Skip to main content

‘Morphogenesis Unbound’ from the Dynamics of Multilevel Networks: A Neo-structural Perspective

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Late Modernity

Part of the book series: Social Morphogenesis ((SOCMOR))

Abstract

One way to understand the notion of Morphogenesis Unbound is to focus on the meso level of society, i.e. to look at society as an ‘organizational society’ and to think about the co-evolution of structure, agency and culture – the three dimensions of Archer’s sociology, analytically speaking – in that context. This co-evolutionary vision happens to be very close to the research program of neo-structural sociology. To illustrate this insight, one neo-structural method, multilevel network analysis through linked design, is applied to a set of empirical data so as to propose a network translation of Morphogenesis Unbound and observe its outcome. This chapter reports results in which actors create new relationships beyond the boundaries of the organization with which they are affiliated, thus reshaping/expanding their own personal opportunity structure beyond the limitations imposed upon them by pre-existing structures. Half the population of the innovators observed (here: highly competitive scientists) deploy ‘independentist’ strategies, i.e. all the new personal ties that they develop in their network among the elite of colleagues of their profession are beyond the constraining perimeter predefined by their organization’s inter-organizational network. The kind of organization that they might create would not establish inter-organizational ties with their current organization. Over time, measurements suggest that this independence takes them close to Nowhere in terms of further achievements. Slightly more pedestrian forms of Morphogenesis, i.e. perhaps less Unbound, based on a relational strategy called here ‘individualist’, in which actors keep a strong foot in the organization in which they are affiliated so as to use its resources to create a new set of ties – and eventually a new organization – outside their current organization’s perimeter, seem to be of a more rewarding kind of networks to Somewhere closer to the “prizes [that] go to those who will explore and can manipulate contingent cultural compatibilities to their advantage” (Archer 2012). In this latter case, even if some of the opportunities that they could create for themselves are hoarded by their current organization (or boss). Such neo-structural measurements of Morphogenesis are used to start thinking about situations in which the two generative mechanisms identified by Archer (2012), competition and opportunity, coexist; as differentiated from the situations in which the latter would replace the former. Indeed creating new ties with heterogeneous actors, beyond one’s current position and sometimes even new kinds of organizations, is a highly cultural form of agency. Breiger’s notion of ‘weak culture’ helps speculate about actors’ capacity to reshape opportunity structures by reaching heterogeneous alters in spite of resistance from a rather stable, change-averse, tightly-connected organizational society promoting ordinary incremental innovation that will not challenge pre-existing entrenched interests.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The micro-foundations of neo-structuralism are based on a structural brand of symbolic interactionism stressing identity criteria, precarious values and status as combined elements of a theory of appropriateness judgments guiding behaviour (Lazega 1992, 2011).

  2. 2.

    Since this creates dynamics of multilevel networks with different levels of agency, a new family of models is needed to account for such dynamics. We think this family of models is a multilevel extension of Snijders (2001) model of dynamics of networks, using characteristics of level 2 network as set of exogenous factors in the evolution of level 1 network, and the other way around. The coevolution of both level networks is added to the coevolution of behavior and relational choices. In terms of model specification, new ‘independent’ variables from inter-organizational networks operate at the inter-individual level, and vice-versa.

  3. 3.

    Moreover, the chains of interactions between tie generation at different levels are not necessarily centred around subordinates. Sometimes cooperation between superiors and subordinates facilitate or hinder the development of such chains and restructuration (Lazega et~al. 2013).

References

  • Archer, M. S. (1982). Morphogenesis versus structuration: On combining structure and action. British Journal of Sociology, 35, 455–483.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Archer, M. S. (1995). Realist social theory: The morphogenetic approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Archer, M. S. (Ed.). (2013a). Introduction. Social morphogenesis. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Archer, M. S. (2013b, January 16–18). The generative mechanisms re-configuring late modernity. Paper prepared for 2013 Lausanne workshop ‘Morphogenic Society’ as a potential new social formation?’. Centre for Social Ontology, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland

    Google Scholar 

  • Breiger, R. L. (1974). The duality of persons and groups. Social Forces, 53, 181–190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Breiger, R. L. (2010). Dualities of culture and structure: Seeing through cultural holes. In J. Fuhse & S. Mützel (Eds.), Relationale Soziologie: Zur kulturellen Wende der Netzwerkforschung (pp. 37–47). Wiesbaden: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Donati, P. (2010). Relational sociology. A new paradigm for the social sciences. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fararo, T. J., & Doreian, P. (1984). Tripartite structural analysis: Generalizing the Breiger-Wilson formalism. Social Networks, 6, 141–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lazega, E. (1992). Micropolitics of knowledge. Communication and indirect control in workgroups. New York: Aldine-de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lazega, E. (2003). Rationalité, discipline sociale et structure. Revue française de sociologie, 44, 305–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lazega, E. (2006). Capital social, processus sociaux et capacité d’action collective. In A. Bevort & M. Lallement (Eds.), Capital social (pp. 213–225). Paris: La Découverte.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lazega, E. (2011). Pertinence et structure. Revue Suisse de Sociologie, 37, 127–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lazega, E. (2012). Sociologie néo-structurale. In R. Keucheyan et G. Bronner (Eds.), Introduction à la théorie sociale contemporaine. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lazega, E. (2014, forthcoming). Coevolution of appropriateness and structure in organizations: Secondary socialization through dynamics of advice networks and weak culture. In D. J. Brass, Giuseppe (Joe) Labianca, A. Mehra, D. S. Halgin, & S. P. Borgatti (Eds.), Research in the sociology of organizations (Contemporary perspectives on organizational social networks, Vol. 40, pp. 377–398).

    Google Scholar 

  • Lazega, E., & Pattison, P. (2001). Social capital as social mechanisms and collective assets: The example of status auctions among colleagues. In N. Lin, K. Cook, & R. Burt (Eds.), Social capital: Theory and research (pp. 185–208). New York: Aldine-de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lazega, E., Jourda, M., Mounier, L., & Stofer, R. (2007). Des poissons et des mares: l’analyse de réseaux multi-niveaux. Revue française de sociologie, 48, 93–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lazega, E., Jourda, M., Mounier, L., & Stofer, R. (2008). Catching up with big fish in the big pond ? Multi-level network analysis through linked design. Social Networks, 30, 157–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lazega, E., Jourda, M., & Mounier, L. (2013). Network lift from dual alters: Extended opportunity structures from a multilevel and structural perspective. European Sociological Review. doi:10.1093/esr/jct002.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perrow, C. (1991). A society of organizations. Theory and Society, 20, 725–762.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schultz, J., & Breiger, R. L. (2010). The strength of weak culture. Poetics: Journal of Empirical Research on Culture, the Media, and the Arts, 38, 610–624. doi:>10.1016/j.poetic.2010.09.002#http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.poetic.2010.09.002.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snijders, T. A. B. (2001). The statistical evaluation of social network dynamics. In M. E. Sobel & M. P. Becker (Eds.), Sociological methodology − 2001 (pp. 361–395). Boston/London: Basil Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snijders, T. A. B., & Bosker, R. (1999). Multi-level Analysis. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stryker, S. (1980). Symbolic interactionism: A social structural version. London: Benjamin/ Cummings.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tilly, C. (1998). Durable inequality. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, H. C. (1970). Chains of opportunity: System models of mobility in organizations. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, H., Boorman, S., & Breiger, R. L. (1976). Social structure from multiple networks I. Blockmodels of roles and positions. American Journal of Sociology, 81, 730–780.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, T. P. (1982). Relational networks: An extension of sociometric concepts. Social Networks, 4, 105–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Emmanuel Lazega .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Lazega, E. (2014). ‘Morphogenesis Unbound’ from the Dynamics of Multilevel Networks: A Neo-structural Perspective. In: Archer, M. (eds) Late Modernity. Social Morphogenesis. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-03266-5_8

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics