Integrating insights from the literature on headquarters attention in the multinational corporation and the social capital of brokering and closed networks, we argue that the career performance of subsidiary managers depends on whether the manager’s individual social network is complementary with the level of headquarters attention received by the subsidiary in which the manager is located. By so doing, we expound on an “attention paradox,” in which we contend that that the same condition of operating in a subsidiary receiving a given level of headquarters attention could in principle facilitate as well as hamper the career performance of the individual managing that subsidiary. Our theory moves beyond the conventional view that links headquarters attention to unidirectional effects on performance, and offers a non-deterministic perspective that suggests that similar levels of attention may lead to opposite outcomes for the individual manager depending on the structural properties of the manager’s network.

Social networks are dynamic by nature. While network research has typically treated relationships between social actors as static, there has been a surge in literature extending a dynamic lens to intraorganizational networks. Critically, there is no comprehensive and systematic review of intraorganizational network dynamics studies. Moreover, the field lacks programmatic coherence, clear and consistent terminology, and methodological clarity. This review attempts to resolve these issues. To foster a common language, we provide an integrative definition and clarify the scope of intraorganizational network dynamics. This allows us to distinguish four domains of dynamic network theorizing. Building on this, we develop an encompassing framework that maps the multiple facets of this literature and apply it to organize our summary and synthesis. We then take a bird's-eye view of the full body of research and discuss four foundational areas in which network dynamics research can be conceptually and methodologically extended. We end by elaborating on the issue of interdependence in network data and providing an overview of leading statistical approaches for modeling longitudinal network data that explicitly account for dependence among observations. We see this review as an entry point for researchers interested in intraorganizational network dynamics and as a way to spark new scholarship on questions that remain open in this literature.

Network research shows that strong relationships, highly embedded relationships and brokered relationships may have different outcomes. While pros and cons are associated with each of these network structures, how this ambiguity translates into individuals' actions of network change is unclear. Specifically, if network positions can be both beneficial and detrimental, how do individuals decide whether to maintain those positions? We develop a tie-specific model of network modification that captures the positioning in the work-related network and the level of knowledge acquired from that network for each individual in a knowledge-intensive organization. Our analysis of tie-level data identifies the level of acquired knowledge as an important disambiguating mechanism that determines how individuals manage their strong ties, embedded ties and brokered ties over time.

Social structure is critical in organizational life. While abundant scholarly work has emphasized the benefits and opportunities that follow from positive interpersonal relationships in the context of social networks in work organizations, it has largely overlooked the role of negative relationships. The aim of this paper is to shed more light on this issue. Using a mixed methods approach, we examine the role of direct and indirect negative relationships on individuals’ innovative behavior. In a study of a high-end Italian architectural studio, we demonstrate that both direct and indirect negative relationships lead to poorer innovative performance, as evaluated by the focal individual’s supervisor. The results provide important insights into the social processes and relational dynamics that explain the relationship between negative ties and individuals’ innovative behavior, offering noteworthy implications for theory, research, and practice on negative ties and innovative behavior.

There has been a tremendous increase in scholarly interest in the emergence, evolution, and change of organizational networks. This has led to key insights on the phenomenon, and to a clearer understanding of its uniqueness and importance. Yet, the rapid increase in the number of publications on network dynamics, the fact that longitudinal network data significantly differ both across and within levels of analysis, and the fact that network dynamics can be explained invoking different logics (e.g., agency, inertia, opportunity) which are differentially embedded in various disciplines (e.g., economics, sociology, strategy) have led to fragmentation in the existing literature, which is scattered across a wide range of scientific journals. This hampers cumulative knowledge growth and risks leading to a duplication of efforts. Drawing on 162 peer-reviewed articles, we systematically review and integrate research on network dynamics into a conceptual framework that allows us to identify persisting gaps in research and promising avenues for advancing our understanding of network dynamics.

Linguistic framing—that is, “the selective use of vocabularies to construct meaning of a particular version of reality and to shape target audiences’ understandings, garner their appreciation, and influence their behaviors” (Pan et al., 2019: 3)—has important consequences for firms that need to convey information to potential resource contributors in order to secure external investments. However, while linguistic frames are ubiquitous and normally simultaneously deployed, knowledge is lacking on the workings and inherent advantages and disadvantages of the concurrent use of contrasting framing strategies—namely, framing ambivalence. To improve our understanding of the importance of ambivalent framing for strategic communication effectiveness, we explore the application in an equity crowdfunding setting of linguistic framing strategies that simultaneously appeal to the familiarity and novelty of a given entrepreneurial project. In particular, we extend a complementarity logic to the context of ambivalent linguistic frames and their rhetorical counterparts to theorize that, while per se deleterious, ambivalent framing strategies lead to increased resource acquisitions when formulated in a clear and simple manner, but result in the opposite effect when formulated in complex ways. Analysis of full-sample, firm-level data on 197 equity crowdfunding campaigns supports these ideas. These findings contribute to the strategic communication, signaling, and crowdfunding literature.

The debate on whether bonding or bridging ties are more beneficial for acquiring knowledge that is conducive to individual creativity has mostly overlooked the context in which such ties are formed. We challenge the widespread assumption that closed, heavily bonded networks imply a collaborative attitude on the part of the embedded actors and propose that the level of collaboration in a network can be independent from that network's structural characteristics, such that it moderates the effects of closed and brokering network positions on the acquisition of knowledge that supports creativity. Individuals embedded in closed networks acquire more knowledge and become more creative when the level of collaboration in their network is high. Brokers who arbitrage information across disconnected contacts acquire more knowledge and become more creative when collaboration is low. An analysis of employee-level, single-firm data supports these ideas.

Particularly in noisy signaling environments, managerial communication has important consequences for organizations. Yet, these consequences can be very different, and rhetorical signals have been shown to be able to create as well as destroy value for firms. To improve our understanding of the conditions that make rhetoric a value-adding versus value-destroying exercise, we examine the simultaneous application in an equity crowdfunding setting of two key rhetorical instruments: metaphorical communication and language concreteness. Based on a complementary fit logic, we theorize that metaphorical communication boosts resource contributions when paired with language concreteness, but hampers resource contributions when combined with language abstraction. Analysis of full-sample, firm-level data on 140 crowdfunding campaigns supports these ideas. These findings contribute to the strategic communication, signaling, and crowdfunding literatures.

Multinational corporations (MNCs) need to sense, source, and mobilize knowledge when and where it arises, whether at home, or elsewhere in the world. For this reason, MNCs benefit from employee networks of relationships that span across intraorganizational barriers, allowing for the efficient mobilization of knowledge across boundaries. Yet, which organizational members are more likely to be able to develop these boundary spanning networks? We leverage a unique data set from a large multinational corporation to empirically test a comprehensive model that captures the effect of an employee's mandate, expertise, and behavioral orientations on her likelihood to span intraorganizational boundaries that manifest themselves in the form of hierarchies, intra-functional domains, and geographic territories. We find that the employees that are more likely to be boundary spanners are those having mandates with a global impact, high levels of expertise, and a collaborative orientation in their networking behaviors. In addition, we find that these effects are stronger for those employees that have large formal workflow networks.

Headquarters of multinational corporations can be involved in their subsidiaries and help with the development and transfer of innovative ideas. However, headquarters involvement might not always be desired or needed, and it can thus be perceived as interference with local activities, potentially reducing local willingness to go the extra mile. We address the lack of knowledge about subsidiary manager behavior by answering the following question: How does headquarters involvement influence the proactive behavior of subsidiary managers to push for new and innovative ideas? Using data from 120 top managers in subsidiaries of multinational corporations, we find that the negative relationship between headquarters involvement and their subsidiary managers' support for initiatives can be reduced when socialization mechanisms such as a common corporate culture or rotation programs are put in place.

Brokers are expected to be more creative than employees embedded in closed social structures because they occupy a position in the social space that provides them with access to non-redundant knowledge. However, the extant research provides partly inconsistent findings on the creative implications of brokerage, which raises important questions about when and how brokering between otherwise disconnected colleagues leads to individual creativity. We advance the relational perspective on individual creativity by adopting a contingency view, and showing that a curvilinear ( inverted U-shape) specification of the relationship between brokerage and creativity applies particularly when brokers work in research and development, as they are more likely to intensively exploit their structural opportunities. In addition, we show that brokers who work in research and development are more sensitive to work environments that protect their cognitive resources, such that they exhibit greater creativity when the work environment is free from environmental stressors, such as noise and disturbances. Thus, environmental stressors are particularly harmful for those employees who are most likely to exploit the opportunity to broker across otherwise disconnected colleagues.

Having a large network of colleagues means having several opportunities to help those colleagues, as well as a higher chance of receiving requests for help from them. Employees with large networks are therefore expected to help more in the workplace than those with small networks. However, large networks are also associated with cognitive costs, which may reduce the focal employee's ability to both recognize the need for help and engage in helping behaviours. For these reasons, the authors assert an inverted U-shaped relation between the size of an ego's social network and engagement in helping behaviour. However, high-quality relationships imply higher mutual understanding between the actors, and hence lower cognitive costs. In turn, the position (and threshold) of the curve between network size and interpersonal helping should be influenced by the quality of the relationship between the provider and the beneficiaries of help. Analysis of employee-level, single-firm data supports these ideas, providing preliminary evidence that quality of relationship compensates for the difficulties that may arise from having large social networks.

Managers delegate the right to make decisions to employees because delegation economizes on scarce managerial attention, fosters the use of local knowledge, and positively impacts employee motivation. This is particularly important in knowledge-intensive organizations that operate in uncertain environments, where employees have specialized knowledge and need to be responsive to local changes. Managers, however, often renege on delegation, particularly in high-uncertainty contexts, because they are tempted to adjust past decisions based on new information. We argue that employees’ knowledge that management may renege on delegated decision rights has negative motivational consequences that are costly in knowledge-intensive organizations. As a consequence, making delegation credible is essential for sustaining the advantages that flow from delegation. Organizational design can play a key role in making delegation credible, supporting the value creation caused by delegated discretion. Our theoretical argument sheds new light on relationships among organizational design, credible delegation, and firm-level value creation.