7/27/2019 homophily

1/17

Law of Propinquity

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0 20 40 60 80 100

Distance (meters)

Pr

obofDaily

Communication

7/27/2019 homophily

2/17

GenderSharing Confidential Matters:

1515970Female

7481245Male

FemaleMale

7/27/2019 homophily

3/17

Race

343521Other

1120666Hispanic

3428340Black

2030293806White

OtherHispanicBlackWhiteRace

7/27/2019 homophily

4/17

Religion

37411127Other

14131126692None

1568713Jewish

134124790241Catholic

3083223052129Protestant

OtherNoneJewishCatholicProtestantReligion

7/27/2019 homophily

5/17

Age

3872121381273460 +

1082101211008450 - 59

70842461708840 - 49

10612817150119130 - 39

56155183186567< 30

60 +50 - 5940 - 4930 - 39< 30Age

7/27/2019 homophily

6/17

Kinds of Homophily

Choice-based

Preference for ones own kind Opportunistic

Can only interact with those that are available for

interaction Demography relative population sizes

Organizational & Event Foci

7/27/2019 homophily

7/17

SocioDemographic Space

7/27/2019 homophily

8/17

Organizations in Socio-Demographic

Space

7/27/2019 homophily

9/17

Some Propositions

Rate of joining new groups increases with the

size of individuals ego network Network ties to members increase duration of

membership

Ties to non-members decrease duration ofmembership

Similarity increases strength of tie

Dissimilar members more likely to leave

Majority will often experience minorities as unstable

7/27/2019 homophily

10/17

Ties Between Groups

7/27/2019 homophily

11/17

Simple Answers

Who you ask for answers to straightforward questions.

Recent acquisition

Older acquisitions

Original company

HR Deptof Large

Health Care

Organization

Data drawn from Cross, Borgatti & Parker 2001.

7/27/2019 homophily

12/17

Problem Reformulation

Who you see to help you think through issues

Recent acquisition

Older acquisitions

Original company

Data drawn from Cross, Borgatti & Parker 2001.

7/27/2019 homophily

13/17

The Natural Organization

7/27/2019 homophily

14/17

The Optimal Organization

7/27/2019 homophily

15/17

The Experiment - Setup

Weekend class exercise

Class divided into two independent organizations

Each subdivided into 4 departments, with some

interdependencies

A measure of overall performance which included

financial performance, efficiency, and some humanresource metrics

Staffing was controlled by the experimentor

natural org placed friends together within departments

optimal org separated friends as much as possible (high E-I

value)

As they went along, the experimenter introducedorganizational crises, such as imposing layoffs

7/27/2019 homophily

16/17

Experimental Results

Natural

Optimal140

120

100

80

60

40

20

6 trials at 3 universities. Results shown for most dramatic trial only.

7/27/2019 homophily

17/17

Why?

In crisis, the organization needs to pull together*

across departments But when you have few close ties across

departments

The tendency is opposite start retrenching, pointingfingers

When you have lots a friends across

departments,

you trust them not to screw you, and

you are more inquiring and willing to share needed

information than blaming and hoarding