Análise de redes sociais: avanços recentes e controvérsias atuais

FÓRUM

Análise de redes sociais: avanços recentes e controvérsias atuais

Mark S. Mizruchi

University of Michigan

RESUMO

A análise de redes avançou rapidamente nas últimas três décadas, mas as críticas à abordagem também aumentaram. Este artigo aborda diversas realizações e problemas não resolvidos da abordagem de redes. Na primeira seção, ilustrarei o valor do modelo de redes em diversas situações empíricas, concentrandome em estudos de centralidade e poder, subgrupos da rede e relações interorganizacionais. Em seguida, discutirei três questões em que a abordagem tem causado controvérsia: a relação entre a análise de redes e a teoria da escolha racional; o papel das normas e da cultura; e a questão da agência humana. Concluirei com alguns exemplos de como os teóricos das redes estão abordando esses problemas.

Palavras-chave: Redes sociais, análise de redes, relações interorganizacionais, teoria da escolha racional, agência humana.

ABSTRACT

Network analysis has grown rapidly over the past two decades, but criticisms of the approach have increased as well. This article focuses on several accomplishments and unresolved problems of the network approach. In the first section, I illustrate the value of the network model in several substantive areas, focusing on studies of centrality and power, network subgroups, and interorganizational relations. I then discuss three issues over which the approach has provoked controversy: the relation between network analysis and rational choice theory; the role of norms and culture; and the question of human agency. I conclude with some examples of how network theorists are addressing these problems.

Key words: Social networks, network analysis, interorganizational relations, rational choice theory, human agency.

Texto completo disponível apenas em PDF.

Full text available only in PDF format.

Aprovado em 27.04.2006.

Mark S. Mizruchi

Professor de Sociologia e Administração de Empresas da University of Michigan.

Interesses de pesquisa nas áreas de Análise de Redes Sociais, Teoria das Organizações, Sociologia Econômica e Sociologia Política.

E-mail: [e-mail]. Site: <http://www-personal.umich.edu/~mizruchi/>

Endereço: Department of Sociology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor – Michigan – USA, 48109.

Artigo convidado.

Revisão técnica de Maurício Reinert do Nascimento.

• ALBA, R. D. A graph-theoretic definition of a sociometric clique. Journal of Mathematical Sociology, v. 3, n. 1, p. 113-126, 1973.
• ALLEN, M. P. Economic interest groups and the corporate elite structure. Social Science Quarterly, v. 58, p. 597-615, 1978.
• ASTELY, W. G.; ZAJAC, E. J. Beyond dyadic interdependence. Organization Studies, v. 11, n. 4, p. 481-501, 1990.
• BAKER, W. E. The social structure of a national securities market. American Journal of Sociology, v. 89, n. 4, p. 775-811, 1984.
• BAKER, W. E.; FAULKNER, R. R. The social organization of conspiracy: illegal networks in the heavy electrical equipment industry. American Sociology Review, v. 58, n. 6, p. 837-860, 1993.
• BARNES, J. A. Class and committees in a Norwegian island parish. Human Relations, v. 7, n. 1, p. 39-58. 1954.
• BAVELAS, A. Communication patterns in task-oriented groups. Journal of the Acoustical Society if America, v. 57, p. 271-282, 1950.
• BAYSINGER, B. D.; KOSNIK R. D.; TURK, T. A. Effects of board and ownership structure on corporate R&D strategy. Academy of Management Journal, v. 34, n. 1, p. 205-214, 1991.
• BERKOWITZ, S. D. An Introduction to Structural Analysis Toronto: Butterworths, 1982.
• BLAU, P. M. Structural sociology and network analysis: an overview. In: MARSDEN, P. V.; LIN, N. (Eds.). Social Structure and Network Analysis Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1982.
• BOEKER, W.; GOODSTEIN, J. Performance and successor of choice: the moderating effects of governance and ownership. Academy of Management Journal, v. 36, n. 1, p. 172-186, 1993.
• BONACICH, P. Technique for analyzing overlapping memberships. In: COSTNER, H. (Ed.). Sociological Methodology. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1972.
• BONACICH, P. Power and centrality: a family of measures. American Journal of Sociology, v. 92, n. 5, p. 1170-1182, 1987.
• BORGATTI, S. P.; EVERETT, M. G. The notion of position in social network analysis. In: MARSDEN, P. V. (Ed.). Sociological Methodology Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1992.
• BOTT, E. Family and Social Network: Roles, Norms, and External Relationships in Ordinary Urban Families. London: Tavistock, 1957.
• BRASS, D. J.; BURKHARDT, M. E. Centrality and power in organizations. In: NOHRIA, N.; ECCLES, R. G. (Eds.). Network and Organizations Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 1992.
• BREIGER, R. L.; BOORMAN, S. A.; ARABIE, P. An algorithm for clustering relational data with applications to social network analysis and comparison with multidimensional scaling. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, v. 12, n. 3, p. 328-383. 1975.
• BRINT, S. Hidden meanings: cultural content and context in Harrison White's structural sociology. Sociological Theory, v. 10, p. 194-208, 1992.
• BURT, R. S. Toward a Structural Theory of Action: Network Models of Social Structure, Perception, and Action. New York: Academic Press, 1982.
• BURT, R. S. Corporate Profits and Cooptation New York: Academic Press, 1983.
• BURT, R. S. Social contagion and innovation: cohesion versus structural equivalence. American Journal of Sociology, v. 92, n. 6, p. 1297-1335, 1987.
• BURT, R. S. Detecting role equivalence. Social Networks, v. 12, p. 83-97, 1990.
• BURT, R. S. Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1992.
• CLAWSON, D.; NEUSTADTL, A. Interlocks, PACs, and corporate conservativism. American Journal of Sociology, v. 94, p. 749-773, 1989.
• COCHRAN, P. L.; WOOD, R. A.; JONES, T. B. The composition of boards of directors and incidence of golden parachutes. Academy of Management Journal, v. 28, n. 3, p. 664-671. 1985.
• COHEN, J. S. Structuration Theory London: Macmillan, 1989.
• COLEMAN, J. S. Foundations of Social Theory Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1990.
• COOK, K. S. Network structures from an exchange perspective. In: MARSDEN, P. V.; LIN, N. (Eds.). Social Structure and Network Analysis Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1982.
• COOK, K. S.; EMERSON, R. M.; GILLMORE M. R; YAMAGISHI, T. The Distribution of power in n-person exchange networks: theory and experimental results. American Journal of Sociology, v. 89, p. 275-305, 1983.
• COOK, K. S.; WHITMEYER, J. M. Two approaches to social structure: exchange theory and network analysis. Annual Review of Sociology, v. 18, p. 109-127, 1992.
• DAVIS, G. F. Agents without principles? The spread of the poison pill through the intercorporate world. Administrative Science Quarterly, v. 36, n. 4, p. 583-613, 1991.
• DIMAGGIO, P. J. Structural analysis of organizational fields: a blockmodel approach. In: STAW, B. M.; CUMMINGS, L. L. (Eds.). Research in Organizational Behavior Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 1986.
• DIMAGGIO, P. J.; POWELL, W. W. The iron cage revisited: institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, v. 48, n. 2, p. 147-160, 1983.
• FAUCHEUX, C.; MACKENZIE, K. D. Task dependency of organizational centrality: its behavioral consequences. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, v. 2, p. 361-375, 1966.
• FLIGSTEIN, N.; MARKOWITZ, L. Financial reorganization of American corporations in the 1980s. In: WILSON, W. J. (Ed.). Sociology and the Public Agenda Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1993.
• FREEMAN, L. C. Centrality in social networks: I. Conceptual clarification. Social Networks, v. 1, n. 2, p. 215-239, 1979.
• FRIEDKIN, N. E. Structural cohesion and equivalence explanations of social homogeneity. Sociological Methods and Research, v. 12, n. 3, p. 235-261, 1984.
• FRIEDKIN, N. E. Theoretical foundations for centrality measures. American Journal of Sociology, v. 96, n. 6, p. 1478-1504, 1991.
• GALASKIEWICZ, J. Exchange Networks and Community Politics Beverly Hills: Sage, 1979.
• GALASKIEWICZ, J.; BURT, R. S. Inter-organizational contagion and corporate philanthropy. Administrative Science Quarterly, v. 36, n. 1, p. 88- 105, 1991.
• GIDDENS, A. The Constitution of Society: Outlines of a Theory of Structuration. Cambridge, England: Polity Press, 1984.
• GOULD, R. V.; FERNANDEZ, R. M. Structures of mediation: a formal approach to borkerage in transaction networks. In: CLOGG, C. C. (Ed.). Sociological Methodology Washington, DC: American Sociological Association, 1989.
• GRANOVETTER, M. S. Economic action and social structure: the problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, v. 91, n. 3, p. 481-510, 1985.
• HAINES, V. A. Social network analysis, structuration theory, and the holismindividualism debate. Social Networks, v. 10, p. 157-182, 1988.
• HARARY, F.; NORMAN, R.; CARTWRIGHT, D. Structural Models: An Introduction to the Theory of Directed Graphs. New York: Wiley, 1965.
• HAUNSCHILD, P. R. Interorganizational imitation: the impact of interlocks on corporate acquisition activity. Administrative Science Quarterly, v. 38, n. 4, p. 564-592, 1993.
• HECHTER, M. Principles of Group Solidarity Berkeley: University of California Press, 1987.
• HEDSTRÖM, P. Introduction to this special issue on rational choice theory. Acta Sociologica, v. 36, n. 3, p. 167-169, 1993.
• HOPKINS, T. K. The Exercise of Influence in Small Groups Totowa, NJ: Bedminster. 1964.
• JOHNSON, J. C. Social networks and innovation adoption: a look at Burt's use of structural equivalence. Social Networks, v. 8, p. 343-364. 1986.
• KOSNIK, R. D. Greenmail: a study of board performance in corporate governance. Administrative Science Quarterly, v. 32, n. 2, p. 163-185. 1987.
• KRACKHARDT, D. The strength of strong ties: the importance of philos in organizations. In: NOHRIA, N.; ECCLES, R. G. (Eds.). Networks and Organizations Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 1992.
• LAUMANN, E. O.; KNOKE, D. The Organizational State: Social Choice in National Policy Domains. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1987.
• LAUMANN, E. O.; PAPPI, F. U. Networks of Collective Action: A Perspective on Community Influence Systems. New York: Academic Press, 1976.
• LEAVITT, H. J. Some effects of certain communication patterns on group performance. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, v. 46, n. 1, p. 38- 50, 1951.
• LEFIER, E. M.; WHITE, H. C. A structural approach to markets. In: MIZRUCHI; M. S.; SCHWARTZ, M. (Eds.). Intercorporate Relations New York: Cambridge University Press, 1987
• LEVI-STRAUSS, C. Elementary Structures of Kinship Boston: Beacon, 1969.
• LEVINE, J. H. The Sphere of Influence. American Sociological Review, v. 37, p. 14-27, 1972.
• LORRAIN, F.; WHITE, H. C. Structural equivalence of individuals in social networks. Journal of Mathematical Sociology, v. 1, p. 49-80, 1971.
• MACKENZIE, K. D. A Theory of Group Structures New York: Gordon and Breach, 1976.
• MARKOWSKY, B.; WILLER, D.; PATTON, T. Power relations in exchange networks. American Sociology Review, v. 53, n. 2, p. 220-236, 1988.
• MARSDEN, P. V. Brokerage behavior in restricted exchange networks. In: MARSDEN, P. V.; LIN, N. (Eds.). Social Structure and Network Analysis Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1982.
• MARSDEN P. V. Elements of interactor dependence. In: COOK, K. S. (Ed.). Social Exchange Theory Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1987.
• MARTIN, C. J. Shifting the Burden: The Struggle over Growth and Corporate Taxation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991.
• MEYER, J. W.; ROWAN, B. Institutionalized organizations: formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, v. 83, n. 2, p. 340- 363, 1977.
• MINTZ, B.; SCHWARTZ, M. The Power Structure of American Business Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1985.
• MITCHELL, J. C. Social Networks in Urban Situations Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press, 1969.
• MIZRUCHI, M. S. The American Corporate Network: 1904-1974. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1982.
• MIZRUCHI, M. S. The Structure of Corporate Political Action: Interfirm Relations and Their Consequences. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1992.
• MIZRUCHI, M. S. Cohesion, equivalence, and similarity of behavior: a theoretical and empirical assessment. Social Networks, v. 15, p. 275-307, 1993.
• MIZRUCHI, M. S. What do interlocks do? an analysis, critique, and assessment of research on interlocking directorates. Annual Review of Sociology, v. 22, p. 271-298, 1996.
• MIZRUCHI, M. S.; GALASKIEWICZ, J. Networks of interorganizational relations. Sociological Methods and Research, v. 22, n. 1, p. 46-70, 1993.
• MIZRUCHI, M. S.; MARIOLIS, P.; SCHWARTZ, M.; MINTZ, B. Techniques for disaggregating centrality scores in social networks. In: TUMA, N. B. (Ed.). Sociological Methodology Washington: American Sociological Association, 1986
• MIZRUCHI, M. S.; STEARNS, L. B. A longitudinal study of borrowing by large american corporations. Administrative Science Quarterly, v. 39, n. 1, p. 118-140, 1994.
• MIZRUCHI, M. S.; POTTS, B. B. Centrality and power revisited: Actor success in group decision making. Social Networks, v. 20, p. 353-387, 1998.
• MIZRUCHI, M. S.; STEARNS, L. B. Getting Deals Done: The Use of Social Networks in Bank Decision-Making. American Sociological Review, v. 66, n. 5, p. 647-671, 2001.
• MOORE, G. The structure of a national elite network. American Sociological Review, v. 44, n. 5, p. 673-692, 1979.
• NIEMINEN, U. J. On centrality in a graph. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, v. 15, p. 322-336, 1974.
• PADGETT, J. F.; ANSELL, C. K. Robust action and the rise of the medici, 1400-1434. American Journal of Sociology, v. 98, n. 6, p. 1259-1319, 1993.
• PALMER, D.; BARBER, B. M.; ZHOU, X.; SOYSAL, Y. The friendly and predatory acquisition of large u.s. corporations in the 1960s: the other contested terrain. American Sociological Review, v. 60, n. 4, p. 469-499, 1995.
• PARSONS, T. The Social System New York: Free Press, 1951.
• PETTIGREW, A. M. On studying managerial elites. Strategic Management Journal, v. 13, p. 163-182, 1992.
• PFEFFER, J. A resource dependence perspective on intercorporate relations. In: MIZRUCHI, M. S.; SCHWARTZ, M. (Eds.). Intercorporate Relations New York: Cambridge University Press, 1987.
• POWELL, W. W.; DIMAGGIO, P. J. (Eds.). The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991.
• RATCLIFF, R. E. Banks and corporate lending: an analysis of the impact of the internal structure of the capitalist class on the lending behavior of banks. American Sociology Review, v. 45, p. 553-570, 1980.
• SAILER, R. E. Structural equivalence: meaning and definition, computation and application. Social Networks, v. 1, n. 1, p. 73-90, 1978.
• SCIULLI, D. Theory of Societal Constitutionalism: Foundations of a Non-Marxist Critical Theory. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1992.
• SCOTT, J. Social Network Analysis: A Handbook. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, 1991.
• SIMMEL, G. The Triad. In: WOLFF, K. H. (Ed.). The Sociology of Georg Simmel. New York: Free Press, 1950.
• SINGH, H.; HARIANTO, F. Management-board relations, takeover risk, and the adoption of golden parachutes. Academy of Management Journal, v. 32, n. 1, p. 7-24, 1989.
• STEARNS, L. B.; MIZRUCHI, M. S. Corporate Financing: Economic and Social Aspects. In: SWEDBERG, R. (Ed.). Explorations in Economic Sociology New York: Russel Sage Foundation, 1993.
• STEPHENSON, K.; ZELEN, M. Rethinking centrality: methods and examples. Social Networks, v. 11, n. 1, p. 1-37, 1989.
• STOKMAN, F. N.; VAN DEN BOS, J. M. M. A. two-stage model of policymaking with an empirical test in the u.s. energy-policy domain. In: MOORE, G.; WHITT, J. A. (Eds.). Research in Politics and Society Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 1992.
• SWIDLER, A. Culture in action: symbols and strategies. American Sociological Review, v. 51, n. 2, p. 273-286, 1986.
• UZZI, B. The sources and consequences of embeddedness for the economic performance of organizations: The Network Effect. American Sociological Review 61: 674-69, 1996.
• WADE, J.; O'REILLY, C. A. III; CHANDRATAT, I. Golden parachutes: Ceos and the exercise of social influence. Administrative Science Quarterly, v. 35, n. 4, p. 587-603, 1990.
• WEESIE, J.; FLAP. H. (Eds.). Social Networks through Time Utrecht, Netherlands: ISOR, 1990.
• WELLMAN, B. Network analysis: from method and metaphor to theory and substance. In: WELLMAN, B.; BERKOWITZ, S. D. (Eds.). Social Structures: A Network Approach New York: Cambridge University Press, 1988.
• WHITE, D. R.; REITZ, K. P. Graph and semigroup homomorphisms on networks of relations. Social Networks, v. 5, p. 193-234, 1983.
• WHITE, H. C. Chains of Opportunity Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1970.
• WHITE, H. C. Varieties of markets. In: WELLMAN, B.; BERKOWITZ, S. D. (Eds.). Social Structures: A Network Approach New York: Cambridge University Press, 1988.
• WHITE, H. C. Social grammar for culture: reply to stephen brint. Sociological Theory, v. 10, n. 2, p. 209-213, 1992a.
• WHITE, H. C. Identity and Control: A Structural Theory of Social Action. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1992b.
• WHITE, H. C. Careers and Creativity: Social Forces in the Arts. Boulder, CO: Westview, 1993.
• WHITE, H. C.; BOORMAN, S. A.; BREIGER, R. L. Social structure from multiple networks i â blockmodels of roles and positions. American Journal of Sociology, v. 81, n. 4, p. 730-780, 1976.
• WILLIAMSON, O. E. Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications. New York: Free Press, 1975.
• WILLIAMSON, O. E. Comparative economic organization: the analysis of discrete structural alternatives. Administrative Science Quarterly, v. 36, n. 2, p. 269-296, 1991.
• WINSHIP, C. Thoughts about roles and relations: an old document revisited. Social Networks, v. 10, p. 209-231, 1988.

Datas de Publicação

• Publicação nesta coleção
  01 Ago 2011
• Data do Fascículo
  Set 2006