Assignment 5: Networks

This week’s assignment is to analyze two social networks of which I am currently a member. Emphasis will be put on the structure of the network, dependency relationships and what coordinative mechanisms are used.

First network: Studium Generale sessions

Studium Generale (SG) is an organization that aims to broaden the knowledge of TU Delft students, in addition to their specific field of study. SG mainly does this by inviting guest speakers to talk about various subjects like plastic waste, Iran, etcetera. The lectures are aimed at students, but they are open to the public as well. During the last years the percentage of students attending has decreased dramatically, resulting in an audience consisting of mainly non-students. This affects the legitimacy of SG and therefore monthly sessions are organized with various actors to discuss ideas to attract more students.

The boundaries of the network are set to the actors attending the sessions. These include several members of SG, members of VOX (a recently founded student association affiliated to SG) and several TU Delft students (not representing any organization). The sessions were initiated by SG, and in particular their leader Els. She maintains contact between all actors and also has the role of facilitator during the meetings. The structure of the network is resembled by the figure shown below, in an idealized form. Els is the central actor here, shown as the red dot. She forms the main node between SG, VOX and the remaining students. SG and VOX both form mini networks themselves, these are enclosed with a circle. The remaining students are shown as individual dots, only connected to the central actor.

Els coordinates the sessions and forms the main node between all actors. This makes her the most powerful actor within the network. She also delivers the necessary coordinative mechanism for the network; she e-mails every actor and reserves a room at which the sessions can be held. As mentioned, she also facilitates the sessions.

During the first session the figure resembled the network most. But as more sessions were organized the different actors formed more and more tight connections with each other. This made the network less dependent on Els, although she is still the most powerful actor. But the structure of the network would be less damaged if she were to leave, as every actor has made linkages with each other in time. As the structure of the network has strengthened, the single actors have also become more dependent on the network. This is best explained by the goal of the sessions: to give input to SG, but also indirectly to the other actors. Now the network is established SG depends on the network for feedback, while they would have turned to other people for this in the past. VOX, in turn, depends on student members for their association to exist. In part, they gain these from the students attending the sessions. These students will then make advertisement for VOX by word-of-mouth, allowing VOX to grow and to help them with advise. The individual students do not have clear advantages in attending the sessions, but it can be argued that they derive friendships and useful connections from the sessions and become more dependent that way.  

Second network: Lifeguard organization SSW

The last three years I worked as a lifeguard during the Summer. The beach I worked at is located in Oost-Kapelle, in Zeeland. The organization (SSW) supervises this beach, along with five other beaches. Each beach has its own post, with its own commander and a 2^nd commander. The rest of the lifeguards are all pupils and students (lifeguards) who work there only during the Summer.

The figure below resembles the network structure of the SSW. The blue oval represents the office, from which directions are given to the commanders (red dots). The commanders give leadership to the lifeguards (orange dots). The commanders and office-staff form the core of the organization. These people work full-time. The organization is rather small (about 25 full-timers) and the commanders and office-staff visit each other regularly for discussion. This has resulted in tight linkages between the full-time personnel. The lifeguards, on the contrary, mainly work on the same beaches for a few years. They rarely interact with office-staff and lifeguards and commanders from other beaches, except for the yearly barbeque. This results in weak linkages between these actors. From this can be concluded that the commanders have the most powerful position within the network. They interact with the other commanders, office-staff and their lifeguards. The teams of lifeguards have the weakest position in the network because they mainly interact with their own commanders.

Even though the lifeguards have the weakest linkages, they do carry out the main tasks for the organization. During the high season they patrol the beach, empty garbage bins, nurse wounded tourists, etcetera. This makes the office-staff and commanders highly dependent on the lifeguards, as a collective. The SSW is responsible for the quality of the work of the lifeguards, as they hire them and receive subsidies on basis of the quality of the work done. On the individual level, the lifeguards are more dependent on the office-staff and commanders, as these decide if the lifeguards get to work or not. So the individual lifeguards are very dependent on office-staff and commanders whereas the latter are barely dependent on the individual lifeguards.

                The dependency between the commanders and the office-staff is more mutual. The commanders are hired by the office, and also the office decides which beaches have priority in dividing resources such as boats. But the commanders have a more central position in the network. They are the node between the lifeguards and the office, making it hard to replace them.

                From this analyses can be derived what coordinative mechanisms are used; the office (director) determines the strategy and allocates resources. These are channeled to the commanders, which then instruct the lifeguards. The lifeguards, in turn, give feedback to the commander, to be reported to the office-staff.

Assignment 4: Nokia

In the video we saw a representative of Nokia going to its phone supplier in China. During her trip she exposed the supplier’s violations of the Chinese law, like under-payment and too many working hours for the employees. At the end of the visit the people in charge of running the facility were confronted with these violations.

 1. Would this approach be an effective way of diffusing sustainability criteria as well?

Nokia is one of the largest cell-phone companies in the world. This implicates that they have multiple suppliers, also probably in China to cut costs. So Nokia will view the supplier as ‘one of many’. But the supplier will view Nokia as one of its major customers, and it will do (almost) anything to keep it that way. This and the fact that Nokia is one step up in the supply chain makes the position of Nokia very powerful. They can afford it to switch suppliers, but the supplier will see its turnover drop dramatically when they are dropped. So to my opinion this is the most effective way of diffusing sustainability criteria to the supply chain.

Companies like Nokia are also in a unique position to diffuse their criteria. They have the brand, the thing that the consumer knows and wants. In most cases the other companies in the supply chain like the distributor and the manufacturer do not have unique attributes. This makes it easy to replace them. Indirectly, there are also mining companies that supply Nokia. And so Nokia could go even further and tell their suppliers to impose sustainability criteria on their suppliers. And so on. In the case of a mining company the situation is rather different, however. Mining companies are generally huge companies; the investment required for exploiting a mine is significant. This makes it difficult to pressure them. Also, because materials (mostly metals) are getting scarce these companies will sell their products anyway.

2. How would another governance mechanism improve on this?

Another option for Nokia to make its supply chain sustainable is to manufacture and distribute their phones themselves. This makes it easier to implement sustainability measures, as the factory will do as the board tells them to. It also has economic benefits; the profit made by the supplier would go to Nokia instead. But this will prove very hard for Nokia, as they only have experience in designing the phones. Setting up their own factory will require big investments and will prove to be loss-making in the short term.

Another option to impose sustainability criteria
I found it rather surprising to see Nokia (being a company) striving for better social conditions at its supplier without external pressure, except the threat of being thrown out of the Dow Jones Sustainability Index. How to persuade other companies to do the same, and to speed up the transformation towards truly 'green' products?
Industrial ecologist Peter Tom Jones sees the civilians as the group to convince to strive for a ‘green’ future, as described in his book Terra Reversa. A distinction is made between government, companies and comsumers. This is visualized in the scheme (Stevenson and Keehn, 2006), arrows are added by Peter Tom Jones.

In his vision neither companies nor governments will to go on a sustainable path intrinsically. The objective of the companies is maximize profits, and by implementing (strong) sustainability measures profits are lost. Then the aim for governments is to get reelected. This makes them mainly think in terms of four years, instead of the required twenty, or even fifty years. And so governments will barely invest in a green future. A shift towards a truly sustainable society requires significant investment in, for example, smart grids and renewable energy technology. And on the other hand travel by plane, meat consumption and consumption in general should be reduced. This would require a lot of investment (taxes) and impopular (tax)measures, in the short term. It is likely then that the government will not be reelected. The civilians, in turn, have the power to persuade both the companies and the government. They have the option not to buy certain goods and to vote for other parties then the current government. And so the civilians are the group to seduce, to strive for a less materialistic 'green' future. But how?