Understanding
Community Ecology through
Network Theory/Analysis
J. Alison Bryant
Department of Telecommunications
Indiana University, Bloomington
8 November 2004
Four Needs in Organizational Theory
1. to understand organizational evolution
from the level of the community (e.g., Aldrich,
1999; Astley, 1985; Baum, 1996; G. R. Carroll & Hannan, 1999; DiMaggio,
1994; Ruef, 2000);
2. to more systematically understand the
complex relationships within the
community (Baum, 1996);
3. to incorporate network analysis in the
study of community ecology (DiMaggio, 1994); and
4. advance our understanding of
organization by constructing network
theories of organization (Salancik, 1995)
The coevolution of an
organizational community is the
evolution of the community’s
network structure of
interactions/relationships
ENVIRONMENT
COMMUNITY
Thingy 1
Gadget A
Thingy 2
Gadget B
Thingy 3
Gadget C
Widget X
ORGANIZATION
Widget Y
Widget Z
POPULATION
Community Ecology Basics
•Subsumes population ecology and bridges to environment
– coevolution of populations of organizations
•Incorporates punctuated equilibrium model of change (Tushman
& Romanelli, 1985)
•Open Environmental Space
•Symbiosis and Commensalism
–symbiotic relationship (+,+);
–commensalistic relationships:
• full mutualism (+,+)
• partial mutualism (+,0)
• neutrality (0,0)
• predatory competition (+,-)
• partial competition (-,0)
• full competition (-,-)
• The purpose of the community is to buffer populations
from the environment. (Hawley, 1950;1982; Barnett, 1994)
Community Ecology through
Network Theory/Analysis
• The whole, not just the part
• The structure of the network can elucidate
the current “fitness” [or “effectiveness”] of
the community?
• Can look @ how structures of
relationships overtime enable collective,
as well as individual, interests
• Better able to deal with multiple types of
relationships
Networks Perspective on Community
Ecology
• The creation, maintenance, and dissolution of
Symbiosis and
Commensalism
relationships within the community
(network)
is the
key mechanism by which communities
emerge,
–symbiotic relationship
evolve, and collapse –
(+,+);
∆ in network structure explains ∆ in community fitness
–commensalistic
• Articulation of community ecology concepts in
relationships:
network terms:
–Variation, Selection, & Retention • full mutualism (+,+)
–Density Dependence
• partial mutualism (+,0)
–Open Environmental Space
• neutrality (0,0)
–Punctuated Equilibrium
• predatory competition (+,-)
–Symbiotic and Commensalistic Relationships
• partial competition (-,0)
• An “effective” network will buffer populations
from the environment.
• full competition
(-,-)
Phases of Community Coevolution
Emergence
Maintenance
Self-Sufficiency
Transformation
Dissolution
An example…
The Children’s Television Community
Who?
When?
Where?
Educational Content Creators
Entertainment Content Creators
Content Programmers
Toy Companies
Advertisers
Governmental Bodies
Advocacy Groups
Philanthropic Organizations
1953-2002
United States
How? & Why?
ENVIRONMENT
COMMUNITY
Governmental Bodies
Content Programmers
ORGANIZATION
Educational Content
Creators
POPULATION
A Very Brief History of Children’s TV
1940s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000s
Methodology
Data Collection:
1. In-depth Interviews
2. Network Data Questionnaire
3. Historical Records
Data
Coding:
Participants:
20 key players in each population over the past 50 years, e.g.,
Creators
of Sesame Street
Television
Workshop
560 Network
Ties and
(10Children’s
Time Periods,
8x8
Network Matrices)
Dir. of Research,Viacom Media/former Dir. of Research, Nick Jr./Nickelodeon
President, Mediascope/former VP for Programming, ABC Family & Fox Family
Key Environmental
Events
Founder,
Action for Children’s
Television
Former Director of Research, Children’s Television Workshop
Director, Center for Media Education
President, DIC Entertainment
Educational
Content
Creators
Educational
Content
Creators
relationship to
Entertainment
Content
Creators
relationship to
Content
Programmers
relationship to
Toy Tie-In
Companies
relationship to
Advertisers
relationship to
Governmental
Bodies
relationship to
Advocacy
Groups
relationship to
Philanthropic
Organizations
relationship to
Entertainment
Content
Creators
Content
Programmers
Toy Tie-In
Companies
Advertisers
Governmental
Bodies
Advocacy
Groups
Philanthropic
Organizations
Environmental Events in the History of
the Children’s TV Community
Public Broadcasting Act of 1967
1963-1967
Penetration of Cable
1983-1987
Children’s Television Act of 1990
1988-1992
Three-Hour Rule (Addendum to
CTA in 1996)
1993-1997
Network Evolution
1
0.9
0.8
Density
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
19531957
19581962
19631967
19681972
19731977
19781982
19831987
19881992
19931997
Time Period
Density (all ties)
Density (mutual)
Density (no neutral)
Density (competitive)
19982002
OR...
1
0.9
0.8
Density
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
19531957
19581962
19631967
19681972
19731977
19781982
19831987
19881992
19931997
Time Period
Density (all ties)
Density (mutual)
Density (no neutral)
Density (competitive)
19982002
Limitations/Future Directions
Limitations:
Data Collection
• One case study
• Network Data Questionnaire
• Macro-level Events
Data Analysis
• Small networks
• Need to use dynamic network analysis
Future Directions:
• Further data collection (children’s media community
and other communities)
• More multilevel, emergent analysis