Seeing the forest and the trees: using network analysis to develop an organizational blueprint of state tobacco control systems.

In the United States, tobacco control activities are organized primarily in state tobacco control programs. These programs are comprised of public and private agencies working together to reduce tobacco use. The human, financial, and informational resources that go into state tobacco control programs are documented, and the outcomes of these programs have been studied in terms of health and health behavior. However, little is known about the organizational infrastructure that transforms the human, financial, and informational resources into positive health outcomes. This study examined the inter-organizational relationships among key partner agencies in eight state tobacco control programs. The state programs varied in terms of funding level, funding stability, and region of the country. Using a network analytic approach we asked an average of 14 agencies in each state program about their contacts and partnerships with the other key tobacco control agencies in their state program. Using network visualization and statistics we determined that the state networks shared some common features such as a highly central lead agency, but also had differences in network structure in terms of density and centralization. Using blockmodeling we found that, despite differences in state and program characteristics, there was a common organizational structure among the eight state programs. Understanding the inter-organizational relationships and the common organizational structures of state programs can aid researchers and practitioners in enhancing program capacity and in developing strategies for organizing effective public health systems.

[1]  F. Chaloupka,et al.  The impact of tobacco control program expenditures on aggregate cigarette sales: 1981–2000 , 2003 .

[2]  K. Provan,et al.  Network structure and attitudes toward collaboration in a community partnership for diabetes control on the US-Mexican border. , 2005, Journal of health organization and management.

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

[4]  William Richards,et al.  Nonrespondents in Communication Network Studies , 1992 .

[5]  Thomas W. Valente,et al.  Interorganizational relationships among HIV/AIDS service organizations in Baltimore: A newtwork analysis , 2001, Journal of Urban Health.

[6]  Keith G. Provan,et al.  The Use of Network Analysis to Strengthen Community Partnerships , 2005 .

[7]  G. Giovino,et al.  State tobacco control spending and youth smoking. , 2005, American journal of public health.

[8]  Karen Farquharson A Different Kind of Snowball: Identifying Key Policymakers , 2005 .

[9]  Vladimir Batagelj,et al.  Generalized blockmodeling , 2005, Structural analysis in the social sciences.

[10]  P. Doreian,et al.  Utilizing and Understanding Community Service Provision Networks: A Report of Three Case Studies Having 583 Participants , 1994 .

[11]  Keith G. Provan,et al.  Do networks really work? A framework for evaluating public-sector organizational networks , 1999 .

[12]  Vladimir Batagelj,et al.  Centrality in Social Networks , 1993 .

[13]  Vladimir Batagelj,et al.  Exploratory Social Network Analysis with Pajek , 2005 .

[14]  P. Doreian,et al.  Fixed list versus snowball selection of social networks , 1992 .

[15]  Jenine K. Harris,et al.  Network Analysis in Public Health: History, Methods, and Applications , 2022 .

[16]  Wenpin Tsai,et al.  Social networks and organizations , 2003 .

[17]  Vladimir Batagelj,et al.  Pajek - Program for Large Network Analysis , 1999 .

[18]  D. Luke,et al.  The best practices: use of the guidelines by ten state tobacco control programs. , 2006, American journal of preventive medicine.

[19]  Office on Smoking Best practices for comprehensive tobacco control programs , 1999 .

[20]  Thomas W. Valente Network models of the diffusion of innovations , 1996, Comput. Math. Organ. Theory.

[21]  D. Sly,et al.  The Florida “truth” anti-tobacco media evaluation: design, first year results, and implications for planning future state media evaluations , 2001, Tobacco control.

[22]  Pamela I. Clark,et al.  Greater Than the Sum: Systems Thinking in Tobacco control , 2007 .

[23]  F. Scutchfield,et al.  Public health systems research: the new kid on the block. , 2007, American journal of preventive medicine.

[24]  Mark Huisman,et al.  Imputation of missing network data: Some simple procedures , 2009, J. Soc. Struct..

[25]  T. Valente,et al.  Community coalitions as a system: effects of network change on adoption of evidence-based substance abuse prevention. , 2007, American journal of public health.

[26]  R. Beach,et al.  Funding of North Carolina tobacco control programs through the Master Settlement Agreement. , 2006, American journal of public health.

[27]  R. Zakocs,et al.  What explains community coalition effectiveness?: a review of the literature. , 2006, American journal of preventive medicine.

[28]  Jenine K. Harris,et al.  Using Social Network Analysis to Understand Missouri's System of Public Health Emergency Planners , 2007, Public health reports.

[29]  D. Luke,et al.  Interorganizational Relationships Within State Tobacco Control Networks: A Social Network Analysis , 2004, Preventing chronic disease.

[30]  C. Oliver,et al.  Organizations Working Together , 1992 .

[31]  Stanley Wasserman,et al.  Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications , 1994, Structural analysis in the social sciences.

[32]  F. Wheeler,et al.  Recommendations for Integration of Chronic Disease Programs: Are Your Programs Linked? , 2007, Preventing chronic disease.

[33]  Vladimir Batagelj,et al.  Exploratory Social Network Analysis with Pajek: Cohesion , 2005 .

[34]  Steven B. Andrews,et al.  Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition , 1995, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[35]  Scott J Leischow,et al.  Systems thinking and modeling for public health practice. , 2006, American journal of public health.

[36]  S. Wasserman,et al.  Models and Methods in Social Network Analysis: Structural Analysis in the Social Sciences , 2005 .