Call for Papers

Call for short papers (pdf)

Social networks and relationships of managers, entrepreneurs, employees, or entire organizations are central to how business endeavors function and evolve. Extending, complementing, or replacing formal hierarchies or workflows, networks constitute the channels through which resources circulate, shaping collaboration, power dynamics, and individual or strategic behavior.

Recent scholarship suggests that network configurations do not emerge randomly but follow institutionalized rules of the game that govern how ties are formed and maintained within specific social fields (Fuhse & Gondal, 2024). These rules reflect culturally shared expectations about appropriate forms of relating and, in turn, shape core social network mechanisms such as reciprocity, homophily, or transitivity. Broadly speaking, the game refers to the ongoing process of social interaction within a field—an arena where actors engage with one another, pursue goals, and interpret their relationships under culturally specific norms and shared understandings.

Building on this view, understanding social networks requires attention to their cultural embeddedness. Since social relationships are deeply shaped by institutional and cultural contexts (Klyver & Foley, 2012), the antecedents, structures, and outcomes of networks—as well as the mechanisms linking them—can vary substantially across countries, regions, and social settings. In non-Western contexts, where formal institutions are often less developed or differently configured, organizations and entrepreneurs often rely more heavily on informal ties and personal trust to coordinate activities, mobilize resources, and navigate uncertainty (Sydow et al., 2022). The significance of incorporating non-Western perspectives into key areas of organizational and entrepreneurship research has been increasingly recognized, as highlighted by recent scholarly calls to develop indigenous and context-specific frameworks (Baker & Welter, 2020; Bruton et al., 2018; Filatotchev et al., 2022; George et al., 2016; Wickert et al., 2024).

Informal social networks and culturally specific network ties, such as Guanxi in China and Wasta in the Middle East (Ali & Weir, 2020; Burt & Burzynska, 2017; Minbaeva et al., 2023), as well as tribal networks in Sub-Saharan Africa (Busch & Mudida, 2024), have been shown to play a pivotal role in shaping management and entrepreneurial activities and behaviors. For instance, tribes constitute a meso-level structure in many African societies that lacks a direct counterpart in Western contexts. These tribal networks have been shown to impact, for instance, job markets and organizational performance (Zoogah et al., 2015). In addition to tribal ties, there are other types of ties that do not exist in Western contexts, such as accusations of witchcraft, which may impact entrepreneurial behavior (Namatovu et al., 2018). Furthermore, extended kinship and family networks especially play an outstanding role in entrepreneurial activities in non-Western contexts, as they provide an opportunity to access resources, but at the same time place demands and expectations on the entrepreneur (Khayesi et al., 2014). Not only do these cultural specificities shape the composition of networks, but they also influence the financial and non-financial outcomes of those ties in the context of managerial and entrepreneurial activities. Beyond cultural factors, other elements such as place/geographic location (Grant, 2013), the type of activity (e.g., necessity-driven entrepreneurship; Urban, 2011), or (Western) influences, such as those introduced through entrepreneurship training programs (Dimitriadis & Koning, 2022), can significantly impact the formation of ties, the accumulation of social capital, potential liabilities, and other outcomes associated with these networks.

Despite their critical importance, non-Western perspectives remain significantly underrepresented in the broader fields of management, organization, and entrepreneurship research as well as in social network research. Our understanding of the drivers, structures, outcomes, and mechanisms of social networks in non-Western contexts lags far behind the insights we have about networks in Western contexts. This disparity also extends to methodological and theoretical frameworks used in non-Western studies, which are predominantly shaped by Western paradigms. These paradigms often fail to adequately account for context-specific factors, thereby limiting our understanding of social networks in non-Western contexts. There is considerable potential to challenge and expand existing theories, or even to develop entirely new theoretical approaches, by incorporating context-specific insights from non-Western contexts.

This sub-theme seeks to advance scholarly understanding of how different kinds of institutions, culture, perceptions, and rules influence the formation, structure, and outcomes of social networks and relationships in non-Western contexts. We encourage submissions that address these topics in non-Western organizational and entrepreneurial contexts. Submissions may address, but are not limited to, the following questions:

• What are the drivers, structures, outcomes, and underlying mechanisms of social networks in non-Western contexts in management, organization, and entrepreneurship research?

  • What is the role of the cultural context in the formation and evolution of social networks?

  • What kind of (new) context-specific types of ties are relevant, and what are their meanings?

  • Which distinct financial and non-financial outcomes are relevant with regard to social networks in non-Western contexts?

  • What role do network cognition and agency of managers and entrepreneurs, as currently prominent debates in social network research, play in non-Western contexts?

• How do insights from non-Western contexts challenge current management and entrepreneurship theories, or expand or contribute to the development of entirely new management, entrepreneurship, and social network theories?

• What kind of research designs and methods do we require to capture social networks, for instance, their structure and their meanings, in non-Western, especially indigenous contexts?

We look forward to submissions that advance theoretical and empirical insights into these issues and promote a rich, interdisciplinary dialogue.
 

• Ali, S., & Weir, D. (2020). Wasta: Advancing a holistic model to bridge the micro-macro divide. Management and Organization Review, 16(3), 657–685.
• Baker, T., & Welter, F. (2020). Contextualizing entrepreneurship theory. Routledge.
• Bruton, G., Zahra, S., & Cai, L. (2018). Examining entrepreneurship through indigenous lenses. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 42(3), 351–361.
• Burt, R., & Burzynska, K. (2017). Chinese entrepreneurs, social networks, and Guanxi. Management and Organization Review, 13(2), 221–260.
• Busch, C., & Mudida, R. (2024). Asserting and transcending ethnic homophily: How entrepreneurs develop social ties to access resources and opportunities in socially contested environments. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 18(2), 229–257.
• Dimitriadis, S., & Koning, R. (2022). Social skills improve business performance: Evidence from a randomized control trial with entrepreneurs in Togo. Management Science, 68(12), 8635–8657.
• Filatotchev, I., Ireland, R., & Stahl, G. (2022). Contextualizing management research: An open systems perspective. Journal of Management Studies, 59(4), 1036–1056.
• Fuhse, J., & Gondal, N. (2024). Networks from culture: Mechanisms of tie-formation follow institutionalized rules in social fields. Social Networks, 77, 43–54.
• George, G., Corbishley, C., Khayesi, J., Haas, M., & Tihanyi, L. (2016). Bringing Africa in: Promising directions for management research. Academy of Management Journal, 59(2), 377–393. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2016.4002
• Grant, R. (2013). Gendered spaces of informal entrepreneurship in Soweto, South Africa. Urban Geography, 34(1), 86–108.
• Khayesi, J., George, G., & Antonakis, J. (2014). Kinship in entrepreneur networks: Performance effects of resource assembly in Africa. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 38(6), 1323–1342.
• Klyver, K., & Foley, D. (2012). Networking and culture in entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 24(7–8), 561–588.
• Minbaeva, D., Ledeneva, A., Muratbekova-Touron, M., & Horak, S. (2023). Explaining the persistence of informal institutions: The role of informal networks. Academy of Management Review, 48(3), 556–574.
• Namatovu, R., Dawa, S., Adewale, A., & Mulira, F. (2018). Religious beliefs and entrepreneurial behaviours in Africa: A case study of the informal sector in Uganda. Africa Journal of Management, 4(3), 259–281.
• Sydow, A., Cannatelli, B., Giudici, A., & Molteni, M. (2022). Entrepreneurial workaround practices in severe institutional voids: Evidence from Kenya. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 46(2), 331–367.
• Urban, B. (2011). Entrepreneurial networking differences: An ethnic in-group and out-group analysis. South African Journal of Industrial Psychology, 37(1), Article 826.
• Wickert, C., Potočnik, K., Prashantham, S., Shi, W., & Snihur, Y. (2024). Embracing non-Western contexts in management scholarship. Journal of Management Studies, 61(8), e1-e24. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.13048
• Zoogah, D., Peng, M., & Woldu, H. (2015). Institutions, resources, and organizational effects in Africa. Academy of Management Perspectives, 29(1), 7–31.