Advertisement

Modeling Individual Outcomes Using a Multilevel Social Influence (MSI) Model: Individual Versus Team Effects of Trust on Job Satisfaction in an Organisational Context

  • Filip AgneessensEmail author
  • Johan Koskinen
Chapter
Part of the Methodos Series book series (METH, volume 12)

Abstract

In this chapter we propose an integrated approach to study the effects of individual network position and global network structure on the attitudes and opinions of individuals within groups. The Multilevel Social Influence (MSI) model used here is generic, and can incorporate both individual network position measures such as centrality or brokerage position, as well as group level network properties such as the density, centralization or fragmentation of the network. This enables the possibility to disentangle and identify the relative importance of “individual social capital” from “collectively owned social capital”. Focusing on 201 employees in 27 teams as a specific empirical example, we demonstrated how employee job satisfaction can be explained by looking at the individual attributes of the employee, the position of the employee in the group’s trust network (indegree centrality), and the group structure (density and centralization).

Keywords

Social Capital Network Position Trust Network Trust Relation Individual Social Capital 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Tom Snijders for comments on an earlier version and the sociology students (Ghent University) and Danille De Lange for help with the practical data collection.

References

  1. Adler, P. S., & Kwon, S. W. (2002). Social capital: Prospects for a new concept. Academy of Management Review, 27, 17–40.Google Scholar
  2. Agneessens, F. (2006). Social capital in knowledge intensive teams: The importance of content, structure and resources for performance of researchers at university. PhD dissertation. Ghent University, Ghent.Google Scholar
  3. Agneessens, F., & Wittek, R. (2008). Social capital and employee well-being: Disentangling intrapersonal and interpersonal selection and influence mechanisms. Revue Française de Sociologie, 49, 613–637.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Agneessens, F., & Wittek, R. (2012). Where do intra-organizational advice relations come from? The role of informal status and social capital in social exchange. Social Networks, 34, 333–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Agneessens, F., Waege, H., & Lievens, J. (2006). Diversity in social support by role relations: A typology. Social Networks, 28, 427–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bacharach, S. B., Bamberger, P. A., & Vashdi, D. (2005). Diversity and homophily at work: Supportive relations among white and African-American peers. Academy of Management Journal, 48, 619–644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Baldwin, T. T., Bedell, M. D., & Johnson, J. L. (1997). The social fabric of a team-based MBA program: Network effects on student satisfaction and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 40, 1369–1397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bantel, K., & Jackson, S. (1989). Top management and innovations in banking: Does the composition of the top team make a difference? Strategic Management Journal, 10, 107–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Blau, P. M. (1977). Inequality and heterogeneity. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  10. Borgatti, S. P., & Halgin, D. S. (2011). On network theory. Organization Science, 22, 1168–1181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Borgatti, S. P., & Kidwell, V. (2011). Network theorizing. In P. Carrington & J. Scott (Eds.), The Sage handbook of social network analysis (pp. 40–54). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  12. Borgatti, S. P., Everett, M. G., & Freeman, L. C. (2002). Ucinet for Windows: Software for social network analysis. Harvard: Analytic Technologies.Google Scholar
  13. Brass, D. J. (1984). Being in the right place: A structural analysis of individual influence in an organization. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29, 518–539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Brass, D. J. (2003). A social network perspective on human resources management. In R. Cross, A. Parker, & L. Sasson (Eds.), Networks in the knowledge economy (pp. 283–323). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Brass, D. J., & Burkhardt, M. E. (1992). Centrality and power in organizations. In N. Nohria & R. G. Eccles (Eds.), Networks and organizations: Structure, form, and action (pp. 191–215). Boston: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  16. Burt, R. S. (1983). Range. In R. S. Burt & M. J. Minor (Eds.), Applied network analysis. A methodological introduction (pp. 176–194). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  17. Burt, R. S. (1992). Structural holes: The social structure of competition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Burt, R. S. (2001). Structural holes versus network closure as social capital. In N. Lin, K. Cook, & R. S. Burt (Eds.), Social capital: Theory and research. New York: Aldine De Gruyter.Google Scholar
  19. Campbell, K. E., Marsden, P. V., & Hurlbert, J. S. (1986). Social resources and socioeconomic status. Social Networks, 8, 97–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94, S95–S120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Coleman, J. (1990). Foundations of social theory. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Cross, R., & Cummings, J. N. (2004). Tie and network correlates of individual performance in knowledge-intensive work. Academy of Management Journal, 47, 928–937.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Cummings, J. N., & Cross, R. (2003). Structural properties of work groups and their consequences for performance. Social Networks, 25, 197–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. De Klepper, M., Sleebos, E., van de Bunt, G., & Agneessens, F. (2010). Similarity in friendship networks: Selection or influence? The effect of constraining contexts and non-visible individual attributes. Social Networks, 32, 82–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. De Lange, D., Agneessens, F., & Waege, H. (2004) Asking social network questions: A quality assessment of different measures. Metodoloski zvezki, 1(2), 351–378. mrvar.fdv.uni-lj.si/pub/mz/mz1.1/lange.pdf
  26. Dirks, K. T. (1999). The effects of interpersonal trust on work group performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 445–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Doreian, P. (1982). Maximum likelihood methods for linear models: Spatial effect and spatial disturbance terms. Sociological Methods & Research, 10, 243–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Duke, J. B. (1993). Estimation of the network effects model in a large data set. Sociological Methods Research, 21, 465–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Erbring, L., & Young, A. (1979). Individuals and social structure: Contextual effects as endogeneous feedback. Sociological Methods and Research, 7, 396–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Erickson, B. H. (1988). The relational basis of attitudes. In B. Wellman & S. D. Berkowitz (Eds.), Social structures (pp. 99–122). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Flap, H., & Völker, B. (2001). Goal specific social capital and job satisfaction: Effects of different types of networks on instrumental and social aspects of work. Social Networks, 23, 297–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Flap, H., Bulder, B., & Völker, B. (1998). Intra-organizational networks and performance: A review. Computational & Mathematical Organization Theory, 4, 109–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Friedkin, N. E. (2001). Norm formation in social influence networks. Social Networks, 23, 167–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Gabbay, S. M., & Leenders, R. T. A. J. (1999). CSC: The structure of advantage and disadvantage. In R. T. A. J. Leenders & S. M. Gabbay (Eds.), Corporate social capital and liability (pp. 1–14). Boston: Kluwer Academic Publisher.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Gelman, A., Carlin, J., Stern, H., Dunson, D., Vehtari, A., & Rubin, D. (2004). Bayesian data analysis (Texts in statistical science). Boca Raton: Chapman & Hall/CRC.Google Scholar
  36. Goldstein, H. (1995). Multilevel statistical models (2nd ed.). London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
  37. Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78, 1360–1380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Hansen, M. T. (1999). The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization subunits. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 82–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Hansen, M. T., Mors, M. L., & Lovas, B. (2005). Knowledge sharing in organizations: Multiple networks, multiple phases. Academy of Management Journal, 48, 776–793.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Harlow, R. E., & Cantor, N. (1995). To whom do people turn when things go poor: Task orientation and functional social contacts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 329–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. House, J. S. (1981). Work stress and social support. Reading: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  42. Hurlbert, J. S. (1991). Social networks, social circles, and job satisfaction. Work and Occupations, 18, 415–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Ibarra, H. (1992). Homophily and differential returns: Sex differences in network structure and access in an advertising firm. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37, 422–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Inkpen, A. C., & Tsang, E. W. K. (2005). Social capital, networks, and knowledge transfer. Academy of Management Review, 30, 146–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Jehn, K. A., & Shah, P. P. (1997). Interpersonal relationships and task performance: An examination of mediating processes in friendship and acquaintance groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 775–790.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Kandel, D. B. (1978). Homophily, selection and socialization in adolescent friendships. American Journal of Sociology, 84, 427–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Katz, J. S., & Martin, B. R. (1997). What is collaboration? Research Policy, 26, 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Koskinen, J. H., & Stenberg, S.-Å. (2012). Bayesian analysis of multilevel probit models for data with friendship dependencies. Journal of Educational and Behavioural Statistics, 37, 203–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Krackhardt, D. (1999). The ties that torture: Simmelian tie analysis in organizations. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 16, 183–210.Google Scholar
  50. Krackhardt, D., & Stern, R. N. (1988). Informal networks and organizational crisis: An experimental simulation. Social Psychology Quarterly, 51, 123–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Kramer, R. M. (1999). Trust and distrust in organizations: Emerging perspectives, enduring questions. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 569–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Langfred, C. W. (2004). Too much of a good thing? Negative effects of high trust and individual autonomy in self-managing teams. Academy of Management Journal, 47, 385–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Lazega, E. (2001). The collegial phenomenon. The social mechanisms of cooperation among peers in a corporate law partnership. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Lazega, E., Jourda, M.-T., Mounies, L., & Stofer, R. (2008). Catching up with big fish in the big pond? Multi-level network analysis through linked design. Social Networks, 30, 157–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Leavitt, H. J. (1951). Some effects of certain communication patterns on group performance. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 46, 38–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Leenders, R. T. A. J. (2002). Modeling social influence through network autocorrelation: Constructing the weight matrix. Social Networks, 24, 21–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Leenders, R. T. A. J., & Gabbey, S. M. (1999). Corporate social capital and liability. Boston: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Lin, N. (1999). Building a network theory of social capital. Connections, 22, 28–51.Google Scholar
  59. Lin, N., Vaughn, J. C., & Ensel, W. M. (1981). Social resources and occupational status attainment. Social Forces, 59, 1163–1181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Marsden, P. V. (1987). Core discussion networks of Americans. American Sociological Review, 52, 122–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Marsden, P. V. (1988). Homogeneity in confiding relations. Social Networks, 10, 57–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Marsden, P., & Friedkin, N. (1993). Network studies of social-influence. Sociological Methods & Research, 22, 127–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., & Cook, J. M. (2001). Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 415–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Molm, L. D. (1994). Dependence and risk: Transforming the structure of social exchange. Social Psychology Quarterly, 57, 163–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Nahapiet, J., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23, 242–266.Google Scholar
  66. Oh, H., Chung, M.-H., & Labianca, G. (2004). Group social capital and group effectiveness: The role of informal socializing ties. Academy of Management Journal, 47, 860–875.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Pelled, L. H. (1996). Demographic diversity, conflict, and work group outcomes: An intervening process theory. Organization Science, 7, 615–631.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Pelled, L. H., Eisenhardt, K. M., & Xin, K. R. (1999). Exploring the black box: An analysis of work group diversity, conflict, and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Podolny, J. M., & Baron, J. N. (1997). Resources and relationships: Social networks and mobility in the workplace. American Sociological Review, 62, 673–693.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Portes, A. (1998). Social capital: Its origins and applications in modern sociology. Annual Review of Sociology, 24, 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Reagans, R. E., & McEvily, B. (2003). Network structure and knowledge transfer: The effects of cohesion and range. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48, 240–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Requena, F. (2003). Social capital, satisfaction and quality of life in the workplace. Social Indicators Research, 61, 331–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Roberts, K. H., & O’Reilty, C. A., III. (1979). Some correlates of communication roles in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 22, 42–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Shaw, M. E. (1964). Communication networks. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental psychology (pp. 111–147). New York: Academic.Google Scholar
  75. Snijders, T. A. B., & Bosker, R. J. (2012). Multilevel analysis: An introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modelling (2nd ed.). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  76. Snijders, T. A. B., van de Bunt, G. G., & Steglich, C. E. G. (2010). Introduction to actor-based models for network dynamics. Social Networks, 32, 44–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Sparrowe, R. T., Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., & Kraimer, M. L. (2001). Social networks and the performance of individuals and groups. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 318–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Spector, P. E. (1997). Job satisfaction: Application, assessment, causes, and consequences. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  79. Thoits, P. A. (1982). Conceptual, methodological, and theoretical problems in studying social support as a buffer against life stress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 23, 145–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Tsai, W., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital and value creation: The role of intrafirm networks. Academy of Management Journal, 41, 464–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Umberson, D., Chen, M. D., House, J. S., Hopkins, K., & Slaten, E. (1996). The effect of social relationships on psychological well-being: Are men and women really so different? American Sociological Review, 61, 837–857.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Uzzi, B. (1996). The sources and consequences of embeddedness for the economic performance of organzations: The network effect. American Sociological Review, 61, 674–698.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Van de Ven, A. H., Delbecq, A. L., & Koenig, R. (1976). Determinants of coordination modes within organizations. American Sociological Review, 41, 322–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Venkataramani, V., Labianca, G., & Grosser, T. (2013). Positive and negative workplace relationships, social satisfaction, and organizational attachment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98, 1028–1039.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Zhang, B., Thomas, A. C., Krackhardt, D., Doreian, P., & Krishnan, R. (2013). Contrasting multiple social network autocorrelations for binary outcomes, with applications to technology adoption. ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems (TMIS) 3, Article No. 18.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Surrey Business SchoolUniversity of SurreyGuildfordUK
  2. 2.Social Statistics Discipline AreaUniversity of ManchesterManchesterUK

Personalised recommendations