Being in the right place: A structural analysis of individual influence in an organization.

Daniel J. Brass This research examined the relationships between structural positions and influence at the individual level of analysis. The structure of the organization was conceptualized from a social network perspective. Measures of the relative positions of employees within workflow, communication, and friendship networks were strongly related to perceptions of influence by both supervisors and nonsupervisors and to promotions to the supervisory level. Measures included criticality, transaction alternatives, and centrality (access and control) in the networks and in such reference groups as the dominant coalition. A comparison of boundary-spanning and technical-core personnel indicated that contacts beyond the normal work requirements are particularly important for technical core personnel to acquire influence. Overall, the results provide support for a structural perspective on intraorganizational influence.

[1]  Alex Bavelas,et al.  Communication Patterns in Task‐Oriented Groups , 1950 .

[2]  H. Leavitt.  Some effects of certain communication patterns on group performance. , 1951, Journal of abnormal psychology.

[3]  R. Weiss,et al.  A Method for the Analysis of the Structure of Complex Organizations , 1955 .

[4]  Harold Guetzkow,et al.  The Impact of Certain Communication Nets Upon Organization and Performance in Task-Oriented Groups , 1955 .

[5]  D. Trow,et al.  Autonomy and job satisfaction in task-oriented groups. , 1957, Journal of abnormal psychology.

[6]  M. Mulder.  Power and satisfaction in task-oriented groups , 1959 .

[7]  J. R. French,et al.  The bases of social power. , 1959 .

[8]  R. Emerson.  Power-Dependence Relations , 1962, Power in Modern Societies.

[9]  David Mechanic,et al.  Sources of Power of Lower Participants in Complex Organizations , 1962 .

[10]  James D. Thompson.  Organizations in Action , 1967 .

[11]  Charles Kadushin,et al.  Power, Influence and Social Circles: A New Methodology for Studying Opinion Makers , 1968 .

[12]  K. Weick.  The social psychology of organizing , 1969 .

[13]  J. Pennings,et al.  A Strategic Contingencies' Theory of Intraorganizational Power , 1971 .

[14]  A. Pettigrew.  Information Control as a Power Resource , 1972 .

[15]  Jeffrey Pfeffer,et al.  The Bases and Use of Power in Organizational Decision Making: The Case of a University. , 1974 .

[16]  J. Pennings,et al.  Structural conditions of intraorganizational power , 1974 .

[17]  E. Rogers,et al.  Communication in Organizations , 1976 .

[18]  J. Pfeffer,et al.  Who gets power — and how they hold on to it: A strategic-contingency model of power , 1977 .

[19]  L. Freeman.  Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification , 1978 .

[20]  R. Mowday.  The Exercise of Upward Influence in Organizations. , 1978 .

[21]  Noel M. Tichy,et al.  Network Analysis in Organizational Settings , 1979 .

[22]  J. Lincoln,et al.  Work and Friendship Ties in Organizations: A Comparative Analysis of Relational Networks , 1979 .

[23]  C. Fombrun,et al.  Social Network Analysis For Organizations , 1979 .

[24]  D. Kipnis,et al.  Intraorganizational Influence Tactics: Explorations in Getting One's Way , 1980 .

[25]  David M. Boje,et al.  Effects of Organizational Strategies and Contextual Constraints on Centrality and Attributions of Influence in Interorganizational Networks. , 1981 .

[26]  F. Harary,et al.  Mediation and Power in Melanesia , 1981 .

[27]  Daniel J. Brass.  Structural Relationships, Job Characteristics, and Worker Satisfaction and Performance. , 1981 .

[28]  J. Kotter,et al.  What effective general managers really do. , 1982, Harvard business review.

[29]  J R Blau,et al.  Empowering nets of participation. , 1982, Administrative science quarterly.

[30]  C. Fombrun.  Attributions of Power Across a Social Network , 1983 .