About this resource guide.

We have made an effort to located and link to many of the most influential books, papers and Web site about social networks, as well as ones that may gain influence or we just happen to like. The term "social network" has several distinct meanings and different groups that use the term have different objectives. When possible, we try to give some sense of this in the short descriptions, but they are not always neat distinctions and it is not unusual for someone that is looking at networks for one purpose to discover something that can be applied to anothers. In fact, for network experts, this probalby goes with out saying (see the section on innovation) We are mentioning it here because it might be helpful in finding what you are looking for and understanding what you are seeing.

A high level rough grouping of approaches to social networks might be thought of as "using them" or "observing them."

The former approach is based on the idea that there are social networks and that they can be used for marketing, getting jobs and so on. Many writers in this area talk of strategies for enlarging or creating social networks. This view of social networks strongly influences collaborative software, which is designed to create networks of users who can then use the relationships to their advantage in various ways.

The latter approach is based on the idea that to understand human behavior, it is important to understand people's relationships. There are behaviors we call "altruism," "trust," and so on that seem to serve the best interest of the group more than the individual. These influences and relationship are the ones any human has: children, indiginous peoples, or people in communes. The issue is: "how do these relationships affect social action?" whether it is individual or group action. This is a tricky question because linking cause to effect in human action is always difficult and often impossible. In the "observing them" camp using social networks as a way of describing human interactions has always been envisioned as a way of empirically studying the influence of the patterns of relationships.

The "observing them" camp has a broad variety of views and many unknowns. The nuts and bolts problems of describing and finding patterns can and does engage many people. A simple quesiton like: "whose network is better, John or Mary's?" is not simple at all. If one network has 100 nodes and the other 120, how can the be compared? By size? Is the bigger network "better?" How do we know that? Perhaps the bigger network makes so many time demands that the one with the bigger network fares worse on job performance, sales or whatever. Perhaps having a network with the right people is better than with many people. How do we find the answers to these questions? Are our intuitions accurate? Can the by improved? The answers to these questions often have to be taken one-at-a-time in a methodical way that is often more steak than sizzle. Surprisingly often the answer to the questions "are our intuitions accurate?" is: "no," but fortunately the answer to the question: "can our intuitions be improved" is "yes." Often times the advantage of observing social networks is that we come to realize that the way we have assumed things work can't be right and though that will not answer the question "what is a way that more closely fits the facts?" it will, at least, tell us that we need to start looking.

Though it is common to think of networks as metaphorical pipes through which stuff flows, this is only one view. Researchers talk of "friendship" networks and it is hard to imagine "friendship" flowing through a pipe like water. Networks can be conceived of as flows and implemented as concrete arrangements of chips and wires or hyperlinks on the Web. But some researchers study how we are tied together by shared meanings, geographic and other proximity, kinship and more. In fact, the influential network researcher, Harrison White, says: "Anything about which you can tell a story is a tie." We are linked by love, hate and even disinterest.

The "using them" camp starts with an observation that much of what is valuable to us comes by way of others. Mark Granovetter's famous paper, The Strength of Weak Ties, showed that professionals are more likely to get a job through casual acquaintances that from close friends. It makes sense, then, if one is looking for a job, to spend more time checking with casual acquaintances than with close friends. This result applies to more than jobs. If a salesperson needs new customers, he or she needs to go beyond the people he or she already knows. Close friends already know what he or she is selling. Another example is answers to questions or solutions to problems. Oftentimes someone know how to solve a problem, we just do know how to find them. Searching through our networks of acquaintances can be a productive way of finding answers. These types of strategies work so well that they have been automated to some extent in software like LinkedIn, Friendstr, Google Answers, Innocentive.com and countless other software platforms.

In addition, there is the art of "networking" which can be thought of as purposfully developing relationships for future business activity. This has been institutionalized as well with organizations like "Business Networking International (BMI)" teaching people how to "network" effectively. Researchers have tied together the observations about networks with using them and the answer to questions about which network is best for a specific purpose and how to act to effectivly use networks is not totally blue sky or intuition.

One thing that businesspeople and administrators find difficult about networks, is that there are few "one size fits all" results. To master the ability to understand and evaluate the observations takes some effort. While it may be possible for someone, a salesperson or job seeker, to follow a small set of specific rules to increase his or her chances of success, but this will not tell you how networks influence organizations, institutions, markets, social movement or even individual self-concept and identity. However, these more subtle aspects of networks are of critical importance to managers, planners, politicians, marketeers, and individuals.