How we see networks: the view from the node

The theory

I'm currently involved in the efforts of an organization to draw up their constitution. I have no idea if the efforts are going anywhere, but there are a number of questions that are hotly contested, and I thought it would be useful for other people to post my take on those questions on this blog. The first question is: "Should the organization have a chair?" Most people are interpreting "chair" here as "a central authority figure". There are ongoing discussions about the exact job description of the chair, but what is clear is that the question isn't so much about what the chair does as about having some kind of central authority.

This question takes us again to the subject of networks. Organizations are networks of people. Each of us sees the network from a different point of view. At the same time, there is often (but not always) some kind of "official" view of the network, some way of looking at it that is considered the standard view. In many organizations, they have some kind of "organization chart" that shows what's supposed to be everybody's place. What this "organization chart" shows is usually the view from the vantage point of the CEO. On the other hand, a receptionist often has another completely different view.

From the point of view of a CEO, there are usually a number of managers underneath, each of them with a number of underlings, all the way down to the "little people". From the point of view of a receptionist, there are a number of people she contacts regularly, whoever needs to meet people at the door often, maybe a contact in human resources, another one with the cleaners, another one in sales, etc. Each of them will take matters to somebody else as and when needed. The receptionist may be quite hazy on what happens with people after they cross the door, or may be very well informed, it really depends on how intelligent and curious she or he is.

The important thing to realise is that both the CEO and the receptionist actually have a lot of power in a company. The CEO may have the formal authority, but the receptionist gets to decide who can go through the door. That's a hell of a lot of power! And both know a lot of key people within the company.

Similar situations can happen in any kind of network, and not just networks of people. For example, think of food webs, the networks that represent which living creatures eat which. Usually, they are drawn with the biggest predators at the top. But not always. Compare these two food webs of marine life:



They both represent the same ecosystem roughly, but the first one has the biggest predator at the top, humans. The second is a food web drawn around krill, which is what's called a keystone species. A keystone species is any living creature that has such a critical place in the ecology, that if their numbers go down, the whole ecosystem could be in trouble.

This is a very important thing to realise. You can look at any network from the point of view of any node, and it will look different. And when you look at it from some nodes, it may become immediately clear that this node is very important for the whole network, but you may not see it until you think about that particular node.

There are several keystone species in any ecosystem, and there never is a single central authority figure in any organization that has more than 12 or so people. As soon as it gets any bigger, chances are that there will be several people in key positions of power, that if they went or refused to do their work properly, could cause endless trouble to everyone else (unless the network has a rather unusual structure - and in most unusual structures you would find it impossible to work anyway).

So the question becomes rather: "Should we only recognize one of these positions as an official position of power? Or do we make it clear that we realise there are several key positions?" Different situations call for a different answer to this question, but at least you need to be aware that this is the real question.

The practice

Experiment 1

Find a patch of wildlife that you have easy access to. A garden will do, but wild is best.

1. Pick a common plant and try to draw the food web around it. What animals seem to eat that plant? What eating connections can you identify between these animals?
2. Pick a common bird or bird-sized animal and try to do the same. What does this bird eat? Does any other animal eat this bird? What other eating connections can you see around these animals?

Compare the two. Could any of the two be a keystone species? If you can't tell, what would you need to know to be able to tell?

Experiment 2

Think of an organization you work in. If it has an organizational chart, get a copy of it. If not, try to draw yourself what it would look like.

Now, have some fun and draw it from several unusual points of view: a receptionist or administrator, the person dealing with your IT systems, or a person dealing with marketing and promotion. Try any other interesting point of view that you can think of. Can you start to see that there are several key positions?