Post on 20-May-2015
description
Teaching excellence for over a hundred years
The structure of business social network sites:the case of Milan IN
– preliminary results –
Ivana Pais – University of Brescia (pais@jus.unibs.it)
Riccardo De Vita – University of Greenwich (r.devita@gre.ac.uk)
Roberto Marmo – University of Pavia
SunBelt XXX Social Networks ConferenceJune 29 - July 04, 2010
Teaching excellence for over a hundred years
Agenda
Social network sites: does one structure fit all?
Empirical setting: the case of Milan In
Methodology: exploring the data
Preliminary findings: different levels of analysis
Discussion and conclusion: the next steps
Teaching excellence for over a hundred years
Theoretical background
‘Appropriable social organisations’ vs intentional organizations (Coleman, 1990)
Technological development
Different forms of Social Network Sites (O’Murchu, Breslin, Decker, 2004)
o Registration-Based vs. Connection Basedo Social vs. Professionalo Online vs. Offlineo …
Teaching excellence for over a hundred years
Research question
The majority of the studies focused on the understanding of the effects of social networks; while the factors that generate, sustain and reproduce them partly remain to be explored (Smith-Doerr & Powell, 2005).
Little is known about the specific structure of online business social network services.
RQ: Are different social network sites associated withdifferent network structures?
Teaching excellence for over a hundred years
Milan In
A non-profit association set up in 2005 to allow members of LinkedIn living in Milan to physically meet up with each other.
Comparative study: o same organization & same actorso Linkedin Group Vs Facebook Group
4311 1357505
Teaching excellence for over a hundred years
Method
Structural Variables: connection on Facebook and Linkedin groups symmetric networks
Composition variable: gender, education, job title, number of connections,...
Exploratory analysis of several network properties at the global and local level
Software: UCINET 6 (Borgatti, Everett and Freeman, 2002) and helper applications
Linkedin Group – Members since 2005
…adding the members since 2006
…adding the members since 2007
…adding the members since 2008
…adding the members since 2009
Linkedin Group – Today
Facebook GroupMan; Woman
N Components Isolates Density Centralization Avg Degree505 35 33
(+1 dyad)0.019** 79.0 % 9.43
Linkedin GroupMan; Woman
N Components Isolates Density Centralization Avg Degree505 6 5 0.027** 83.4 % 13.5
Multiplexity
% of ties in theLinkedin Group
% of ties in theFacebook Group
2.00% 2.86%
Clique size
Overall Clustering CoefficientFacebook Group 0.584Linkedin Group 0.494
Identifying relevant actors
Degree CentralityTop 5 actors in Linkedin Group
ID Facebook Linkedin
344 0 432347 7 260276 2 101
1031 5 9116 25 90
5 Key PlayersKPP 2 – Using nodes
Facebook Group Linkedin Group
714 34419 16
394 321482 1101
1236 530
Degree CentralityTop 5 actors in Facebook Group
ID Facebook Linkedin
19 406 3886 139 7620 87 3696 75 2497 74 40
Teaching excellence for over a hundred years
Discussion
Different network structures are associated with online groups built for the same purpose but on different platforms
o Specialization and different behaviour
Implications for academic debate and for organization management
Need to take a process perspective in analyzing network evolution
Teaching excellence for over a hundred years
The next steps…
Data:o Relations recommendations, physical interactiono Attribute data questionnaire and deeper analysis
Methodological approach:o Longitudinal analysis
Theoretical perspective:o Network structure and organizational development
Empirical setting:o Comparison with other online social networks
Teaching excellence for over a hundred years
The structure of business social network sites:the case of Milan IN
– preliminary results –
Ivana Pais – University of Brescia (pais@jus.unibs.it)
Riccardo De Vita – University of Greenwich (r.devita@gre.ac.uk)
Roberto Marmo – University of Pavia