Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Why organizational networks in reality do not show scale-free distributions

  • Published:
Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper discusses chain of command networks that are most likely to exhibit the scale-free (SF) property in organizational networks, explaining why organizational networks do not show SF distributions. We propose an evolving hierarchical tree network model without explicit preferential attachment. The model simulates several kinds of chain of command networks with the span of control ranging from extreme homogeneity to extreme heterogeneity. In addition to traditional degree distribution, a new kind of cumulative-outdegree distribution p(K cum =k cum ) is introduced and discussed that gives a probability that a randomly selected node has exactly k cum children nodes. Theoretical analysis and simulation results show that even if the network size is large enough to meet the demand of large-scale networks, the SF property can emerge only when a hierarchical tree lies in two extreme situations: (1) the exact same span of control exists at all levels of an organization; (2) the node outdegree (i.e. span of control) distribution obeys a power-law distribution. The empirical investigations show that real organization networks are between the two extreme situations. This is why organizational networks in reality do not show an SF degree distribution or SF cumulative-outdegree distribution. This finding shows that the SF property is the consequence of extreme situations, even though it is very common in nature and in society. In fact, the SF property is of no value in the study of problems in organizations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles and news from researchers in related subjects, suggested using machine learning.

References

  • Abello J, Pardalos PM, Resende MGC (1999) On maximum clique problems in very large graphs. In: Abello J, Vitter J (eds) External memory algorithms, DIMACS Series on Discrete Mathematics and Theoretical Computer Science, vol 50, pp 119–130

  • Albert R, Barabási A-L (2001) Statistical mechanics of complex networks. Rev Mod Phys 74:47–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amaral LAN, Uzzi B (2007) Complex system—A new paradigm for the integrative study of management, physical, and technological systems. Manag Sci 53:1033–1035

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amaral LAN, Scala A, Barthélémy M, Stanley HE (2000) Classes of behavior of small-world networks. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 97:11149–11152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barabási A-L, Albert R (1999) Emergence of scaling in random networks. Science 286:509–512

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barabási A-L, Albert R, Jeong H (1999) Mean-field theory for scale-free random networks. Physica A 272:173–197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barabási A-L, Jeong H, Ravasz E, Néda Z, Schubert A, Vicsek T (2002) Evolution of the social network of scientific collaborations. Physica A 311:590–614

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caldarelli G, Capocci A, De Los Rios P, Muñoz MA (2002) Scale-free networks from varying vertex intrinsic fitness. Phys Rev Lett 89:258702

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carley KM, Krackhardt DA (1997) Typology for network measures for organizations. Comput Org Theory 6:122–138

    Google Scholar 

  • Fortunato S, Flammini A, Menczer F (2006) Scale-free network growth by ranking. Phys Rev Lett 96:218701

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Han X-P, Xie Y-B (2007) Time-cumulative scale-free networks without both growth and preferential attachment. Physica A 381:525–531

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu B, Jiang X-Y, Ding J-F, Xie Y-B, Wang B-H (2005) A weighted network model for interpersonal relationship evolution. Physica A 353:576–594

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jeong H, Tombor B, Albert R, Oltvai ZN, Barabási A-L (2000) The large-scale organization of metabolic networks. Nature 407:651–654

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones JH, Handcock MS (2003) An assessment of preferential attachment as a mechanism for human sexual network formation. Proc R Soc Lond B 02PB1027:1–6,

    Google Scholar 

  • Krackhardt D, Carley KM (1998) A PCANS model of structure in organizations. In: Proceedings of the 1998 international symposium on command and control research and technology, Monterrey

  • Li W, Cai X (2004) Statistical analysis of airport network of China. Phys Rev E 69:046106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liljeros F, Edling CR, Amaral LAN, Stanley HE, Aberg Y (2001) The web of human sexual contacts. Nature 411:907–908

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liljeros F, Edling CR, Amaral LAN (2003) Sexual networks implications for the transmission of sexual transmitted infections. Microbes Infect 5:189–196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • May RM, Lloyd AL (2001) Infection dynamics on scale-free networks. Phys Rev E 64:066112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newman MEJ (2001a) The structure of scientific collaboration networks. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98:404–409

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newman MEJ (2001b) Scientific collaboration networks: I. Network construction and fundamental results. Phys Rev E 64:016131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newman MEJ (2001c) Scientific collaboration networks: II. Shortest paths, weighted networks, and centrality. Phys Rev E 64:016132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pareto V (1897) Cours d’économie politique 2. F. Rouge, Lausanne

  • Perline R (2005) Strong, weak and false inverse power laws. Stat Sci 20:68–88

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rapoport A, Horvath WJ (1961) A study of a large sociogram. Behav Sci 6:279–291

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ravasz E, Barabási A-L (2003) Hierarchical organization in complex networks. Phys Rev E 67:026112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Souma W, Fujiwara Y, Aoyama H (2003) Complex networks and economics. Physica A 324:396–401

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watts DJ, Strogatz SH (1998) Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks. Nature 393:440–442

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White DR, Owen-Smith Moody JJ, Powell WW (2004) Networks, fields and organizations: micro-dynamics, scale and cohesive embeddings. Comput Math Organ Theory 10:95–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xi Y, Tang F (2004) Multiplex multi-core pattern of network organizations: an exploratory study. Comput Math Organ Theory 10:179–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zipf GK (1949) Human behavior and the principle of least effort. Addison-Wesley, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Peng-Xiang Li.

Additional information

This research work was supported partially by the Excellent Innovative Research Group Funds under grant No. 70121001 from the National Science Foundation in China, and partially by the Chinese National Science Foundation grant Nos. 70571062 and 70673077. We acknowledge the financial support of “985 engineering” project No. NS-005 of Xi’an Jiaotong University.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Li, PX., Zhang, MW., Xi, YM. et al. Why organizational networks in reality do not show scale-free distributions. Comput Math Organ Theory 15, 169–190 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10588-008-9030-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10588-008-9030-6

Keywords