Network Analysis Across Different Disciplines

Table 2 illustrates the research efforts evolution in the DOMINO project. From a summarized view of Table 2, we extract that research is diversified both with regards to industry and network formation, as well as to the research issue to be investigated.

Table 2: Focused Research Projects, Empirical Settings, and Management Issues in DOMINO

Focused research projects under the DOMINO flow of work	Research method/description of empirical settings	Research issues
Inter-organizational identity on the bases of power-dependence relations in the automotive industry	Survey/DaimlerChrysler`s Supplier Network in the automobile industry	Research involves the dyadic view within supplier-buyer relationships. The focus is on power and culture effects.
ECR adoption in the consumer goods industry	Survey/Sainsbury's - Supplier Networks and Performance	Research involves rules, guidelines, and structures for governing networks.
Network information infrastructures in the construction industry: Emergence and impact on work and management arrangements	Case study/Dimer - A construction network utilizing project monitoring, documentation and collaboration through a web-based platform	The potential role of IT in enabling collaboration - cooperation and understanding impacts in business and work practices.
From replication to organizational decline: The case of Global eManagement MBA	Case study/(GeM) - A network of international business schools sharing a common curriculum at the masters degree level	Investigating the role of interpersonal relationships in the configuration process of network organization.
Collaborative performance process improvement in the retail sector: The ONIA-NET case study	Case study/ONIA-NET - A start-up offering electronic mediation services	The general research problem is concerned with the ex-ante (feasibility) and ex-post (monitoring /improvement) evaluation of a collaborative business process.
Leveraging social capital in inter-firm relationships	Desk research - A conceptual type of research. Its source of data will be findings from other focused research projects	The objective is to tackle the management of partner relationships from a single firm point of view.
Collaboration platforms - Facilitating collaboration in networks through IT	Case study/K chen Partner AG - Emergence of a collaboration platform in a horizontal network	Examining the functional requirements in existing networks for collaboration support. Secondly, researchers will assess a governance model.
Network business model configuration	Case study/Opel.ch - Web-based value creation network	Investigating the configuration and management of networks for Web-based value creation.
Corporate venturing - the venture base and knowledge production in networks	Desk research - The medico valley and specifically Neurosearch A/S	Corporate venturing is associated with strategic renewal, and gaining knowledge within a network.
Strategizing in learning networks	Case study/VIGILANTe - Network formations in the IT security industry	Investigating firms' position in a learning network.

Additionally, the diversified pool of the focused research efforts and their specific research questions grasps the main research theme in DOMINO from many different perspectives. The growing interest in the networked organizations and related concepts is evident from parallel developments in a number of various disciplines.

Figure 1 indicates how various areas of DOMINO research use network concepts to investigate and analyze network phenomena. This illustration sheds light over the specific research issues to be investigated by the focused research projects. Moreover, it shows how the multiple perspectives are applied to ensure coverage of the overall DOMINO research terrain (e.g., inter-firm networks). The areas range from broad disciplines, such as sociology and economics, to more focused fields, such as adoption and diffusion theory. At the same time we can identify that the majority of DOMINO researchers deal with interpersonal social relationships and informal structures and patterns within networks. This is not any surprising, because of the increased recognition of the central role of social relations within networks, and because of the growing need for developing some appropriate guidelines for how to manage the network collaborative process with respect to their impact. To this end we propose an actionable framework constructed from four specific research perspectives to investigate multidisciplinary network phenomena across different disciplines: (1) social networks, (2) IOS platforms, (3) business models, and (4) network governance.

Figure 1: An Actionable Multi-Dimensional Framework for Analyzing Multidisciplinary Network Phenomena in DOMINO

In this figure, the horizontal axis reflects the different type of network structures that we face in each focused research effort. Social networks refer to informal and non-canonical network arrangements/structures, focusing on the notion of social embeddedness, while business models refer to formal and typical network arrangements, focusing on value creation. The vertical axis depicts whether the level of cooperation within the network is IT enabled, in the case of IOS platforms, or contractual based, in the case of network governance.

Social Networks

According to Biemans (1996), in sociology numerous academics have used network concepts to analyze structures such as patterns of informal communication within organizations and friendship networks. In this concept, this has mostly led to a rather formalized and quantitative approach. Burt (1982), for example, used social systems theory to develop a structural network theory. In this view an actor's behavior is partly explained by his own goals and partly by the actions and conditions of others— relationships among actors. Structural sociologists have suggested that the most important facet of an organization's environment is its social network of external contacts (for a review, see Powell & Smith-Doerr, 1994). They emphasize the fact that economic action—like any other form of social action—does not take place in a barren social context but, rather, is embedded in social networks of relationships. A social network can be defined as "a set of nodes (e.g., persons, organizations) linked by a set of social relationships (e.g., friendship, transfer of funds, overlapping membership) of a specified type" (Laumann, Galaskiewicz, & Marsden, 1978, p. 458). Network perspectives build on the general notion that economic actions are influenced by the social context in which they are embedded and that actions can be influenced by the position of actors in social networks. There are two broad analytical approaches for examining the influence of social networks. The first emphasizes the differential informational advantages bestowed by social networks, while the second highlights the control benefits actors can generate by being advantageously positioned within a social network (Gulati, 1998).

Interim findings from DaimlerChrysler's supplier network show that supplier-buyer relationships are fraught with risk and vulnerabilities. Suppliers of components tailored for specific models often have made relation-specific investments (Bensaou, 1997). Since these investments are not effortlessly reusable by other customers, suppliers are at risk if their car manufacturer behaves opportunistically. Moreover, researchers found that both suppliers and car manufacturers have incentives to investigate in intensive partnerships. Nevertheless, interferences in the supply chain occur and partnerships fail due to the lack of trust and loyalty. However, trust within supplier-buyer relationships can be a valuable economic asset that pays off in significant bottom-line results. The building of trust will lower transaction costs (Gulati, 1995), leads to superior knowledge sharing, and triggers the investment in relation-specific assets (Dyer, 1998). In this context one supplier of DaimlerChrysler argued that relations based on partnerships and long-term commitments will bring the desired effect of knowledge exchange. Further, under these circumstances they are more comfortable to make investments and to take risks on behalf of the car manufacturers.

In the GeM case, interviews revealed the importance of interaction between network participants. More specifically, the successful operation of the network requires, first of all, interaction among actors of the five levels of confinements of each country participating in GeM, but also interaction across countries since coordination is a major issue in network formations. What has become obvious from the data collected so far is that while interaction between levels, at each country, is highly successful, the intensity of cooperation across levels varies significantly. The levels that interact on an everyday basis are the ones of the GeM directors and the administration. Regarding the GeM directors' level, this close cooperation can be attributed to the previous scientific collaboration among them, but also to the importance of issues that still need to be resolved at the upper level of the network. The administration level, on the other hand, ensures the unobstructed operation of the GeM program, and therefore close collaboration and interaction among each country's staff are more than imperative.

Corporate venturing researchers indicated that in the empirical setting of "DaimlerChrysler's Supplier Network in the automobile industry." The unique resources and capabilities are the ones who reside within the network that determines the value profile and the specific network character. The significant shift in the perspective of competition and collaboration is illustrated in this case setting. Therefore, competitive advantage will be jointly created and shared by specific inter-firm supplier networks. Concerning this case setting, researchers note that strategies will no longer be a phenomenon on the firm level, but rather align partners' firms within the same network setting. Research findings support the shift in redefining network collaboration. It is stressed that traditional boundaries of vertical interactions in the automotive industry are becoming more and more blurred. Outsourcing strategies and risk sharing with system suppliers triggers car manufacturers to fulfill more and more the coordination role than the role of the manufacturer. The entire network is based on complementary competencies between the network partners. The participating firms differ in terms of their value-added profile and their position within the network.

IOS Platforms

Bensaou and Venkatraman (1996) contend that two themes are relevant and important:

1. a general concern with changes in the pattern of relationships among firms, especially the emergence of hybrid forms of organizations (Williamson, 1991) or networks (Powell, 1990); and

2. the specific concern with the potential role of IT in enabling and facilitating these new forms of relationships.

Research concerning the role, effects, adoption, development of IS (especially IOS platforms) within networks. IOS to facilitate support or enable cooperation in a network level. From a research perspective, Bensaou and Venkatraman, contend that two themes are relevant and important:

• Examining factors that may influence the level of cooperation between two firms, with particular interest in the comparative role of IT

• Determining these factors as: (a) exogenous to the relationship (environmental uncertainty) and (b) endogenous to the relationship (partnership uncertainty)

The research effort considering the Dimer's construction network reveals that the understanding of new forms of IT-supported cooperative work are very much connected to the actor's knowledge, and information of IT use deals mostly with IOS platforms. The interviews revealed varying interests and knowledge of the use of information technology, in the different organizations that participate in the network. More specifically, researchers observed the IT literacy level in the following actors: owner, architects, civil engineers, and the technical administrator. All these actors were located in different organizational settings and places. More specifically, researchers noted that the introduction of "I-construct" meant different things to different groups of users; that is, it possessed a high degree of interpretive flexibility. For the senior manager of the prime contractor, the introduction of "I-construct" would provide an improvement in the efficiency of interoffice communications and the acquisitions of new office automation business. For the technical administration at the construction site, it meant better access to the consortia databases and an alternative means of interoffice communication, however it was also the means for monitoring his work and increased the time he spends on feedback to his supervisors. However, if we exclude the technical administrator's objections, we could say that the successful positioning of the project led to the creation of a limited negotiation space in which "I-construct" could begin to mobilize a temporary local network consisting of actors that would constitute the electronic communication network.

An IOS such as a collaboration platform, investigated Kuchen Partner AG might increase network efficiency and decrease network coordination efforts if the underlying processes, transactions, and network structures are appropriately adjusted, and if platform users have a certain technological affinity and an awareness of its benefits. Initial interviews reveal that the introduction and use of an IOS has to be carefully planned, managed, and integrated into an inter-organizational network strategy. In addition, the potential users and their ideas, annotations, and wishes should be taken into consideration at an early stage. Otherwise there will be the impendence of no noticeable collaboration/process improvements, and respectively no or limited acceptance by users. The necessary change process to get a suitable solution should proceed in three steps: contingency analysis, requirements engineering, and identification and evaluation of alternative scenarios.

Business Models

Zimmerman (1997) argues that at first glance, there seems to be a broad understanding regarding business models. However, a more thorough analysis of existing resources paints a different picture. The term "business model" often remains undefined and a consensus on the elements of business models is lacking. Linder and Cantrell (2000) note that when practitioners say "business model," they are really talking about three different kinds of things: components of business models, real operating business models, and what we call change models:

• Components of business models. These aren't really complete business models at all— they're just pieces. Business model components range from revenue models and value propositions to organizational structures and arrangements for trading relationships. Each may be an important part of a business model, but not the whole thing. Since the Internet has dramatically impacted the way firms reach customers, price, and tailor the commerce experience, e-watchers have paid a great deal of attention to new value propositions, new channel configurations, and new revenue models. Many have mistakenly called these business models.

• Operating business models. Operating business models are the real thing. An operating business model is the organization's essential logic for consistently achieving its principle objectives. The business model of a profit-oriented enterprise explains how it consistently makes money. Since organizations compete for customers and resources, a good business model highlights the distinctive activities and approaches that enable the firm to succeed—to attract customers, employees, and investors, and to deliver products and services profitably. Only the business model components that are part of the essential logic are included, so one company's operating model may look dramatically different from another's.

• Change models. A change model goes one step further. It describes how an organization adapts to a dynamic environment. Operating business models create core assets, capabilities, relationships, and knowledge; change models extend and leverage them.

In the Onia-net case setting, research findings deal more with the operative business model perspective. More specifically, initial indications reveal that top management commitments, as well as their acceptance by the end-users, are essentially required. Organizational changes and clear specifications of the new roles are necessary, especially as the number of partners increases. It is important to have a clear product mapping and data validation mechanism to ensure reliable and uninterrupted communication between partners. It is necessary to closely track the results and progress during and after the pilot and at regular intervals. Finally, findings reveal that is necessary for tools enabling CPFR processes to allow different users to selectively focus on different areas of CPFR, according to their needs and priorities.

In regards to the Opel.ch case, interim findings show that the specifics of the Web, and in particular the economics of digital products, explain the comparative advantages of networked business models that capture the advantages of specialization and division of labor. The content syndication model is a very good illustration of the networking potentials. The Web is a particularly volatile business environment; cooperative networks have to be not only carefully designed, but also continually balanced and readjusted. Therefore researchers are suggesting an extension of the syndication role model with management roles. The extended role model is at the same time an extension of the business model, which allows better description of the business undertaken, not only in terms of value creation but also regarding important management issues.

Network Governance

Jones, Hesterly, and Borgatti (1997) argue that network governance involves a select, persistent, and structured set of autonomous firms engaged in creating products or services based on implicit and open-ended contracts to adapt environmental contingencies and to coordinate safeguard exchanges. By the term "select" the authors try to indicate that network members do not normally constitute an entire industry. By "persistent" they mean that the network members work repeatedly with each other over time. And by the term "structured" they imply that exchanges within the network are neither random nor uniform, but rather are patterned, reflecting a division of labor. By using the phrase "autonomous firm," they want to highlight the potential of each node of the network to be legally independent. However, business units that may share common ownership are not excluded. The phrase "implicit and open-ended contracts" is used to refer to means of adapting, coordinating, and safeguarding exchanges that are not delivered from authority structures or from legal contracts.

Thus, network governance is composed of autonomous firms that operate like a single entity in this task, requiring joint activity. Concluding, the authors strongly believe that to enhance cooperation on shared tasks, the network form of governance relies more heavily on social coordination and control—such as occupational socialization, collective sanctions, and reputations—than on authority and/or legal resource.

In the end, Jones et al. (1997) recognize a major challenge in researching network governance, and that is the attempt to define network membership. All DOMINO researchers should take under deep consideration this challenge and its implications when studying network governance issues. From a research point of view, the relations an organization has with other firms in the network, rather by an attribute of the organization itself, operationally define network membership.

A survey of existing industrial experience in Sainsbury's case setting reveals a gap between the understandings of ECR adoption, and more specifically discrepancies between prescribed practices and actual practice. More complex negotiations were observed in the network-oriented retailer-supplier relationships and their roles within the network. The implementation of ECR practices has indicated a significant impact of companies' performance. In practice, ECR measures are still not commonly adopted among the demand side (retailer) and supplier side (manufacturer) in the consumer goods industry. However, this research effort is in an initial stage, according to interim findings from interviews with practitioners. These initial interviews revealed that a major concern about the issue of trust between partners in correspondence to the "implicit and open-ended contracts."

In the GeM case, the network's governance is composed of autonomous firms that operate like a single entity and perform tasks, when joint activity is required. Cooperation among the deans of the universities hosting the program has been limited for a variety of reasons linked to political issues that evolved at each institution hosting the program. The resistance that each GeM director encountered, at the initial stages of the program, created in some countries a rather unfavorable environment for further collaboration among the official authorities. The stakes of various groups within each university, tightly linked to fear of power shifts among the basic actors of each institution, generated a rather negative environment in some countries and prohibited further engagement of the deans of each university in the operation of the consortium.

A corporate venturing research effort, regarding desk research of existing cases, concludes that corporate venturing is the base that is constituted from activities and resources, which can lead to generation of genuine original and vibrant ideas. A viable venture base relates the organizational set up, the kind of activities conducted in the organization, and how the activities are governed. To combine the two into a coherent structure, an integrated framework of transaction costs and social network theory were established. In addition, the conditions for efficient exchange factors rely on demand uncertainty, asset specificity, frequency, and task complexity. Depending on a combination of these factors, one can find indications of the advantage of a network structure.