Search for: All records

Professional networks help employees accomplish work tasks, progress in their careers, and thrive personally. Decades of research suggest that achieving these outcomes requires more than simply amassing 'more' network contacts. Instead, networks with certain characteristics (e.g., networks that are open, diverse, and deep) enhance effectiveness. Network training teaches trainees about effective networks and helps trainees identify their network development needs by providing feedback on their current network. Once back on the job, trainees are assumed to take appropriate actions to develop their networks. However, our research and experience training MBA students, executives, and employees at all levels suggest that trainees often struggle to develop their networks after training. We studied 119 trainees engaged in network training and development to understand why. Our investigation revealed that many trainees fail to set network development goals that match their personalized feedback, identify strategies that match their goals, and take actions to develop networks that match their strategies. These mismatches create gaps in the bridge that trainees build to take themselves from network training to development. Further, even after building strong bridges by aligning their feedback, goals, strategies, and actions, many trainees encounter on-the-job barriers that prevent them from improving the effectiveness of their network. We offer a guide to help address translational gaps and mitigate on-the-job barriers, thereby enhancing the translation of network training insights into network development. 

Team membership in today’s open talent economy is more fluid and interchangeable than ever before. In light of these dynamics, we consider how team members’ signaling of human and social capital, in the form of challenging or supportive voice, informs our understanding of how individuals across an organizational network self-assemble into temporary work teams. We test our hypotheses in two separate multiwave studies and find support for our hypotheses above and beyond the effects of homophily. In Study 1, we find support for a human capital pathway in which challenging voice in a team fosters perceptions of quality work that enhance one’s personal reputation in the broader network. Personal reputation, in turn, predicts team assembly decisions. In Study 2, we consider a social capital pathway alongside the human capital pathway. We find that supportive voice in a team fosters friendship that enhances the extent to which one is trusted in the broader network, and trust subsequently influences team assembly decisions. Potential team members appear to prioritize the social capital signaled by supportive voice more so than the human capital signaled by challenging voice, although those who possess both human and social capital are also highly sought during team formation. We discuss the implications of these findings for the literatures on voice and team assembly.