Studying Networks in Complex Problem Domains
Advancing Methods in Boundary Specification
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 15748681 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Branda Nowell (0000-0001-9028-311X, North Carolina State University, corresponding author), Branda L Nowell (North Carolina State University), Anne‐lise K Velez (0000-0002-9396-7063, Virginia Tech), Anne-Lise K Velez (Virginia Tech University), Mary Clare Hano (0000-0001-5828-0138, North Carolina State University), Jayce Sudweeks (0000-0002-8449-169X, North Carolina State University), Kate Albrecht (0000-0002-7765-6986, North Carolina State University), Toddi A Steelman (0000-0001-7492-8635, University of Saskatchewan), Toddi Steelman (University of Saskatchewan) |
| Year | 2018 |
| Publication date | 2018-03-12 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Perspectives on Public Management and Governance (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 2398-4910 • E-ISSN: 2398-4929 |
| Publisher | Oxford University Press (OUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1093/ppmgov/gvx015 |
| OpenAlex | W2795152433 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 8 |
| References cited | 24 |
The application of network perspectives and methods to study complex problem and policy domains has proliferated in the public management literature. Network metrics are highly sensitive to boundary decisions as findings are a direct reflection of who and what was considered to be part of the network. The more complex the problem domain, the messier the network and the more challenging it is for researchers to determine network boundaries. Laumann, Marsden, and Prensky’s seminal (1989) article on network bounding highlighted the theoretical and methodological significance associated with determinations of network boundaries in social network research. However, despite an expansion of network scholarship, the advancement of frameworks aimed at assisting scholars in thinking through the relative advantages and disadvantages of different boundary determinations has received limited attention. This article addresses this gap. Drawing insights from three network studies, we argue that problem domain characteristics and concerns such as formal structures, isolates, disconnected subgroups and/or the duration of the ties will be differentially emphasized with different boundary approaches. We leverage these insights to advance a framework for aiding network scholars working in complex problem domains to consider the strengths and limitations of varied bounding approaches in relation to the question at hand
Boundary (topology · Complex network · Data science · Economic geography · Economics · Law and economics · Management science · Mathematical analysis · Political science · Public economics · Public relations · Sociology · World Wide Web · Complex Systems and Decision Making · Computer Science · Information Systems Theories and Implementation · Information Technology Governance and Strategy · Mathematics
Formal Hierarchies and Informal Networks
Understanding School Leadership Through Consultation Ties
Transdisciplinarity and Shifting Network Boundaries
A cognitive network perspective for public administration and policy
What Drives the Centralization or Decentralization of Network Governance? A Configurational Analysis in Different Health and Social Care Networks
Taking Network Analysis Seriously
Theoretical Advances in Our Understanding of Network Effectiveness
Striving for State of the Art with Paradigm Interplay and Meta-Synthesis
Social Network Analysis
Interorganizational Networks at the Network Level
The role of individual attributes in the practice of information sharing among fishers from Loreto, BCS, Mexico
Managing Transboundary Crises
Broadening Participation in Community Problem Solving
Understanding Information Exchange During Disaster Response
Networking Literature About Determinants of Network Effectiveness
Referent Organizations and the Development of Inter-Organizational Domains
Wicked Problems, Knowledge Challenges, and Collaborative Capacity Builders in Network Settings
Network Management Reconsidered
Modes of Network Governance
| Unique citing works | 8 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1 |
| Citation span | 2018 - 2026 (9) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 8 |