
• Tushman ML, Nadler DA (1978) Information processing as an integrating concept in organizational design. Acad. Management Rev. 3(3):613–624.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Uzzi B (1999) Embeddedness in the making of financial capital: How social relations and networks benefit firms seeking financing. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 64(4):481–505.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Vaara E, Sonenshein S, Boje D (2016) Narratives as sources of stability and change in organizations: Approaches and directions for future research. Acad. Management Ann. 10(1):495–560.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wasserman S, Faust K (1994) Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications, Vol. 8 (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Watts G (1999) Small Worlds (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Weber RP (1990) Basic Content Analysis, 2nd ed. (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Weick KE, Sutcliffe KM, Obstfeld D (2005) Organizing and the process of sensemaking. Organ. Sci. 16(4):409–421.Link, Google Scholar
• Wellman B (1988) Structural analysis: From method and metaphor to theory and substance. Wellman B, Berkowitz SD, eds. Social Structures: A Network Approach (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK), 19–61.Google Scholar
• White HC (2008) Identity and Control: How Social Formations Emerge (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Google Scholar
• Wooldridge JM (2009) Introductory Econometrics: A Modern Approach, 4th ed. (South-Western, Mason, OH).Google Scholar