IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ems/eureri/46.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Broker Positions in Task-Specific Knowledge Networks

Author

Listed:
  • Dekker, D.J.
  • Stokman, F.
  • Franses, Ph.H.B.F.

Abstract

In this paper we empirically investigate various benefits and costs associated with broker characteristics of individuals who operate in the account management system of financial service providers. We narrow our focus to broker positions in two specific task-specific knowledge networks that facilitate account management. We study the effect of broker positions on the contribution of individuals to organizational performance. We measure such a contribution by measuring the perceptions of others concerning a particular individual. We also explore how certain personal costs are associated with these task-specific broker positions. More specifically, we explore how these positions affect role ambiguity and role conflict, as self-perceived by that particular individual. To test the hypothesized effects we collect data for a network consisting of 55 individuals. We conclude with stating that service specification broker positions benefit organizations, but service delivery broker positions are detrimental to an organization and that they also invoke personal costs.

Suggested Citation

  • Dekker, D.J. & Stokman, F. & Franses, Ph.H.B.F., 2000. "Broker Positions in Task-Specific Knowledge Networks," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2000-37-MKT, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    • Handle: RePEc:ems:eureri:46
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://repub.eur.nl/pub/46/erimrs20000927154220.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bruce Kogut & Udo Zander, 1992. "Knowledge of the Firm, Combinative Capabilities, and the Replication of Technology," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(3), pages 383-397, August.
    2. David Krackhardt, 1995. "Entrepreneurial Opportunities in an Entrepreneurial Firm: A Structural Approach," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 19(3), pages 53-69, April.
    3. Hinds, Pamela J. & Carley, Kathleen M. & Krackhardt, David & Wholey, Doug, 2000. "Choosing Work Group Members: Balancing Similarity, Competence, and Familiarity," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 81(2), pages 226-251, March.
    4. Deborah Dougherty, 1992. "Interpretive Barriers to Successful Product Innovation in Large Firms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(2), pages 179-202, May.
    5. Diane L. Rulke & Joseph Galaskiewicz, 2000. "Distribution of Knowledge, Group Network Structure, and Group Performance," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(5), pages 612-625, May.
    6. Deborah Gladstein Ancona & David F. Caldwell, 1992. "Demography and Design: Predictors of New Product Team Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(3), pages 321-341, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sung‐Choon Kang & Scott A. Snell, 2009. "Intellectual Capital Architectures and Ambidextrous Learning: A Framework for Human Resource Management," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(1), pages 65-92, January.
    2. Paul R. Carlile, 2002. "A Pragmatic View of Knowledge and Boundaries: Boundary Objects in New Product Development," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(4), pages 442-455, August.
    3. Sebastian Raisch & Julian Birkinshaw & Gilbert Probst & Michael L. Tushman, 2009. "Organizational Ambidexterity: Balancing Exploitation and Exploration for Sustained Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 685-695, August.
    4. Latukha, M. & Veselova, A. & Selivanovskikh, L. & Artukh, E. & Mitskevich, E., 2016. "Re-thinking the role of talent management in a firm’s performance: Talent management practices and absorptive capacity," Working Papers 6442, Graduate School of Management, St. Petersburg State University.
    5. Daniel Tzabbar & Alex Vestal, 2015. "Bridging the Social Chasm in Geographically Distributed R&D Teams: The Moderating Effects of Relational Strength and Status Asymmetry on the Novelty of Team Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(3), pages 811-829, June.
    6. Li, Shenxue & Clark, Timothy & Sillince, John, 2018. "Constructing a strategy on the creation of core competencies for African companies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 204-213.
    7. Venugopal Ramachandran, 2011. "Strategic corporate social responsibility: a ‘dynamic capabilities’ perspective," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(5), pages 285-293, September.
    8. Jie Zhao, 2023. "Coupling Open Innovation: Network Position, Knowledge Integration Ability, and Innovation Performance," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 14(2), pages 1538-1558, June.
    9. Rizova, Polly S. & Gupta, Samir & Maltz, Elliot N. & Walker, Robert W., 2018. "Overcoming equivocality on projects in the fuzzy front end: Bringing social networks back in," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 40-55.
    10. Kannan Srikanth & Phanish Puranam, 2014. "The Firm as a Coordination System: Evidence from Software Services Offshoring," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(4), pages 1253-1271, August.
    11. Torsten Ringberg & Markus Reihlen, 2008. "Towards a Socio‐Cognitive Approach to Knowledge Transfer," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(5), pages 912-935, July.
    12. Tsai, Kuen-Hung & Wang, Jiann-Chyuan, 2005. "Does R&D performance decline with firm size?--A re-examination in terms of elasticity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 966-976, August.
    13. Burgers, J. Henri & Jansen, Justin J.P. & Van den Bosch, Frans A.J. & Volberda, Henk W., 2009. "Structural differentiation and corporate venturing: The moderating role of formal and informal integration mechanisms," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 206-220, May.
    14. Eric (Er) Fang, 2011. "The Effect of Strategic Alliance Knowledge Complementarity on New Product Innovativeness in China," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 158-172, February.
    15. Binz-Scharf, Maria & Lazer, David, 2008. "A New Order of Things: Managing Novelty and Cooperation on E-Government Projects," Working Paper Series rwp08-048, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    16. Bercovitz, Janet & Feldman, Maryann, 2011. "The mechanisms of collaboration in inventive teams: Composition, social networks, and geography," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 81-93, February.
    17. Taewon Suh & Omar J. Khan & Benedikt Schnellbächer & Sven Heidenreich, 2019. "Strategic Accord And Tension For Business Model Innovation: Examining Different Tacit Knowledge Types And Open Action Strategies," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 24(04), pages 1-29, July.
    18. Biggiero, Lucio, 2007. "Organizations as congitive systems :what do they process and deliver?," MPRA Paper 3089, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Beth A. Bechky, 2003. "Sharing Meaning Across Occupational Communities: The Transformation of Understanding on a Production Floor," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(3), pages 312-330, June.
    20. Tine Buyl & Christophe Boone & Walter Hendriks & Paul Matthyssens, 2011. "Top Management Team Functional Diversity and Firm Performance: The Moderating Role of CEO Characteristics," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(1), pages 151-177, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    account management; role stress; social networks; task-specific broker positions;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C44 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - Operations Research; Statistical Decision Theory
    • M - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics
    • M31 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Marketing and Advertising - - - Marketing

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ems:eureri:46. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: RePub (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/erimanl.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.