Brokering or Sitting Between Two Chairs? A Group Perspective on Workplace Gossip

Abstract

Brokerage is a central concept in the organization literature. It has been argued that individuals in broker positions—i.e., connecting otherwise disconnected parts within a firm’s social network—can control the flow of information. It would imply their increased relevance in workplace gossip. This allegation, however, has not been addressed empirically yet. To fill this gap, we apply social network analysis techniques to relational data from six organizations in Hungary. First, we identify informal groups and individuals in broker positions. Then, we use this information to predict the likelihood with which positive or negative gossip is reported. We find more gossip when the sender and receiver are part of the same group and more positive gossip about in-group rather than out-group targets. Individuals in broker positions are more likely the senders and targets of negative gossip. Finally, even if both the brokers and the boss(es) are the targets of their colleagues’ negative gossip, the combination of the two categories (bosses in broker positions) does not predict more negative gossip anymore. Results are discussed in relation to the theoretical accounts on brokerage that emphasize its power for information control but fail to recognize the pitfalls of being in such positions.

The Core Might Change Anyhow We Define It: The Instability of Key Actors in Longitudinal Social Network Data

“…Tere are multiple methods to do this, and which is desirable depends on researcher needs and questions. When data from several diferent ties are available in the same context, then researchers might want to condense information with cluster analysis and fnd the latent dimensions that are measured by similar networks, such as friendship and afection [78,79]. Another way is to simply add values up in diferent sparse networks or to use thresholds for cell sums to create a composite network [75].…”