The Transformative Power of Network Dynamics: A Research Agenda

Abstract

The emergence and proliferation of network forms of organization has sparked interest and debate in organization studies. We have learned much about the effects of networks but our understanding of how they are formed, how they change, and how networks can themselves possess agential properties that make them complex social actants is limited. In selecting papers for this special issue, we were persuaded by arguments that our understanding of networks and their transformative power can benefit from greater attention to culture and discourse, which provide meaning and direction to network participants and are indispensable agentic resources. The special issue contains two sets of papers. The first set debates the articulation between the organized and emergent dynamics of networks and its impact on knowledge exchanges and innovation. The second set seeks to inform our understanding of the manifestations of power in network dynamics. For each section, we provide a tentative research agenda. Our hope is that this special issue will both advance our ability to conceptualize, measure and manage network evolution and enhance our understanding of the transformative impact of network dynamics on organizations and society.

How to orchestrate R&D networks? The role of orchestration subprocesses and collaborative practices over time

“…Managing network stability is especially important because innovation networks-and interorganizational networks in general-are fundamentally dynamic entities (Abrahamsen, Henneberg, & Naudé, 2012;Ahuja, Soda & Zaheer, 2012;Clegg, Josserand, Mehra, & Pitsis, 2016;Kaartemo, Coviello, & Nummela, 2019). Members change their position and roles in the network over time and therefore also change their expectations regarding the outcomes that they want to achieve (Abrahamsen et al, 2012).…”

The orchestration of alliance portfolios: The role of alliance portfolio capability

“…It is perhaps quite astonishing that alliance theorizing has only sparingly considered the 'change in the network itself' (Emirbayer & Goodwin, 1994) and the role of actors' conscious agency in creating and engendering networks or portfolio structures that benefit them. This is at odds with process-oriented accounts that display differences in how focal actors orchestrate their alliance portfolio (Kilduff & Tsai, 2005;Dhanaraj & Parkhe, 2006;Hallen & Eisenhardt, 2008;Ozcan & Eisenhardt, 2009;Paquin & Howard-Grenville, 2013;Clegg et al, 2016). Hence, examining orchestration and variation in networking actions over time rather than structures or selected snapshots may be a way forward in illuminating how and why alliance portfolios change.…”

“…Both approaches tend to see actors as either passively perpetuating existing relationships or at best reacting to external pressures without considering their strategic choices, that is, how and why actors make changes to their alliance portfolios over time (Wassmer, 2010;Bakker, 2015;Castro & Roldán, 2015). In this respect, recent research has pointed at the critical issue of orchestration (Dhanaraj & Parkhe, 2006;Paquin & HowardGrenville, 2013;Clegg, Josserand, Mehra, & Pitsis, 2016) and the associated processes of alliance portfolio management. Orchestration is broadly defined as the set of deliberate, purposeful actions undertaken by a focal actor to create and extract value from its network of relationships (Dhanaraj & Parkhe, 2006).…”

Sequential Alliance Portfolios, Partner Reconfiguration and Firm Performance

“…Then, some scholars began to integrate two measures of partner reconfigurations, including dropping active partners or allying with outside partners [8]. Thus, the possible antecedents of these alliance partner reconfigurations, including the relative importance of the alliance [32], resource compatibility between partners [33], the bright side and dark side of embedded ties [34,35], attractiveness of outside options [18], and power asymmetry [36] have been investigated. The literature provides important clues as to why alliance reconfiguration occurs, and what factors make its occurrence more likely.…”