Making Sense of Networks: Exploring How Network Participants Understand and Use Information From Social Network Analysis
| dc.contributor.author | Moore, John | en |
| dc.contributor.committeechair | Lemaire, Robin Hargroder | en |
| dc.contributor.committeechair | Stephenson, Max O. Jr. | en |
| dc.contributor.committeemember | Smith, Stephanie L. | en |
| dc.contributor.committeemember | Hult, Karen M. | en |
| dc.contributor.department | Government and International Affairs | en |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-05T08:03:39Z | en |
| dc.date.available | 2021-06-05T08:03:39Z | en |
| dc.date.issued | 2021-05-28 | en |
| dc.description.abstract | Many of today's complex public issues are best addressed by multi-sectoral multi-organizational responses that include different types of organizations working together (Kettl, 2008; O'Toole, 1997). Social network analysis (SNA) of interorganizational networks has emerged as a useful tool for network managers to understand the structure and function of the complex networks in which they seek to manage (Human and Provan, 1997, 2000; Provan and Milward, 1995; Provan, Sebastian, and Milward, 1996; Provan, Veazie, Staten, and Teufel-Shone, 2005). The output of an interorganizational SNA typically provides a range of information to network managers including network plots. The network plots provide visual representations of different aspects of the network by showing the kinds of ties between the actors in the network. The information from network analyses can help network managers encourage systems thinking, see the different roles played by organizations, or identify links to outside resources among many other uses, but "will only have practical value to communities if it can be effectively presented, discussed, accepted, and acted on by community leaders and network participants [emphasis added]." (Provan et al., 2005, p. 610). However, little is currently known about if or how the information embedded in network plots is accepted or acted on by network participants. The visual representations of the network (network plots) provided to network participants following a SNA are often open to a range of interpretations that may or may not align with the findings of the analyst or the intended use by network managers, raising many interesting questions. Little is currently known about how differently situated network participants might interpret the same network plots differently. Nor do we understand what factors might influence different individuals or organizations to come up with different interpretations. After conducting a SNA and presenting it to network participants, I conducted interviews with a range of different representatives from participating organizations. I used a particular form of semi-structured interview, a situated micro-element interview from Dervin's Sense Making Methodology (SMM) (Dervin, Foreman-Wernet, and Lauterbach, 2003). I then analyzed the interview transcripts using standard qualitative coding methods (Bailey, 2007) to see if themes emerged that addressed the research questions. I found that most informants had trouble extracting information and meaning from their examination of the plots without that meaning and interpretation being provided by the expert analyst. I posit some potential explanations for why that might be so in the case I studied. I then turn to some interesting methodological considerations that emerged from taking the perspectives of network participants seriously. Finally, I synthesize the subject area and methodological findings into a refined framework for sense-making around network plots and offer propositions and potential approaches for future research. | en |
| dc.description.abstractgeneral | Many of today's complex public issues are best addressed by multi-sectoral multi-organizational responses that include different types of organizations working together (Kettl, 2008; O'Toole, 1997). Social network analysis (SNA) of interorganizational networks has emerged as a useful tool for network managers to understand the structure and function of the complex networks in which they seek to manage (Human and Provan, 1997, 2000; Provan and Milward, 1995; Provan, Sebastian, and Milward, 1996; Provan, Veazie, Staten, and Teufel-Shone, 2005). The output of an interorganizational SNA typically provides a range of information to network managers including network plots. The network plots provide visual representations of different aspects of the network by showing the kinds of ties between the actors in the network. The information from network analyses can help network managers encourage systems thinking, see the different roles played by organizations, or identify links to outside resources among many other uses, but "will only have practical value to communities if it can be effectively presented, discussed, accepted, and acted on by community leaders and network participants [emphasis added]." (Provan et al., 2005, p. 610). However, little is currently known about if or how the information embedded in network plots is accepted or acted on by network participants. The visual representations of the network (network plots) provided to network participants following a SNA are often open to a range of interpretations that may or may not align with the findings of the analyst or the intended use by network managers, raising many interesting questions. Little is currently known about how differently situated network participants might interpret the same network plots differently. Nor do we understand what factors might influence different individuals or organizations to come up with different interpretations. After conducting a SNA and presenting it to network participants, I conducted interviews with a range of different representatives from participating organizations. I used a particular form of semi-structured interview, a situated micro-element interview from Dervin's Sense Making Methodology (SMM) (Dervin, Foreman-Wernet, and Lauterbach, 2003). I then analyzed the interview transcripts using standard qualitative coding methods (Bailey, 2007) to see if themes emerged that addressed the research questions. I found that most informants had trouble extracting information and meaning from their examination of the plots without that meaning and interpretation being provided by the expert analyst. I posit some potential explanations for why that might be so in the case I studied. I then turn to some interesting methodological considerations that emerged from taking the perspectives of network participants seriously. Finally, I synthesize the subject area and methodological findings into a refined framework for sense-making around network plots and offer propositions and potential approaches for future research. | en |
| dc.description.degree | Doctor of Philosophy | en |
| dc.format.medium | ETD | en |
| dc.identifier.other | vt_gsexam:30735 | en |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10919/103640 | en |
| dc.publisher | Virginia Tech | en |
| dc.rights | In Copyright | en |
| dc.rights.uri | http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/ | en |
| dc.subject | Collaboration | en |
| dc.subject | networks | en |
| dc.subject | sense-making | en |
| dc.title | Making Sense of Networks: Exploring How Network Participants Understand and Use Information From Social Network Analysis | en |
| dc.type | Dissertation | en |
| thesis.degree.discipline | Public Administration/Public Affairs | en |
| thesis.degree.grantor | Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University | en |
| thesis.degree.level | doctoral | en |
| thesis.degree.name | Doctor of Philosophy | en |