Simmelian brokerage, tertius iungens orientation, and idea elaboration

IF 8 1区 管理学 Q1 MANAGEMENT
Stefano Tasselli , Hongzhi Chen , Brian R. Dineen
{"title":"Simmelian brokerage, tertius iungens orientation, and idea elaboration","authors":"Stefano Tasselli ,&nbsp;Hongzhi Chen ,&nbsp;Brian R. Dineen","doi":"10.1016/j.respol.2025.105185","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>In organizations, idea elaboration calls for employees to work with inner-circle coworkers, who may be embedded in separate network cliques. Theories are inconclusive concerning how brokerage position between separate cliques will affect the elaboration and improvement of embryonic ideas. In three studies of R&amp;D scientists and medical professionals in various field settings, we first explored and found that being the sole shared member of separate cliques (i.e., Simmelian brokerage) undermines the quantity and quality of elaborated ideas. To explain this finding, we suggest that the Simmelian brokerage position begets a multi-insider trap: while the idea elaborators benefit from obtaining non-redundant feedback across separate cliques, they also encounter the challenge of selecting, aligning, and integrating potentially conflicting feedback. To investigate a boundary condition, we then explored the role of tertius iungens orientation; i.e., the tendency to bring people together with an inclusive mindset to incorporate divergent perspectives. Prior research suggests that this can reduce both the advantages and disadvantages of brokerage positions. Results show that Simmelian brokerage's detrimental effect is mitigated for people with a higher level of tertius iungens orientation. Overall, this exploratory research identifies a pitfall for innovators who are the sole shared member of separate network cliques, and illuminates who might best navigate such a pitfall.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48466,"journal":{"name":"Research Policy","volume":"54 3","pages":"Article 105185"},"PeriodicalIF":8.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research Policy","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733325000149","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In organizations, idea elaboration calls for employees to work with inner-circle coworkers, who may be embedded in separate network cliques. Theories are inconclusive concerning how brokerage position between separate cliques will affect the elaboration and improvement of embryonic ideas. In three studies of R&D scientists and medical professionals in various field settings, we first explored and found that being the sole shared member of separate cliques (i.e., Simmelian brokerage) undermines the quantity and quality of elaborated ideas. To explain this finding, we suggest that the Simmelian brokerage position begets a multi-insider trap: while the idea elaborators benefit from obtaining non-redundant feedback across separate cliques, they also encounter the challenge of selecting, aligning, and integrating potentially conflicting feedback. To investigate a boundary condition, we then explored the role of tertius iungens orientation; i.e., the tendency to bring people together with an inclusive mindset to incorporate divergent perspectives. Prior research suggests that this can reduce both the advantages and disadvantages of brokerage positions. Results show that Simmelian brokerage's detrimental effect is mitigated for people with a higher level of tertius iungens orientation. Overall, this exploratory research identifies a pitfall for innovators who are the sole shared member of separate network cliques, and illuminates who might best navigate such a pitfall.
Simmelian broker, tertius iungens orientation, idea elaboration
在组织中,想法的阐述要求员工与内部圈子的同事合作,这些同事可能被嵌入到不同的网络派系中。关于不同集团之间的经纪地位将如何影响萌芽思想的阐述和完善,理论尚无定论。在对不同领域的研发科学家和医学专业人士进行的三项研究中,我们首先探索并发现,作为单独集团(即Simmelian经纪)的唯一共享成员,会破坏精心构思的想法的数量和质量。为了解释这一发现,我们认为Simmelian经纪人的立场引发了一个多重内部人陷阱:虽然想法阐述者从不同集团中获得非冗余反馈中受益,但他们也遇到了选择、调整和整合潜在冲突反馈的挑战。为了研究边界条件,我们随后探讨了第三系细菌取向的作用;即,以包容的心态将人们聚集在一起,以吸收不同的观点。先前的研究表明,这可以减少经纪职位的优势和劣势。研究结果表明,非典型肺倾向水平越高,Simmelian经纪的不利影响越小。总的来说,这项探索性研究发现了创新者的一个陷阱,他们是单独网络集团的唯一共享成员,并阐明了谁可能最好地驾驭这种陷阱。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Research Policy
Research Policy MANAGEMENT-
CiteScore
12.80
自引率
6.90%
发文量
182
期刊介绍: Research Policy (RP) articles explore the interaction between innovation, technology, or research, and economic, social, political, and organizational processes, both empirically and theoretically. All RP papers are expected to provide insights with implications for policy or management. Research Policy (RP) is a multidisciplinary journal focused on analyzing, understanding, and effectively addressing the challenges posed by innovation, technology, R&D, and science. This includes activities related to knowledge creation, diffusion, acquisition, and exploitation in the form of new or improved products, processes, or services, across economic, policy, management, organizational, and environmental dimensions.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信