Monday Research Seminar Series
February 18, David Krackhardt
Noon, Hamburg Hall, Room 1502
Simmelian Ties and the Brokerage-Closure Controversy
(with Marco Tortoriello)
A vociferous debate has emerged in the literature around whether there are more advantages to brokerage positions or to closure positions in a social structure. The debate has been amplified by empirical work that has generated a cacophony of contingencies, arguing that each is advantageous depending on one of a plethora of conditions. We argue that this dialectic is false, and that this false dialectic is methodologically driven and not theoretically derived. Instead, we propose to resolve this debate with a simpler, more integrative frame that allows for the independent advantages of both brokerage and closure to the same actors. Focusing on a specific category of network ties, Simmelian ties, and considering organizational boundaries as knowledge fault lines, we provide an example of how this debate can be easily resolved without resorting to awkward contingencies. We examine the relationship between patent activities of 276 researchers and engineers in a multinational semi-conductor firm and their work-related network ties. Results indicate that only brokerage ties characterized by closure are positively and significantly associated with the generation of innovations.
