{"title":"Simmelian brokerage, tertius iungens orientation, and idea elaboration","authors":"Stefano Tasselli , Hongzhi Chen , 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&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":7.5000,"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.
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.