Acknowledgements

Informal Networks: Dark Sides, Bright Sides, and Unexplored Dimensions

“…Russian culture includes kinds of cooptation known as kormlenie (feeding), that is, allowing civil servants to feed off the office and the constituency, which persisted through tsarism and the Soviet period and are observed to this day. Favoritism in hiring and promotions, in which candidates are recruited or promoted not because of merit and competence but because of knowing the right people, can prevent an organization from advancing and limit its potential for creativity and innovativeness (Horak, 2017; Banovic, in Ledeneva et al, 2018). In South Korea, which is often described as a networked society, respective networks (i.e., in-groups) have ‘flexibility, tolerance, mutual understanding as well as trust.…”

“…In addition, if that person, after obtaining the job, becomes a free rider or exploits the position for personal gain, the recommender's reputation is put at risk (Burt, 2000; Lew, 2013). Further, informal ties and networks are often based on a certain level of trust, and they support cooperation and mutual help, provide sociability and emotional support, and hence reduce loneliness (Ledeneva, 2018). However, exchanges of any kind lead to an implicit contract that demands reciprocity; therefore, maintaining ties through reciprocal favors and satisfying demands can be time consuming, costly, and, at times, burdensome.…”

“…The other reason for this empirical elusiveness of informality is that the notions of the formal and the informal are analytical constructs, which are often difficult to detach and analyze separately or possess dual utility that is hard to categorize. In fact, what is formal and what is informal are often contextual and depend on the perspective: ‘Like a quantum particle, we find them in two modalities at once: informal practices are one thing for participants and another for observers’ (Ledeneva, 2018: 7). One key challenge in trying to understand informality is to resist making analogies to formal institutions.…”

“…Many scholars have pointed out that networking theories and comparative analyses of social capital are developed largely by Western scholars and based on assumptions of circumstances and social structures that are typical in Western societies (Horak, Taube, Yang, & Restel, 2019). Thus, these theories need a robustness test for informal ties and networks formed in other parts of the world and, possibly, adjustment to account for their nature, characteristics, and tacit knowledge (Fey & Denison, 2003; Ledeneva, 2008, 2018; Li, 2007b; Qi, 2013; Sato, 2010). The growing body of literature about informal ties and networks in various emerging and transitional countries – such as guanxi (China), blat (Russia), clannism (Kazakhstan), and wasta (Arabic-speaking countries) – has resulted in analyses on the role of informal networks in advanced and industrialized economies.…”

“…The growing body of literature about informal ties and networks in various emerging and transitional countries – such as guanxi (China), blat (Russia), clannism (Kazakhstan), and wasta (Arabic-speaking countries) – has resulted in analyses on the role of informal networks in advanced and industrialized economies. Horak and Taube (2016) discuss yongo in South Korea, Sato (2018) writes about aidagara in Japan, and Kubbe (2018) analyzes vitamin B in Germany, and there are many other examples (Ledeneva, Bailey, Barron, Curro, & Teague, 2018). The findings on emerging markets emphasize the role of informal networks in transitions and structural changes in formal institutions, and insights in studies on developed economies indicate that informal networks persist even where formal institutions are effective.…”