Multiplex Relationships in Organizations

Methot, Jessica R.; Rosado-Solomon, Emily

doi:10.4324/9780203701942-5

Cited by 12 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the organizational network literature on multiplex ties related to performance outcomes is mainly conceptual (e.g., Crawford & Lepine, 2013; Ingram & Zou, 2008). Research examining the performance benefits of multiplex ties for individuals (e.g., Methot et al, 2016; Shah et al, 2017) or teams (e.g., Hood et al, 2017) is sparse, suggesting that multiplex networks have, indeed, been neglected in teams research (Grosser et al, 2020, p. 325), as well as in organizational social network research more generally (Methot & Rosado-Solomon, 2020, p. 80). Indicative research suggests that multiplex ties at work are a “mixed blessing,” as they entail benefits as well as costs (e.g., Methot et al, 2016).…”

Section: Theory and Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In order to address these deficiencies when addressing our question of how leaders can improve team performance over time, especially in teams that exhibit social capital depletion, we adopt an approach neglected in team research (Grosser et al, 2020, p. 325)—a multiplex perspective on team leadership. A multiplex tie, relative to a simplex tie, explicitly captures the overlap of two types of relations between individuals, typically friendship and advice (Methot & Rosado-Solomon, 2020, p. 87). A leader who is central in a multiplex network may leverage the combined influence of friendship and advice networks to improve team performance.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

One tie to capture advice and friendship: Leader multiplex centrality effects on team performance change.

Clarke¹,

Richter²,

Kilduff³

2022

Journal of Applied Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Because leaders' authority is often insufficient to change team performance, formal team leaders seek informal influence through the occupation of central positions in social networks. Prior research focuses on leader centrality involving simplex ties, i.e., either friendship or advice, to the neglect of multiplex ties that involve the overlap of friendship and advice. Friendship and advice ties offer different but complementary resources, so leader centrality in one but not the other network limits leader influence. We provide theory and evidence concerning how leader multiplex centrality affects team performance improvement, particularly if leaders are embedded in team social contexts with sparse friendship and numerous adversarial ties. The research context involved 84 on-going public university service teams headed by formal leaders. Our results show the importance of leader multiplex centrality relative to leader simplex centrality. First, leader multiplex centrality predicted team performance change over a two-year period more strongly than leader centrality in either the advice or the friendship team network. Second, leader multiplex centrality positively predicted team performance change for teams featuring dense adversarial networks or sparse friendship networks. It is not sufficient, therefore, for leaders to be either liked or regarded as expert. It is the integration of both advice and friendship in one tie between the leader and followers that facilitates performance change.

show abstract

Section: Theory and Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

One tie to capture advice and friendship: Leader multiplex centrality effects on team performance change.

Clarke¹,

Richter²,

Kilduff³

2022

Journal of Applied Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In particular, experimental research on the emergence of leadership structures allows for a relatively isolated view of task-related ties. However, field research shows that other forms of ties, such as friendly or amorous relationships, also exist in organizations and, further, that the different relationship networks do not exist independently (Casciaro et al, 2015; Methot and Rosado-Solomon, 2020). Casciaro et al (2014) show, for example, that amicable relations legitimize task-related exchange and that friends are therefore preferred for task-related exchange.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How social context impacts the emergence of leadership structures

Röth

2022

Leadership

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In leadership research, it has proven useful to understand leadership as a relational phenomenon and to conceptualize leadership structures as networks of leader-member ties. Currently, research further highlights the dynamic nature of these structures and examines their emergence in more detail to uncover the underlying mechanisms. In this literature, emergence is conceptualized as social exchange in teams and investigated experimentally. This paper argues that by doing so, the influence of social context has been neglected. I draw on findings from broader tie-formation research to substantiate the influence of social context and to tackle the conceptual shortcoming. Drawing on this rich literature, I identify eight mechanisms that explain in detail how four dimensions of social context ( Culture, Social Networks, Population Characteristics, and Opportunity Patterns) shape the formation of leader-member ties. Finally, I derive 13 propositions based on these mechanisms. These propositions, on the one hand, provide solid starting points for further empirical research. On the other hand, they indicate that the underexposure of social context has led to an overly positive picture of emergent leadership in the current literature. They suggest that much more often than assumed so far, the wrong people become and remain leaders.

show abstract

“…Because these functions are each valuable on their own (Kram & Isabella, 1985), they have largely been studied independently (Janssen, van Vuuren, & de Jong, 2016). But many dyadic relationships are multiplex , whereby multiple support functions coexist (Methot & Rosado-Solomon, 2020). For example, a multiplex developmental relationship simultaneously provides both career and psychosocial support (Cotton et al, 2011; Higgins, 2007; Yip & Kram, 2017).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Unpacking the Microdynamics of Multiplex Peer Developmental Relationships: A Mutuality Perspective

Methot

Cole

2021

Journal of Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Peer developmental relationships—informal arrangements between pairs of individuals who take an active interest in and concerted action to advance one another's careers—offer a valuable alternative to formal mentorships. Despite recognition that peer developmental relationships have the potential to jointly provide career and psychosocial support (i.e., multiplexity) and that relationships embodying multiple support dimensions are indispensable, a paucity of work investigates what factors contribute to their dynamics and persistence over time. To address this issue, we integrate the microfoundations of network dynamics and mutuality perspectives to identify why and when social processes—specifically, reciprocity, trust, and trust asymmetry—operate to form, strengthen, or maintain multiplex peer developmental relationships. To test our hypotheses, we collected three waves of data over one-and-a-half years from a cohort of individuals participating in a leadership development program. Using variations of the Quadradic Assignment Procedure (QAP) to investigate dyad-level dynamics, our results generally suggest that (over and above demographics and network characteristics) the provision of psychosocial support relatively early in the peer-to-peer relationship is likely to evolve into a more complex, high-quality relationship comprised of both psychosocial support and career support (i.e., a multiplex peer developmental relationship). Perhaps more importantly, the social processes capturing mutuality further increased the likelihood that multiplex developmental relationships would develop and persist over time. Our results demonstrate that mutuality is both generative and resolute in nurturing multiplex developmental relationships.

show abstract

Multiplex Relationships in Organizations

Cited by 12 publications

References 1 publication

One tie to capture advice and friendship: Leader multiplex centrality effects on team performance change.

One tie to capture advice and friendship: Leader multiplex centrality effects on team performance change.

How social context impacts the emergence of leadership structures

Unpacking the Microdynamics of Multiplex Peer Developmental Relationships: A Mutuality Perspective

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About