Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Social Network Analyses of Learning at Workplaces

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Discourses on Professional Learning

Part of the book series: Professional and Practice-based Learning ((PPBL,volume 9))

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to examine social network analysis from the perspective of expertise studies and workplace learning. While research on expertise has traditionally been individually oriented, the present paper explores its socially distributed dimensions. Expertise relies on transactive processes involving pursuit of a network of mutually supporting projects where earlier achievements are used to manage more demanding intellectual environments. The paper includes theoretical introduction, methodological considerations, and a minor review of SNA studies that are related to workplaces. The research of social networks stresses the importance of cross-boundary analyses of workplaces’ networks and even experts’ past relations in their former networks. Previous studies have indicated some relevance to study the significance of the worker’s network positions. SNA studies have indicated evidence especially as regards the importance of cohesive network positions, mediator and boundary crossing roles, and the relationship between informal and formal power positions. Particularly, previous research has demonstrated a relationship between network structure and instrumental outcomes. As regards for network profits, individual-level results appear to be easier to evaluate than group- or organizational-level gains.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Agnew, N. M., Ford, K. M., & Hayes, P. J. (1994). Expertise in context: Personally constructed, socially selected and reality relevant? International Journal of Expert Systems, 7, 65–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baldwin, T. T., Bedell, M. D., & Johnson, J. L. (1997). The social fabric of a team-based M.B.A. program: Network effects on student satisfaction and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 40, 1369–1397.

    Google Scholar 

  • Balkundi, P., & Harrison, D. A. (2006). Ties, leaders, and time in teams: Strong inference about network structure’s effects on team viability and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 49, 49–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (2006). Toward a psychology of human agency. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1, 164–180.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barabasi, A.-L. (2002). Linked: The new science of networks. Cambridge, MA: Perseus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beckman, C. M., & Haunschild, P. R. (2002). Network learning: The effects of partner’s heterogeneity of experience on corporate acquisition. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47, 92–124.

    Google Scholar 

  • Béguin, P., & Rabardel, P. (2000). Designing for instrument-mediated activity. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 12, 173–190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bizzi, L. (2013). The dark side of structural holes: A multilevel Investigation. Journal of Management, 39, 1554.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boden, M. (2004). The creative mind: Myths and mechanism (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolger, N., Davis, A., & Rafaeli, E. (2003). Diary methods: Capturing life as it is lived. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 579–616.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borgatti, S., Everett, M., & Freeman, L. (1996). UCINET IV version 1.64 reference manual. Natick, MA: Analytic Technologies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brass, D. J., & Labianca, G. (1999). Social capital, social liabilities, and social resources management. In R. T. Leenders & S. Gabbay (Eds.), Corporate social capital and liability (pp. 99–999). Boston: Kluwer Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, J., & Duguid, P. (2001). Knowledge in organization: A social practice perspective. Organization Science, 12, 198–213.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, J. S., & Duquid, P. (1999). The social life of information. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brzozowski, M. J., Sandholm, T. & Hogg, T. (2009). Effects of feedback and peer pressure on contributions to enterprise social media. In Group ‘09: Proceedings of the ACM 2009 international conference on supporting group work.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burkhardt, M. E., & Brass, D. (1990). Changing patterns or patterns of change: The effects of a change in technology on social network structure and power. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 104–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burt, R. S. (1987). Social contagion and innovation: Cohesion versus structural equivalence. The American Journal of Sociology, 92, 1287–1335.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burt, R. S. (1992). Structural holes: The social structure of competition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burt, R. S. (1997). The contingent value of social capital. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, 339–365.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burt, R. S. (1998). Personality correlates of structural holes. Social Networks, 20, 3–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burt, R. S. (1999). Entrepreneurs, distrust, and third parties: A strategic look at the dark side of dense networks. In L. L. Thompson, J. M. Levine, & M. Messick (Eds.), Shared cognition in organizations: The management of knowledge (pp. 213–243). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burt, R. S. (2000). The network structure of social capital. In R. I. Sutton & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Organizational behaviour (pp. 345–423). Greenwich, CT: JAI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burt, R. S. (2004). Structural holes and good ideas. American Journal of Sociology, 110, 349–399.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burt, R. S. (2007). Secondhand brokerage: Evidence of the importance of local structure for managers, bankers, and analysts. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 119–148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buskens, V., & van de Rijt, A. (2008). Dynamics of networks if everyone strives for structural holes. American Journal of Sociology, 114, 371–407.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chi, M. T. H. (2006). Two approaches to the study of experts characteristics. In K. A. Ericsson, N. Charness, P. Feltovich, & R. Hoffman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (pp. 21–30). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clancey, W. (2006). Observation of work practices in natural settings. In K. A. Ericsson, N. Charness, P. Feltovich, & R. Hoffman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (pp. 127–146). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, A. (2008). Supersizing the mind: Embodiment, action, and cognitive extension. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cummings, J. N., & Cross, R. (2003). Structural properties of work groups and their consequences for performance. Social Networks, 25, 197–210.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donald, M. (2001). A mind so rare: The evolution of human consciousness. New York: Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, A. (2005). Relational agency: Learning to be a resourceful practitioner. International Journal of Educational Research, 43, 168–182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engeström, Y. (2004). The new generation of expertise: even theses. In H. Rainbird, A. Fuller, & A. Munro (Eds.), Workplace learning in context (pp. 145–165). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engeström, Y., Engeström, R., & Kärkkäinen, M. (1995). Polycontextuality and boundary crossing in expert cognition: Learning and problem solving in complex work activities. Learning and Instruction, 5, 319–336.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engeström, Y., Engeström, R., & Vähäaho, T. (1999). When the center does not hold: The importance of knotworking. In S. Chaiklin, M. Hedegaard, & U. Jensen (Eds.), Activity theory and social practice: Cultural-historical approaches (pp. 345–374). Aarhus, Denmark: Aarhus University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ericsson, K. A. (2003). Development of elite performance: An update from the perspective of the expert performance approach. In J. L. Starkes & K. A. Ericsson (Eds.), Expert performance in sports: Advanced in research on sport expertise (pp. 49–83). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ericsson, K. A. (2006). The influence of experience and deliberate practice on the development of superior expert performance. In K. A. Ericsson, N. Charness, P. Feltovich, & R. Hoffman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (pp. 683–704). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ericsson, K. A. (2009). Enhancing the development of professional performance: Implications from the study of deliberate practice. In K. A. Ericsson (Ed.), Development of professional expertise: Toward measurement of expert performance and design of optimal learning environments (pp. 405–431). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ericsson, K. A., & Lehmann, A. C. (1996). Experts and exceptional performance. Evidence on maximal adaptation on task constraints. Annual Review of Psychology, 47, 273–305.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1993). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ericsson, K. A., & Smith, J. (1991). Prospects and limits of the empirical study of expertise: An introduction. In K. A. Ericsson & J. Smith (Eds.), Toward a general theory of expertise: Prospects and limits (pp. 1–38). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fernandez, R. M., & Gould, R. V. (1994). A dilemma of state power: Brokerage and influence in the national health policy domain. American Journal of Sociology, 99, 1455–1491.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleming, L., Mingo, S., & Chen, D. (2007). Collaborative brokerage, generative creativity, and creative success. Administrative Science Quarterly, 57, 443–475.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frank, K. A. (1996). Mapping interactions within and between cohesive subgroups. Social Networks, 18, 93–119.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, L. C. (2000). Visualizing social networks. Journal of Social Structure, 1(1), 4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, R. A., & Podolny, J. (1992). Differentiation of boundary spanning roles: Labor negotiations and implications for role conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37(1), 20–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, H. (2003). Creating minds: An anatomy of creativity seen through the lives of Freud, Einstein, Picasso, Stravinsky, Eliot, Graham, and Gandhi. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gigerenzer, G. (1994). Where do new ideas come from? In M. Boden (Ed.), Dimensions of creativity (pp. 53–74). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, R., & Chi, M. T. H. (1988). Overview. In H. T. M. Chi, R. Glaser, & M. Farr (Eds.), The nature of expertise (pp. xv–xxviii). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grandall, B., Klein, G., & Hoffman, R. R. (2006). Working minds: A practitioner’s guide to cognitive task analysis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gruber, H., Lehtinen, E., Palonen, T., & Degner, S. (2008). Persons in shadow: Assessing the social context of high ability. Psychology Science Quarterly, 50, 237–258.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hakkarainen, K., Hytönen, K., Makkonen, J., Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, P., & White, H. (2013). Interagency, collective creativity, and academic knowledge practices. In A. Sannino & V. Ellis (Eds.), Learning and collective creativity. Activity-theoretical and socio-cultural studies (pp. 77–98). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hakkarainen, K., Palonen, T., Paavola, S., & Lehtinen, E. (2004). Communities of networked expertise: Professional and educational perspectives. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hakkarainen, K., Tuomainen, J., Lonka, K, Pyhältö, K., Paavola, S., Pohjola, P., et al. (2009). Interagency, collective creativity, and academic knowledge practices. Paper presented at The First International Workshop of Sociocultural and Activity-theoretical Research Centers: Collective Creativity and Learning, 21–22 of December, 2009, Centre for Research on Activity, Development and Learning, Department of Education, University of Helsinki (to be published as a book chapter).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, M. T. (1999). The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization subunits. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(1), 82–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howells, J. (1999). Management and hybridization of expertise in network design. In R. Williams, W. Faulkner, & J. Fleck (Eds.), Exploring expertise: Issues and perspectives (pp. 265–285). London: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, T. (1998). Rescuing Prometheus: Four monumental projects than transformed the world. New York: Vintage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, T. (2004). Human built world: How to think about technology and culture. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. Cambridge, MA: MIT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hytönen, K., Hakkarainen, K., & Palonen, T. (2011). Young diplomats’ socialization to the networked professional cultures of their workplace communities. Vocations and Learning, 4(3), 253–273. doi:10.1007/s12186-011-9061-x.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ibarra, H. (1992). Homophily and differential returns: sex differences in network structure and access in an advertising firm. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37(3), 422–447.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ibarra, H., & Andrews, S. B. (1993). Power, social influence and sense making: Effects of network centrality and proximity on employee perceptions. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38, 277–303.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ibarra, H., Kilduff, M., & Tsai, W. (2005). Zooming in and out: Connecting individuals and collectivities at the frontiers of organizational network research. Organization Science, 16(4), 359–371.

    Google Scholar 

  • Janicik, G. A. (1997). The social cognition of social structure: Examining the learning of relations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jehn, K. A., Northcraft, G. B., & Neale, M. A. (1999). Why differences make a difference: A field study of diversity, conflict and performance in workgroups. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 741–763.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, P., Heimann, V. L., & O’Neill, K. (2000). The wolf pack: Team dynamics for the 21st century. Journal of Workplace Learning, 12(4), 159–164.

    Google Scholar 

  • John-Steiner, V. (2000). Creative collaboration. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, A. M., & Haenlein, M. (2010). Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of social media. Business Horizons, 53(1), 59–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krackhardt, D. (1990). Assessing the political landscape: structure, cognition and power in organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 342–360.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kramer, R. M. (1999). Social uncertainty and collective paranoia in knowledge communities: Thinking and acting in the shadow of doubt. In L. L. Thompson, J. M. Levine, & M. D. Messick (Eds.), Shared cognition in organizations: The management of knowledge (pp. 163–191). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Labianca, G., Brass, D. J., & Gray, B. (1998). Social networks and perceptions of intergroup conflict: The role of negative relationships and third parties. Academy of Management Journal, 41, 55–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larson, A. (1992). Network dyads in entrepreneurial settings: A study of the governance of exchange relationships. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37, 76–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lomi, A., Snijders, T. A. B., Steglich, C. E. G., & Torló, V. J. (2011). Why are some more peer than others? Evidence from a longitudinal study of social networks and individual academic performance. Social Science Research, 40, 1506–1520.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCarty, C. (2002). Measuring structure in personal networks. Journal of Social Structure, 3(1). Available from http://www.bebr.ufl.edu/Articles/Structure_persona_networks.pdf.

  • Mehra, A., Kilduff, M., & Brass, D. J. (2001). The social networks of high and low selfmonitors: Implications for workplace performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46, 121–146.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mieg, H. A. (2001). The social psychology of expertise: Case studies in research, professional domains, and expert roles. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mieg, H. A. (2006). Social and sociological factors in the development of expertise. In K. A. Ericsson, N. Charness, P. Feltovich, & R. Hoffman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (pp. 743–760). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miettinen, R. (2006). The sources of novelty: A cultural and systemic view of distributed creativity. Creativity and Innovation Management, 15, 173–181.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mintzberg, H., & Van der Heyden, L. (1999). Organigraphs: Drawing how companies really work. Harvard Business Review, 77(5), 87–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mizruchi, M. S., & Stearns, L. B. (2001). Getting deals done: The use of social networks in bank decision-making. American Sociological Review, 66, 647–671.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moliterno, T. P., & Mahony, D. M. (2011). Network theory of organization: A multilevel approach. Journal of Management, 37, 443–467.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nardi, B., Whittaker, S., & Schwarz, H. (2000). It’s not what you know, it’s who you know: Work in the information age. First Monday, 5, 5. URL: http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue5_5/nardi/index.html

  • Nowicki, K., & Snijders, T. A. B. (2001). Estimation and prediction for stochastic block structures. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 96, 1077–1087.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nurmela, K., Lehtinen, E., & Palonen, T. (1999, December 12–15). Evaluating CSCL log files by social network analysis. In C. M. Hoadley & J. Roschelle (Eds.), Proceedings of the third international conference on computer support for collaborative learning (CSCL99) (pp. 434–444). Palo Alto: Stanford University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nurmela, K., Palonen, T., Lehtinen, E., & Hakkarainen, K. (2003, June 14–18). Developing tools for analyzing CSCL process. In Proceedings of the international conference of computer-supported collaborative learning, Bergen, Norway.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paavola, S., Lipponen, L., & Hakkarainen, K. (2004). Modeling innovative knowledge communities: A knowledge-creation approach to learning. Review of Educational Research, 74, 557–576.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palonen, T. (2003), Shared knowledge and the web of relationships. Turun yliopiston julkaisuja Sarja B osa 266, Turku.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palonen, T., & Lehtinen, E. (2001). Exploring invisible scientific communities: Studying networking relations within an educational research community. A Finnish case. Higher Education, 42(4), 493–513.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palonen, T., Hakkarainen, K., Talvitie, J., & Lehtinen, E. (2004). Network ties, cognitive centrality, and team interaction within a telecommunication company. In H. Gruber, E. Boshuizen, & R. Bromme (Eds.), Professional learning: Gaps and transitions on the way from novice to expert (pp. 273–294). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pea, R. D. (1993). Practices of distributed intelligence and designs for education. In G. Salomon (Ed.), Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations (pp. 47–87). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pyhältö, K., Stubb, J., & Lonka, K. (2009). Developing scholarly communities as learning environments for doctoral students. International Journal for Academic Development, 14, 221–232.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rehrl, M., Palonen, T., Lehtinen, E., & Gruber, H. (2014). Experts in science: Visibility in research communities. Talent Development and Excellence, 6, 31–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reis, H. T., & Gable, S. L. (2000). Event sampling and other methods for studying daily experience. In H. T. Reis & C. Judd (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in social and personality psychology (pp. 190–222). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rissanen, O., Palonen, T., & Hakkarainen, K. (2010, May 3–4). Magical experts: An analysis of Finland’s national magician network. In Proceedings of the seventh conference of networked learning, Aalborg, Denmark.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rissanen, O., Palonen, T., Pitkänen, P., Kuhn, G., & Hakkarainen, K. (2013). Personal social networks and the cultivation of expertise in magic: An interview study. Vocations and Learning, 6(3), 347–365.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ritella, G., & Hakkarainen, K. (2012). Instrument genesis in technology mediated learning: From double stimulation to expansive knowledge practices. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 7, 239–258.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodan, S., & Galunic, C. (2004). More than network structure: How knowledge heterogeneity influences managerial performance and innovativeness. Strategic Management Journal, 25, 541–562.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogoff, B. (2003). The cultural nature of human development. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryymin, E., Palonen, T., & Hakkarainen, K. (2008). Networking relations of using ICT within a teacher community. Computers & Education, 51(3), 1264–1282.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, J. (1991). Social network analysis. A handbook. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seibert, S. E., Kraimer, M. L., & Liden, R. C. (2001). A social capital theory of career success. Academy of Management Journal, 44(2), 219–237.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. (1977). Models of discovery. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Reidel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. (2002). Achieving excellence in institutions. In M. Ferrari (Ed.), The pursuit of excellence through education (pp. 181–194). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slaughter, A. J., Yu, J., & Koehly, L. M. (2009). Social network analysis: Understanding the role of context in small groups and organizations. In E. Salas, G. F. Goodwin, & C. S. Burke (Eds.), Team effectiveness in complex organizations. New York: Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snijders, T. A. B., & Nowicki, K. (2001), Manual for BLOCKS version 1.51. Available from http://stat.gamma.rug.nl/stocnet/

  • Soda, G., & Bizzi, L. (2012). Think different? An investigation of network antecedents and performance consequences of creativity as deviation. Strategic Organization, 10(2), 99–127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sosniak, L. A. (2006). Retrospective interviews in the study of expertise and expert performance. In K. A. Ericsson, N. Charness, P. J. Feltovich, & R. R. Hoffman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (pp. 287–301). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sparrowe, R. T., Liden, R. C., Waynemaria, S. J., & Kraimer, L. (2001). Social networks and the performance of individuals and groups. Academy of Management Journal, 44(2), 316–325.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stasser, G., & Titus, W. (1985). Pooling of unshared information in group decision-making: Biased information sampling during discussion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 1467–1478.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomasello, M. (2009). Why we cooperate. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomasello, M., & Carpenter, M. (2007). Shared intentionality. Developmental Science, 10(1), 121–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tuomainen, J., Palonen, T., & Hakkarainen, K. (2010). A special education teacher’s networks: A Finnish case. International Journal of Special Education, 25(1), 46–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tuomainen, J., Palonen, T., & Hakkarainen, K. (2012). Special educators’ social networks: A multiple case study in a Finnish part-time special education context. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 65(1), 21–38. doi:10.1080/00313831.2011.567394.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uzzi, B. (1997). Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wexler, B. E. (2006). Brain and culture: Neurobiology, ideology, and social change. Cambridge, MA: MIT.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Learning Research and Department of Teacher Education, University of Turku, Turku, Finland

    Tuire Palonen

  2. Department of Education, University of Turku, Turku, Finland

    Kai Hakkarainen

Authors
  1. Tuire Palonen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kai Hakkarainen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tuire Palonen .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Educational Science, University of Paderborn, Paderborn, Germany

    Christian Harteis

  2. Department of Business Education and Educational Management, University of Bamberg, Bamberg, Germany

    Andreas Rausch

  3. Economics and Business Education II, University of Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany

    Jürgen Seifried

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Palonen, T., Hakkarainen, K. (2014). Social Network Analyses of Learning at Workplaces. In: Harteis, C., Rausch, A., Seifried, J. (eds) Discourses on Professional Learning. Professional and Practice-based Learning, vol 9. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7012-6_15

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation