Social Network Analysis. Daniela Lup

Social Network Analysis Daniela Lup

Outline Distinction ego-network vs. whole network Personal network how to analyse Whole network Cygna network Q & A / Brainstorming Cygna

Ego Network The network that forms around a particular social actor (individual, organization, country etc.) All actors (ALTERS) with whom an actor (EGO) is connected (has a TIE) All TIES between the ALTERS Including, if possible, ALTERS further connections (2 nd ORDER)

Whole Network The network of connections (TIES) between actors who are members of a predefined population (NODES) The focus is not on each actor, but on the structure of the whole network The insight: the structure of relations affects the fate of the population and its members

Decisions ahead of data collection Who are the NODES? For ego-networks there exist some standard questions from which the researcher can expand further For whole networks: is the population bounded? How do we want to bound it? What constitutes a TIE? Define the relationship to capture: e.g. friends with ; gives advice.; trusts/ doesn t trust; socialize with ; co-authors with Strength of a tie: e.g. 1 = friends part of a group; 2=friends who often meet and discuss life issues; 3 = best friends & 4 = enemies

Social Network Analysis Other advantages: An analytic tool To be used in uncertain situation Appealing and flexible visual tool (compare with tables!) Based on analyzing relations between actors It re-arranges the world, such that patterns become visible Micro-macro linkages (reveal hidden reasons behind dramatic realities) Enables better strategic decisions

Personal network analysis

Learning about your network Who is in your network? - NODES How to generate a list of contacts? Think about people with whom you interact. Include people who know very well, but also people who you know less well. Remember that weak ties are often consequential! Some of your contacts will appear multiple times. When you finalize the list include them only once. The list will vary, based on your question: work network, personal network, overall network, problem solving (instrumental) network

Relevant contacts QUESTIONS AS PROMPTS 1. Most people discuss important matters with other people. Looking back over the last six months, who are the people with whom you discussed matters important to you? 2. Consider the people with whom you communicate in order to get your work done. (Your work can include a work in your organization, but also projects that you run, job search, other relevant activities). Of all the people you have communicated with during the last six months, who has been the most important for getting your work done? 3. People who work together sometimes socialize informally. They may attend social events unrelated to work, go out for dinner, visit one another at home, and so on. Over the last six months, who are the people from work with whom you have socialized informally? Add also other social contacts not related to work with which you have spent significant social time.

Relevant contacts (cont.) QUESTIONS AS PROMPTS 4. Now, let s consider the project(s) which are the most important for you now (e.g. work related, getting a job, finding a solution to a personal or professional problem). Consider the people who would be influential in helping you with your project by providing essential resources. Who would you talk with to get support for your project? You might have not spoken with some of these people in a long while; do include them if you feel they could help with your project(s). 5. Some people have a mentor / sponsor who takes a strong interest in their professional and personal development. A mentor may give advice, information, access to opportunities etc. List your mentor(s). 6. Suppose you need advice about a major transition in your life, such as changing jobs, switching careers, relocating, starting a new business, retiring, and so on. Who would you turn to for such a piece of important advice?

Your relations (ties) with your contacts In Excel write down a column of all contacts Strength of your relationship with contacts 1 (weak); 2 (medium); 3 (strong); 4 (negative relationship, i.e. do not like each other) Other attributes: industry in which they work Name Strength of relationship Years of knowing them Region Other atributes 1 John 2 3 2 Sarah 2 4 3 Matt 2 8 4 Aura 3 2 5 Oaki 3 5 6 Paul 3 3 7 Jimmy 1 1 8 Phillip 2 8 9 Frank 3 6 10 Doly 4 2 11 Lara 2 2 12 Paul2 2 3 13 Cara 2 3 14 Lizi 4 4 15 Vivi 3 9 16 Sonja 3 7 17 PB 3 5 18 YQ 3 9 19 Lili 3 15 20 Miki 3 1

Relations between your contacts Strength of relationship between your contacts 0 (don t know each other) 1 (weak); 2 (medium); 3 (strong); 4 (negative relationship, i.e. dislike) John Sarah Matt Aura Oaki Paul Jimmy Phillip Frank Doly Lara Paul2 Cara Lizi Vivi Sonja PB YQ Lili Miki John 0 1 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 Sarah 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 Matt 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 Aura 4 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 Oaki 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 Paul 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 1 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Jimmy 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Phillip 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 Frank 0 0 1 0 0 4 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 Doly 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 Lara 2 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 3 0 2 2 2 0 0 1 3 3 0 Paul2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 4 2 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 Cara 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 4 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Lizi 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Vivi 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 Sonja 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 PB 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4 YQ 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lili 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 2 3 0 1 0 0 0 4 0 0 3 Miki 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 3 0

Your network (sociogram)

Strength of rel. Name EGO - name John 2 Sarah 2 Matt 2 Aura 3 Oaki 3 Paul 3 Jimmy 1 Phillip 2 Frank 3 Doly 4 Lara 2 Paul2 2 Cara 2 Lizi 4 Vivi 3 Sonja 3 PB 3 YQ 3 Lili 3 Miki 3

Analysis Problem: will I get nominated for THAT project? Nomination is decided by Doly, Cara, Paul, Paul 2, Lara together Nomination requires endorsement from experts outside your organizations 4 (red dots). Your competitor is Lizi, whose mentor is Lara My relations good with all, except Doly Doly, Cara, Paul, Paul 2 difficult relations what does this mean for decision making process in that group? Lara good relations with me and all the others Lara supports Lizi (with whom I have a difficult relation) but Lizi does not have as many good relations as I have with the nomination committee PB strong connection with Lara. But also PB difficult connection with Miki who has strong connection with Doly (with whom I have a difficult connection).. Next steps.

Whole network analysis Cygna analysis

The sample Anne-Wil list = 39 relatively active swans The mailing list is longer but the rest are not active, with some not even attending a meeting. Of the 39 active members, 32 responded. Very good response rate and allows for reasonably valid inferences, if we assume that the 7 who did not respond are not very different in terms of patterns of connectivity. We know they are not.

q1+q2= know/met in person q3+q4= don t know in person Define relations

How dense is the network? What percent of swans have met each other? Density is an indication of a cohesive group implications for trust, flow of ideas, collaboration etc.

Known Personally Density=41% Percent of potential relations that materialize

Reciprocal nomination Blue = both declare that they met Red = only one declares that they met Density of blue only = 31%

Lost Connectivity due to Lack of Reciprocity Density = 41% Density = 31%

Individuals Contribution to Connectivity Removing the 2 most connected Density=23.7% Following from 31% Good news is that the network still holds together Actions? Suggestions?

Does personal interaction translates in ease to approach? To what extent those who met in person also feel that they can contact the other person for advice?

Met Advice 77.2 percent of met in person translate into feel close enough to ask for advice

Generalized trust in the network To what extent those who DID NOT meet in person feel that they can contact the other person for advice?

Percent of those not met with whom person would connect for advice Percent 0 53.1 4-5% 12.5 10-15% 9.4 100 25 Grand Total 100 What do these figures suggest? Solutions?

Running the mailing list 83 names

Tie = met in person For those who did not respond, a tie exists if someone else who responds says that they met personally. (assumption: our memories are accurate) Density = 11.6% Note many isolates & loosely connected Note also that some of the isolates do not link to the central actors. Question: how do people end up on mailing list? Opportunity: recruiting is not centralized

Further analyses If this would have been a full project.

Potential research questions Does the frequency of interaction with a group increases one s propensity to contact any member of that group? Is the above moderated by individual characteristics, e.g. age, personalityrelated? What is the mechanism that explain the above? (generalized trust) Relevant for groups that want/need to get exposure to new ideas and increase collaboration with loosely attached experts? Can be expanded with a more qualitative approach in-depth interviews that could reveal deep-seated assumptions on which the above type of interactions are based.

Summary of findings and room of discussion

Summary & Discussion Density 41% vs. 31%: why some members do not remember that they met another member? Reliance on 2 high connectors Over 50% do not feel like contacting a member who they did not meet personally The mailing list includes valuable members who are connected to current active members question: should we try to keep them in? How?