Networks in professional groups: a matter of connection or self-exile?

IF 1.6 Q3 MANAGEMENT Team Performance Management Pub Date : 2017-10-03 DOI:10.1108/TPM-10-2016-0044
S. Boroș, L. V. Gorp
{"title":"Networks in professional groups: a matter of connection or self-exile?","authors":"S. Boroș, L. V. Gorp","doi":"10.1108/TPM-10-2016-0044","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose \n \n \n \n \nIntegrating predictions of social exchange theory and implicit social cognition, this paper aims to investigate mechanisms of co-evolution between professional and personal support networks in a professional, non-hierarchical setting. \n \n \n \n \nDesign/methodology/approach \n \n \n \n \nThe study covers simultaneously people’s behaviours and their subjective interpretations of them in a cross-lagged network design in a group of 65 MBA students. \n \n \n \n \nFindings \n \n \n \n \nResults show that people build on their professional support network to develop personal support relations. People who have a high status in the professional support network appear to be afraid to lose them by asking too many others for personal support and people with a low status in the professional support network seem also be reluctant to ask many others for personal support. \n \n \n \n \nPractical implications \n \n \n \n \nAlthough personal support is a key social mechanism facilitating individual well-being and organizational success, support in the workplace often remains limited to professional topics. This research shows why people hesitate to expand their networks in professional settings and to what extent their fears have a basis in reality. \n \n \n \n \nOriginality/value \n \n \n \n \nIt goes beyond predictions of social exchange theory which inform most network evolution studies and tap into implicit social cognition predictions to expand the explanatory power of the hypotheses. The study’s network analysis takes into account both behaviours and social perceptions. The sample is a non-hierarchical professional group which allows a more ecological observation of how hierarchies are born in social groups.","PeriodicalId":46084,"journal":{"name":"Team Performance Management","volume":"23 1","pages":"318-332"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2017-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1108/TPM-10-2016-0044","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Team Performance Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/TPM-10-2016-0044","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Purpose Integrating predictions of social exchange theory and implicit social cognition, this paper aims to investigate mechanisms of co-evolution between professional and personal support networks in a professional, non-hierarchical setting. Design/methodology/approach The study covers simultaneously people’s behaviours and their subjective interpretations of them in a cross-lagged network design in a group of 65 MBA students. Findings Results show that people build on their professional support network to develop personal support relations. People who have a high status in the professional support network appear to be afraid to lose them by asking too many others for personal support and people with a low status in the professional support network seem also be reluctant to ask many others for personal support. Practical implications Although personal support is a key social mechanism facilitating individual well-being and organizational success, support in the workplace often remains limited to professional topics. This research shows why people hesitate to expand their networks in professional settings and to what extent their fears have a basis in reality. Originality/value It goes beyond predictions of social exchange theory which inform most network evolution studies and tap into implicit social cognition predictions to expand the explanatory power of the hypotheses. The study’s network analysis takes into account both behaviours and social perceptions. The sample is a non-hierarchical professional group which allows a more ecological observation of how hierarchies are born in social groups.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
专业群体中的网络:是联系还是自我放逐?
目的结合社会交换理论和内隐社会认知的预测,研究在专业、非层级环境中,专业和个人支持网络之间的协同进化机制。设计/方法论/方法这项研究同时涵盖了65名MBA学生在交叉滞后网络设计中的行为及其主观解释。研究结果显示,人们建立在他们的专业支持网络上发展个人支持关系。在专业支持网络中地位较高的人似乎害怕因为向太多其他人寻求个人支持而失去他们,而在专业支持网中地位较低的人似乎也不愿意向很多其他人寻求私人支持。实际意义尽管个人支持是促进个人幸福感和组织成功的关键社会机制,但工作场所的支持往往仅限于专业主题。这项研究表明,为什么人们在专业环境中不愿扩大自己的人际网络,以及他们的恐惧在多大程度上有现实依据。原创性/价值它超越了为大多数网络进化研究提供信息的社会交换理论的预测,并利用隐含的社会认知预测来扩大假设的解释力。该研究的网络分析同时考虑了行为和社会认知。样本是一个无等级的专业群体,可以更生态地观察社会群体中等级制度是如何产生的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
29.40%
发文量
28
期刊介绍: This international journal contributes to the successful implementation and development of work teams and team-based organizations by providing a forum for sharing experience and learning to stimulate thought and transfer of ideas. It seeks to bridge the gap between research and practice by publishing articles where the claims are evidence-based and the conclusions have practical value. Effective teams form the heart of every successful organization. But team management is one of the hardest challenges faced by managers.
期刊最新文献
“They don’t take notes!” Tensions perceived by first-line workers in an action research project Digital team coaching for workplace communication: longitudinal evaluation of recipients’ perceptions How leader humility influences team reflexivity: a team level analysis The double-edged sword effect of psychological safety climate: a theoretical framework A comparative multi criteria decision analysis of football teams: evidence on FIFA world cup
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1