Are support and social comparison compatible? Individual differences in the multiplexity of career‐related social networks

Abstract

Social networks are crucial for helping people in their careers. Moreover, social identity is reflected in and influenced by individuals’ networks. To date, there is little knowledge on how these different functions of networks might interact. A survey in which 450 individuals provided information on 2,499 contacts in their social networks indicated both multiplexity and segmentation in networks. Contacts tended either to provide psychosocial support only or to provide instrumental support and serve as a standard for social comparison. The segmentation was stronger for individuals with an independent career orientation than for promotion-oriented individuals. These findings contribute to the literature on social networks and careers by providing insights into how career orientation affects the multiplexity in career-related social networks

(Re)Applying social psychology to organizational work, well‐being, and leadership

“…Although they cover a range of topics and theories, these papers demonstrate the subtle methodological differences between organizational psychology from social psychology. For instance, the majority of the special issue papers recruited current organizational employees as participants rather than students (e.g., Tavares et al, ; Tschopp et al, ; Zwingmann et al, ). While organizational psychologists tend to employ survey methods, specific techniques can be used to minimize the weaknesses inherent in using surveys (Podsakoff et al, ).…”

“…In their paper “Are Support and Social Comparison Compatible? Individual Differences in the Multiplexity of Career‐Related Social Networks,” Tschopp, Unger, and Grote () examined the extent to which the functions of different career‐related social network ties are segmented or multiplex. Networking can increase opportunities for career support as well as affecting one's career identity by setting standards for social comparison.…”

The Dynamics of Developmental Networks

“…Of these variables, our study included only gender. Future research could extend this work by considering, for example, proactive personality (Singh, Ragins, & Tharenou, 2009a), relational savvy (Chandler, 2009), stages of adult development (see Chandler, Kram, & Yip, 2011 for a review), emotional intelligence (Cherniss, 2007), self-monitoring (Kim & Kim, 2007), and work orientations (Tschopp, Unger, & Grote, 2016). We hope future developmental network research will also consider individual-level factors associated with developers and the match between protégés and developers so that we can better understand how these networks evolve.…”

Psychosocial and Career Support from Different Types of Role-Multiplexity in Developmental Relationships

“…The roles have been assessed within the additional questions after the name generator, not through or by means of the name generator. Other studies analysed multiplexity as an overlap of different types of roles (Cotton, Shen, & Livne-Tarandach, 2011;Tschopp, Unger, & Grote, 2016), which can be seen as a combination of social role-based and content driven type of operationalization. The latter shows the variety in defining multiplexity and clearly underlines the need for further research if different operationalizations of multiplexity have similar or different nomological networks.…”