The configurational approach in organizational network research

Research in the Sociology of Organizations

Volumn 38, Issue , 2013, Pages 225-253

  Raab, Jorg ^a   Lemaire, Robin H ^a   Provan, Keith G ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

Configurational approach; Interorganizational relations; Networks; Organization; QCA; Set theoretic methods

Indexed keywords

EID: 84981508191     PISSN: 0733558X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1108/S0733-558X(2013)0000038014     Document Type: Chapter

References (57)

1. Bakker, R. M., Cambre, B., Korlaar, L., & Raab, J. (2011). Managing the project learning paradox: A set-theoretic approach toward project knowledge transfer. International Journal of Project Management, 29(5), 494-503.
2. Bell, G. G., & Zaheer, A. (2007). Geography, networks, and knowledge flow. Organization Science, 18(6), 955-972.
3. Bensaou, M., & Venkatraman, N. (1995). Configurations of interorganizational relationships - A comparison between US and Japanese automakers. Management Science, 41(9), 1471-1492.
4. Borgatti, S. P., and Everett., M. G., & Freeman, L. C. (2002). UCINet for Windows. Harvard: Analytic Technologies.
5. Borgatti, S. P., & Foster, P. C. (2003). The network paradigm in organizational research: A review and typology. Journal of Management, 29(6), 991-1013.
6. Brass, D. J., Galaskiewicz, J., Greve, H. R., & Tsai, W. (2004). Taking stock of networks and organizations: A multilevel perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 47(6), 795-817.
7. Cambre, B., Mannak, R., & Raab, J. (2011). Combining structure, governance and context: A configurational approach in explaining the effectiveness of Dutch safety houses. Paper presented at the 27th EGOS Colloquium Gothenburg, Sweden, July 7-9, 2011.
8. Caren, N., & Panofsky, A. (2005). TQCA: A technique for adding temporality to qualitative comparative analysis. Sociological Methods & Research, 34(2), 147-171.
9. Corley, K. G., & Gioia, D. A. (2011). Building theory about theory building: What constitutes a theoretical contribution. Academy of Management Review, 36(1), 12-32.
10. Dekker, D., Krackhardt, D., & Snijders, T. A. B. (2007). Sensitivity of MRQAP tests to collinearity and autocorrelation conditions. Psychometrika, 72(4), 563-581.
11. Fiss, P. C. (2007). A set-theoretic approach to organizational configurations. Academy of Management Review, 32(4), 1180-1198.
12. Fiss, P. C. (2009). Case studies and the configurational analysis of organizational phenomena. In C. C. Ragin & D. Byrne (Eds.), The Handbook of Case Study Methods (pp. 424-440). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
13. Fiss, P. C. (2011). Building better causal theories: A fuzzy set approach to typologies in organization research. Academy of Management Journal, 54(2), 393-420.
14. Freeman, L. C. (2004). The development of social network analysis. A study in the sociology of science. Vancouver, BC. Empirical Press.
15. Gilsing, V., Nooteboom, B., Vanhaverbeke, W., Duysters, G., & Van den Oord, A. (2008). Network embeddedness and the exploration of novel technologies: Technological distance, betweenness centrality and density. Research Policy, 37(10), 1717-1731.
16. Greenwood, R., & Miller, D. (2010). Tackling design anew. Getting back to the heart of organizational theory. Academy of Management Perspectives, 24(4), 78-88.
17. Gulati, R., & Gargiulo, M. (1999). Where do interorganizational networks come from? American Journal of Sociology, 104(5), 1439-1493.
18. Gulati, R., Sytch, M., & Tatarynowicz, A. (2012). The rise and fall of small worlds: Exploring the dynamics of social structure. Organization Science, 23(2), 449-471.
19. Human, S. E., & Provan, K. G. (2000). Legitimacy building in the evolution of small-firm multilateral networks: A comparative study of success and demise. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45(2), 327-365.
20. Jarillo, J. C. (1988). On strategic networks. Strategic Management Journal, 9(1), 31-41.
21. Kilduff, M., & Brass, D. J. (2010). Organizational social network research: Core ideas and key debates. Academy of Management Annals, 4, 317-357.
22. Krackhardt, D. (1988). Predicting with networks: Nonparametric multiple regression analysis of dyadic data. Social Networks, 10(4), 359-381.
23. Larson, A. (1991). Partner networks: Leveraging external ties to improve entrepreneurial performance. Journal of Business Venturing, 6(3), 173-188.
24. Laumann, E. O., & Knoke, D. (1987). The organizational state: A perspective on the social organization of national energy and health policy domains. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.
25. Laursen, K., & Salter, A. (2006). Open for innovation: The role of openness in explaining innovation performance among UK manufacturing firms. Strategic Management Journal, 27(2), 131-150.
26. Lemaire, R. H., & Provan, K. G. (2010). Network governance, structure, and performance in a publicly funded child and youth health network. Paper presented at the 2010 Academy of Management Annual Meeting Montreal, Canada, August 6-10, 2010.
27. Levin, D. Z., & Cross, R. (2004). The strength of weak ties you can trust: The mediating role of trust in effective knowledge transfer. Management Science, 50(11), 1477-1490.
28. Lincoln, J. R., and Gerlach., M. L., & Takahashi, P. (1992). Keiretsu networks in the Japanese economy - A dyad analysis of intercorporate ties. American Sociological Review, 57(5), 561-585.
29. Meyer, A. D., and Tsui., A. S., & Hinings, C. R. (1993). Configurational approaches to organizational analysis. Academy of Management Journal, 36(6), 1175-1195.
30. Moliterno, T. P., & Mahony, D. M. (2011). Network theory of organization: A multilevel approach. Journal of Management, 37(2), 443-467.
31. Nohria, N., & Eccles, R. G. (Eds.). (1992). Networks and organizations: Structure, form, and action. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
32. Oliver, C. (1990). Determinants of interorganizational relationships - Integration and future directions. Academy of Management Review, 15(2), 241-265.
33. Owen-Smith, & Powell, W. W. (2004). Knowledge networks as channels and conduits: The effects of spillovers in the Boston Biotechnology Community. Organization Science, 15(1), 5-21.
34. Provan, K. G., and Fish., M. A., & Sydow, J. (2007). Interorganizational networks at the network level: A review and commentary on the empirical literature. Journal of Management, 33(3), 479-516.
35. Provan, K. G., & Kenis, P. N. (2008). Modes of network governance: Structure, management, and effectiveness. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(2), 229-252.
36. Provan, K. G., & Milward, H. B. (1995). A preliminary theory of interorganizational network effectiveness: A comparative study of four community mental health systems. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(1), 1-33.
37. Powell, W. W. (1990). Neither market nor hierarchy: Network forms of organization. In B. M. Staw & L. I. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behaviour (Vol. 12, pp. 295-336). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
38. Powell, W. W., and Koput., K. W., & Smith-Doerr, L. (1996). Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(1), 116-145.
39. Raab, J., & Kenis, P. (2009). Heading towards a society of networks. Journal of Management Inquiry, 18(3), 198-210.
40. Ragin, C. C. (1987). The comparative method: Moving beyond qualitative and quantitative strategies. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
41. Ragin, C. C. (2000). Fuzzy-set social science. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
42. Ragin, C. C. (2008). Redesigning social inquiry: Fuzzy sets and beyond. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
43. Ragin, C. C. (2009). Qualitative comparative analysis using fuzzy sets (fs-QCA). In B. Rihoux & C. C. Ragin (Eds.), Configurational comparative methods: Qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) and related techniques (pp. 87-121). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
44. Ragin, C. C, & Strand, S. I. (2008). Using qualitative comparative analysis to study causal order. Sociological Methods & Research, 36(4), 431-441.
45. Rihoux, B., & De Meur, G. (2009). Crisp-set qualitative comparative analysis (Cs-QCA). In B. Rihoux & C. C. Ragin (Eds.), Configurational comparative methods: Qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) and related techniques (pp. 33-68). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
46. ∗) models for social networks. Social Networks, 29(2), 173-191.
47. Salancik, G. (1995). Wanted: A good network theory of organization. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(2), 345-349.
48. Schalk, J., Torenvlied, R., & Allen, J. (2010). Network embeddedness and public agency performance: The strength of strong ties in Dutch higher education. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 20(3), 629-653.
49. Short, J. C, Payne, G. T., & Ketchen, D. J. (2008). Research on organizational configurations: Past accomplishments and future directions. Journal of Management, 34(6), 1053-1079.
50. Snijders, T. A. B., Steglich, C. E. G., & van de Bunt, G. G. (2010). Introduction to actor-based models for network dynamics. Social Networks, 32(1), 44-60.
51. Sydow, J., & Windeler, A. (1998). Organizing and evaluating interfirm networks: A structurationist perspective on network processes and network effectiveness. Organization Science, 9(3), 265-284.
52. O'Toole, L. J., & Meier, K. J. (2004). Public management in intergovernmental networks: Matching structural networks and managerial networking. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 14(4), 469-494.
53. Turrini, A., Cristofoli, D., Frosini, F., & Nasi, G. (2009). Networking literature about determinants of network effectiveness. Public Administration, 88(2), 528-550.
54. Uzzi, B. (1997). Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(1), 35-67.
55. Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
56. Watts, D. J. (1999). Networks, dynamics, and the small world phenomenon. American Journal of Sociology, 105(2), 493-527.
57. Zaheer, A., McEvily, B., & Perrone, V. (1998). Does trust matter? Exploring the effects of interorganizational and interpersonal trust on performance. Organization Science, 9(2), 141-159.