With Special Guest Sarah Otner

What is power and influence? Although power appears as a multilevel concept, the early organizational literature tended to view it as wielded by people–measured as skills, traits, or competencies. This would change in the 1980s, in large part to a classic empirical study providing evidence that one’s position within an organizational structure was more likely to translate into one’s source of power. Dan Brass’ article, “Being in the Right Place: A Structural Analysis of Individual Influence in an Organization” from Administrative Science Quarterly is the subject of this episode.

Brass studied the relative positions of 140 non-supervisory members of a newspaper publishing company. His mixed-methods approach included a number of variables such as criticality, transaction alternatives, and centrality (access and control) in the social networks of the organization. The results showed that connections in workflow, communication, and friendship networks resulted in greater perceptions of influence by others. Such individuals were also more likely to be promoted within the organization. Workers in some specialized or boundary-spanning positions were well-postured to gain influence by maintaining broader social networks than one’s duties would normally require.

The impact of the article is still significant today, as the structural perspective on individual influence is now generally accepted. It also kickstarted a long and industrious career for Brass who has written extensively on social network(ing), power, and influence to the present day.

Joining us in the studio for this episode is Sarah Otner, a junior research fellow at the Imperial College in London. Giving credit where due, it was Sarah’s suggestion that we cover this theme as it has greatly influenced her work. After this episode, we believe you too will be convinced that this article is deserving of being called a “classic.”

Read With Us:

Brass, D. J. (1984). Being in the right place: A structural analysis of individual influence in an organization. Administrative Science Quarterly, 518-539.

To Know More:

Betancourt, N., Kovacs, B., & Otner, S. (2018). The perception of status: How we infer the status of others from their social relationships. Network Science, 6(3), 319-347.

Borgatti, S. P., & Foster, P. C. (2003). The network paradigm in organizational research: A review and typology. Journal of Management, 29(6), 991-1013.

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.

Burt, R. S. (2009). Structural holes: The social structure of competition. Harvard University Press.

Friedkin, N. E. (2006). A structural theory of social influence (Vol. 13). Cambridge University Press.

Ibarra, H. (1993). Network centrality, power, and innovation involvement: Determinants of technical and administrative roles. Academy of Management Journal, 36(3), 471-501.

Ibarra, H. (1993). Personal networks of women and minorities in management: A conceptual framework. Academy of Management Review, 18(1), 56-87.

Kleinbaum, A. M. (2012). Organizational misfits and the origins of brokerage in intrafirm networks. Administrative Science Quarterly, 57(3), 407-452.

Krackhardt, D. (1990). Assessing the political landscape: Structure, cognition, and power in organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 342-369.

Magee, J. C., & Galinsky, A. D. (2008). Social Hierarchy: The self‐reinforcing nature of power and status. Academy of Management Annals, 2(1), 351-398.

Kilduff, M., & Brass, D. J. (2010). Organizational social network research: Core ideas and key debates. Academy of Management Annals, 4(1), 317-357.

Otner, S. M. (2018). Near-winners in status competitions: Neglected sources of dynamism in the Matthew Effect. Journal of Management Inquiry, 27(4), 374-377.