Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Network effects on learning during emergency events

  • Article
  • Published:
Knowledge Management Research & Practice

Abstract

Understanding the factors that enhance or impede learning of individuals is instrumental in achieving organizational performance goals. In this study, the effect of social network structures on the learning attitudes of emergency personnel during an emergency event was investigated. On the basis of a social influence model of learning, a theoretical framework has been proposed to investigate the effects of network structure on learning outcomes of bushfire incident management teams. To test our framework, we investigated social network data, which were extracted from the transcripts of the 2009 Victorian Bushfires Royal Commission report. Empirical results suggest that a network structure of emergency personnel can be identified, which plays a key role in the ability of those actors to engage in learning-related work activity, allowing them to adapt and improvise in complex emergency events. By presenting a model of learning-related work activity, based on a social network analysis of its structure, emergency staff members can strengthen their capacity to be flexible and adaptable.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abbasi A, Hossain L, Hamra J and Owen C (2010) Social networks perspective of firefighters’ adaptive behaviour and coordination among them. 2010 IEEE/ACM Int’l Conference on Green Computing and Communications & Int’l Conference on Cyber, Physical and Social Computing pp 819–824, IEEE Computer Society, Hangzhou, China.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ahuja MK, Galletta DF and Carley KM (2003) Individual centrality and performance in virtual R&D groups: an empirical study. Management Science 49 (1), 21–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bavelas A (1950) Communication patterns in task-oriented groups. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 22 (6), 725–730.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bodin Ö, Crona B and Ernstson H (2006) Social networks in natural resource management: what is there to learn from a structural perspective. Ecology and Society 11 (2), r2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borgatti SP (2005) Centrality and network flow. Social Networks 27 (1), 55–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borgatti SP and Cross R (2003) A relational view of information seeking and learning in social networks. Management Science 49 (4), 432–445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borgatti SP and Foster PC (2003) The network paradigm in organizational research: a review and typology. Journal of management 29 (6), 991–1013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borgatti SP, Everett MG and Freeman LC (2002) UCINET for Windows: Software for Social Network Analysis Vol. 2006 Harvard Analytic Technologies, Natick, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brandes U and Fleischer D (2005) Centrality measures based on current flow. Proceedings of the 22nd Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science (STACS ‘05) pp 533–544, Springer-Verlag, Stuttgart.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brannback M (2003) R&D collaboration: role of Ba in knowledge-creating networks. Knowledge Management Research & Practice 1 (1), 28–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burt RS (1992) Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burt RS (2002) The social capital of structural holes. In The New Economic Sociology: Developments in an Emerging Field (Guillen M, Collins R, England P and Meyer MW, Eds), pp 148–190, Russell Sage Foundation, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carrington PJ, Scott J and Wasserman S (2005) Models and Methods in Social Network Analysis. Cambridge University Press, New York.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Chung KSK (2009) Understanding attitudes towards performance in knowledge-intensive work: the influence of social networks and ICT use. Ph.D. Thesis, The University of Sydney, NSW, Australia.

  • Coleman J, Katz E and Menzel H (1957) The diffusion of an innovation among physicians. Sociometry 20 (4), 253–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coleman JS (1994) Foundations of Social Theory. Belknap Press, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coleman JS (1988) Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology 94 (Supplement), S95–S120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coleman JS, Katz E and Menzel H (1966) Medical Innovation: A Diffusion Study. Bobbs-Merrill Co, Indianapolis, IN.

    Google Scholar 

  • Comfort LK (1999) Shared Risk: Complex Systems in Seismic Response. Pergamon, Amsterdam, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cross R and Cummings JN (2004) Tie and network correlates of individual performance in knowledge-intensive work. The Academy of Management Journal 47 (6), 928–937.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dodgson M (1993) Learning, trust, and technological collaboration. Human Relations 46 (1), 77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Faust K (1997) Centrality in affiliation networks. Social Networks 19 (2), 157–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frank KA and Yasumoto JY (1998) Linking action to social structure within a system: social capital within and between subgroups. American Journal of Sociology 104 (3), 642–686.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman LC (1978) Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification. Social Networks 1 (3), 215–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman LC, Roeder D and Mulholland RR (1980) Centrality in social networks: II. Experimental results. Social Networks 2 (2), 119–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman LC, Romney AK and Freeman SC (1987) Cognitive structure and informant accuracy. American Anthropologist 89 (2), 310–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gourlay S (2006) Towards conceptual clarity for ‘tacit knowledge’: a review of empirical studies. Knowledge Management Research & Practice 4 (1), 60–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Granovetter M (1985) Economic action and social structure: the problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology 91 (3), 481–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guetzkow H and Dill WR (1957) Factors in the organizational development of task-oriented groups. Sociometry 20 (3), 175–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guetzkow H and Simon HA (1955) The impact of certain communication nets upon organization and performance in task-oriented groups. Management Science 1 (3/4), 233–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamel G (1991) Competition for competence and interpartner learning within international strategic alliances. Strategic Management Journal 12 (S1), 83–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hammer M (1985) Implications of behavioral and cognitive reciprocity in social network data. Social Networks 7 (2), 189–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanneman R and Riddle M (Eds) (2005) Introduction to social network methods. Riverside CUoC, Riverside (published in digital form at [WWW document] http://faculty.ucr.edu/~hanneman/), (accessed 16 November 2011).

  • Hossain L and Kuti M (2010) Disaster response preparedness coordination through social networks. Disasters 34 (3), 755–786.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hytten K and Hasle A (1989) Fire fighters: a study of stress and coping. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica 80 (S355), 50–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kapucu N (2009) Interorganizational coordination in complex environments of disasters: the evolution of intergovernmental disaster response systems. Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management 6 (1), 47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kianto A and Waajakoski J (2010) Linking social capital to organizational growth. Knowledge Management Research & Practice 8 (1), 4–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kilduff M and Tsai W (2003) Social Networks and Organizations. Sage Publications Ltd, Thousand Oaks, CA.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kimball Romney A and Weller SC (1984) Predicting informant accuracy from patterns of recall among individuals. Social Networks 6 (1), 59–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leavitt HJ (1951) Some effects of certain communication patterns on group performance. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 46 (1), 38–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mullen B, Johnson C and Salas E (1991) Effects of communication network structure: components of positional centrality. Social Networks 13 (2), 169–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oh H, Chung MH and Labianca G (2004) Group social capital and group effectiveness: the role of informal socializing ties. The Academy of Management Journal 47 (6), 860–875.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Powell WW, Koput KW and Smith-Doerr L (1996) Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: networks of learning in biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly 41 (1), 116–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quińones MA, Ford JK and Teachout MS (1995) The relationship between work experience and job performance: a conceptual and meta-analytic review. Personnel Psychology 48 (4), 887–910.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rana MR (2004) Physical fitness and job performance of firefighters. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 18 (2), 348–352.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reagans R and McEvily B (2003) Network structure and knowledge transfer: the effects of cohesion and range. Administrative Science Quarterly 48 (2), 240–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoeneborn D (2011) Organization as communication: A Luhmannian perspective. Management Communication Quarterly 25 (4), 663–689.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaw M (1981) Group Dynamics: The Social Psychology of Small Group Behavior. McGraw-Hill, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tam M (2000) Constructivism, instructional design, and technology: implications for transforming distance learning. Educational Technology & Society 3 (2), 50–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teague B, McLeod R and Pascoe S (2009) Victorian Bushfires Royal Commission Final Report. Parliament of Victoria, Government Printer for the State of Victoria, Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Varda D, Forgette R, Banks D and Contractor N (2009) Social network methodology in the study of disasters: issues and insights prompted by post-Katrina research. Population Research and Policy Review 28 (1), 11–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weick KE and Sutliffe KM (2001) Managing the Unexpected. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Sydney, Australia

    Jafar Hamra & Liaquat Hossain

  2. University of Arkansas at Little Rock, U.S.A.

    Rolf Wigand

  3. University of Tasmania, Australia

    Christine Owen

Authors
  1. Jafar Hamra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rolf Wigand
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Liaquat Hossain
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Christine Owen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jafar Hamra.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hamra, J., Wigand, R., Hossain, L. et al. Network effects on learning during emergency events. Knowl Manage Res Pract 12, 387–397 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1057/kmrp.2012.65

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/kmrp.2012.65

Keywords

Search

Navigation