Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-03T15:48:39.740Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

4 - A Network Analytical Four-Level Concept for an Interpretation of Social Interaction in Terms of Structure and Agency

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 July 2014

By
Roger Häussling
Edited by
Silvia Domínguez  and
Betina Hollstein
Roger Häussling
Affiliation:
RWTH Aachen University
Silvia Domínguez
Affiliation:
Northeastern University, Boston
Betina Hollstein
Affiliation:
Universität Bremen
Get access

Summary

Introduction

This contribution proposes a four-level concept for network analysis designed for adequately capturing and interpreting the socially multidimensional nature of human interaction. Specifically, the concept serves to link the actor perspective of an interaction-oriented sociology with a structural perspective on prevailing constellations of interaction and overall framework conditions. Both perspectives are warranted and stand more in a complementary than in a rival or even a mutually exclusive relationship. On the empirical side of methodology, this insight is mirrored by employing a combination of qualitative methods of collecting network data and formal methods of network analysis. The analysis itself follows a multilevel parallel design strategy (cf. Introduction). Exploiting the advantages of both approaches requires a conceptual framework capable of pinpointing what each approach can be expected to accomplish and where its limits is.

This conceptual framework is outlined in the following section. Its application is demonstrated afterwards drawing on a case study. The findings from a study on processes of communication and knowledge transfer in the sales department of an auto manufacturer are presented. Special attention is paid to ways of linking the results obtained through different methods of network analysis. The chapter concludes by underscoring that, when using mixed methods designs, method triangulation should be based on a conceptual framework defining the range and function of the individual methods applied. In case of network analysis, the concept of interaction is especially suited for this purpose.

Type
Chapter
Information
Mixed Methods Social Networks Research
Design and Applications
 , pp. 90 - 118
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2014

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Berger, Peter L. and Luckmann, Thomas. 1966. The Social Construction of Reality. A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. New York et al.: Doubleday.Google Scholar
Bröckling, Ulrich, Krasmann, Susanne, and Lemke, Thomas, eds. 2000. Gouvernementalität der Gegenwart. Studien zur Ökonomisierung des Sozialen. Frankfurt/M.: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Burt, Ronald S. 2001. “Structural holes versus network closure as social capital.” Pp. 31–56 in Social Capital: Theory and Research, edited by Lin, N., Cook, K. S., and Burt, R. S.. Aldine: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Drew, Paul and Wootton, Anthony, eds. 1988. Erving Goffman. Exploring the Interaction Order. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Engel, Uwe. 1998. Einführung in die Mehrebenenanalyse. Grundlagen, Auswertungsverfahren und praktische Beispiele. Opladen, Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garfinkel, Harold. 1986. Ethnomethodological Studies of Work. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Giddens, Anthony. 1984. The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration. Berkeley, Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Goffman, Erving. 1977. Frame Analysis. An Essay on the Organization of Experience. Frankfurt/M.: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Haller, Max 1999. Soziologische Theorie im systematisch-kritischen Vergleich. Opladen: Leske + Budrich.Google Scholar
Häussling, Roger. 2005. “Netzwerke und Organisationen – konträre oder komplementäre gesellschaftliche Mechanismen?” Pp. 265–86 in Organisationsgesellschaft. Facetten und Perspektiven, edited by Jäger, W. and Schimank, U.. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.Google Scholar
Häussling, Roger 2003. Soziale Prozesse als Netzwerkspiele. Soziologische Essays zu Leitaspekten der Netzwerktheorie. Moscow/Stuttgart [German/Russian]:Logosaltera.Google Scholar
Häussling, Roger 2009. “Video analyses with a four level interaction concept: A network-based concept of human-robot interaction.” Pp. 107–31 in Video Interaction Analysis. Methods and Methodology, edited by Kissmann, U. T.. Frankfurt/M.: Peter Lang Verlag.Google Scholar
Hillmann, Karl-Heinz, ed. 1994. Wörterbuch der Soziologie. 4th ed. Stuttgart: Kröner.Google Scholar
Hitzler, Ronald and Honer, Anne, eds. 1997. Sozialwissenschaftliche Hermeneutik. Eine Einführung. Opladen: Leske + Budrich.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hitzler, Ronald and Pfadenhauer, Michaela, eds. 2003. Karrierepolitik. Beiträge zur Rekonstruktion erfolgsorientierten Handelns. Opladen: Leske & Budrich/VVA.Google Scholar
Hollstein, Betina. 2002. Soziale Netzwerke nach der Verwitwung. Eine Rekonstruktion der Veränderungen informeller Beziehungen. Opladen: Leske + BudrichCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahn, Robert L. and Antonucci, Toni Claudette. 1980. “Convoys over the life course: Attachment, roles, and social support.” Pp. 253–68 in Life-Span Development and Behavior, vol. 3, edited by Baltes, P. B. and Brim, O. B.. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Küpper, Willi and Ortmann, Günther. 1992. Mikropolitik. Rationalität, Macht und Spiele in Organisationen. 2nd ed. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.Google Scholar
Lave, Jean and Wenger, Etienne. 1991. Situated Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lenk, Hans. 1987. “Das Ich als Interpretationskonstrukt: Vom kognitiven Subjektivitätskonzept zum pragmatischen Handlungszusammenhang.” Pp. 152–82 in Zwischen Sozialpsychologie und Sozialphilosophie, edited by Hans Lenk. Frankfurt/M.: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Lenk, Hans 1995. Schemaspiele. Über Schemainterpretation und Interpretationskonstrukte. Frankfurt/M.: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Luff, Paul, Hindmarsh, Jon, and Heath, Christian, eds. 2000. Workplace Studies: Recovering Work Practice and Informing System Design. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luhmann, Niklas 1997. Die Gesellschaft der Gesellschaft. 2 vols. Frankfurt/M.: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Neuhaus, Ralf. 2002. “Moderne Bürokonzepte – Wirtschaftlichkeit durch Telearbeit und Desk-Sharing, in Angewandte Arbeitswissenschaft.” Zeitschrift für die Unternehmenspraxis 173:42–61.Google Scholar
Nonaka, Ihujiro and Takeuchi, Hirotaka. 1997. Die Organisation des Wissens – Wie japanische Unternehmen eine brachliegende Ressource nutzbar machen. Frankfurt/M.: Campus.Google Scholar
Ortmann, Günther. 1995. Formen der Produktion. Organisation und Rekursivität. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Polanyi, Michael. 1958. Personal Knowledge. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Pongratz, Hans. 2002. “Legitimitätsgeltung und Interaktionsstruktur. Die symbolische Repräsentation hierarchischer Verfügungsrechte in Führungsinteraktionen.” Zeitschrift für Soziologie 31(4):255–74.Google Scholar
Pongratz, Hans 2003. Die Interaktionsordnung von Personalführung. Inszenierungsformen bürokratischer Herrschaft im Führungsalltag. Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Probst, Gilbert J. B. and Büchel, Bettina S. T.. 1998. Organisationales Lernen. Wettbewerbsvorteil der Zukunft. 2nd ed. Wiesbaden: Gabler.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reinmann-Rothmeier, Gabi and Mandl, Heinz. 2000. Individuelles Wissensmanagement. Strategien für den persönlichen Umgang mit Information und Wissen am Arbeitsplatz. Bern: Huber Verlag.Google Scholar
Richter, Rudolf and Furubotn, Eirik G.. 2003. Neue Institutionenökonomik. Eine Einführung und kritische Würdigung. 3rd ed. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.Google Scholar
Romhardt, Kai. 2002. Wissensgemeinschaften – Orte lebendigen Wissensmanagements. Zurich: Versus Verlag.Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey. 1992. Lectures on Conversation. Edited by Jefferson, G.. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Sofsky, Wolfgang and Paris, Rainer. 1991. Figurationen sozialer Macht. Autorität – Stellvertretung – Koalition. Opladen: Leske und Budrich.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Straus, Florian. 2002. Netzwerkanalysen. Gemeindepsychologische Perspektiven für Forschung und Praxis. Wiesbaden: Deutscher Universitäts-Verlag.Google Scholar
Suchman, Lucy. 1987. Plans and Situated Actions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sydow, Jörg and Windeler, Arnold, eds. 2000. Steuerung von Netzwerken. Konzepte und Praktiken. Opladen and Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wasserman, Stanley and Faust, Katherine. 1998. Social Network Analysis. Methods and Applications. 4th ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Weber, Max. 1978. Economy and Society. An Outline of Interpretive Sociology. Berkeley, Los Angeles: Univiversity of California Press.Google Scholar
White, Harrison C. 1992. Identity and Control. A Structural Theory of Social Action. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Willke, Helmut. 2001. Systemisches Wissensmanagement. Including Case Studies by Carsten Krück, Susanne Mingers, Konstanze Piel, Trosten Strulik and Oliver Vopel. 2nd ed. Stuttgart: Lucius & Lucius.Google Scholar
Witte, Erich H. and Ardelt, Elisabeth. 1989. “Gruppenarten, -strukturen, -prozesse.” Pp. 463–83 in Organisationspsychologie. Enzyklopädie der Psychologie D/III/3, edited by Roth, E.. Göttingen: Hogrefe.Google Scholar
Wuppertaler, Kreis E.V., ed. 2000. Wissensmanagement im mittelständigen. Untern.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×