Ethnicity and Advice information relations in the UK

1. Ethnicity and Advice information relations in the UK A Social Network Approach Antoinette Saint-Hilaire University of Greenwich, UK

2. Introduction • The UK is increasingly becoming ethnically diverse. • The 1991- 2001 Census data shows 76% of a total 4% population growth in the UK occurred amongst ethnic groupings. • This growth occurred most in the major conurbations where ethnic communities are already established (Lupton and Power 2004). • Further, according to 2001 Census data, significant population growth occurred in Black African, Bangladeshi, Pakistani and Chinese ethnic groupings. The mid term census shows a significant increase in eastern Europeans – Polish. • The increasing diversity of the UK, and the global context, makes the need to develop a deep understanding of the social relationships that occur in ethnically diverse organisations important. • We need to understand more about relations in ethnically diverse settings.

3. Inter-ethnic interaction • Interested: ethnically diverse environments : social identity and relations in organisation settings. What network structures and actors attributes best explain advice information relational patterns ? • What contributes to network configurations? • Q1 what network structural patterns do different forms of ethnically diverse organization produce ? • Q2. How can these patterns be explained ( size, location, identity ) ? • Q3. Do all ethnic groups pattern the same ? • Q4. What role does ethnic identity play in the ordering of relations? • Q5. Does collective identity really matter in everyday life (who we are) ? • Q6. Is ethnic identity antecedent to advice information relationships? Or is self interest a key factor ( Barth 69) i.e., material resources ? • What explains / motivates advice relations ? • Q7. Which is the more important in understanding human behaviour? Both are internal and external influenced. • Q8. How do we distinguish between self interest and social identity ? How do they matter? Can they be in the presence of each other ? Can interest create identity (Y) and can identity create interest? Can forms of communication create identity? How?

4. Previous Research 1. In the organisational and management literatures, relational and network research primarily focuses on highlighting the existence and consequences of differential access to resources between ethnic groups in the USA. ( Ibarra 1993; Mc Guire 2000 ) 2. Small numbers of ethnic minorities and their peripheral status leads to ethnic identification. ( structure + size = ethnic identification) 3. Ethnic identification is a product of discontent 4. Questions about ethnic diversity raises new questions about ethnic identity and the patterning of social relations Box 19.1

5. Ethnicity Homophily • The homophily principle asserts that people along the same socio-demographic dimensions are more likely to interact than people who are dissimilar (Lazerfeld and Merton 1954; Blau 1977; Brass 1985). Therefore, homophily refers to one's preference on choice selections. • Ethnicity homophily ethnicity homophily means that people of the same ethnic background are more likely to interact and exchange social resources (McPherson et al. 2001).

6. Ethnicity Homophily • McPherson et al (2001) suggests that race and ethnicity homophily tend to create stronger relational ties than other classifying forms (e.g., class). • Ethnicity produces opportunities for ethnic distinctions and social constructions of ethnic identities (Jenkins 2004). Therefore collective identity is a interactional product of external identification by others - as well as internal identification by the self. • There is also evidence that finds ethnicity does not necessarily lead to same race /ethnicity relations when the social environment is ethnically and multi-culturally diverse (Quillan and Campbell 2003)

7. Advice information • Krackhardt and Kilduff (2002:.281) see advice information sharing as a form of mutual assistance as: • ‘knowledge which is key to understanding how work gets done, how daily routine is handled and who the experts are in the organisation….knowledge of advice can be advantageous in short circuiting long chains of information gathering…’

8. Diversity in advice information relations • From a social resource perspective, it is known that advice information is sought from experts in the network (Cross et al. 2001) and advisors hierarchically senior (higher status) to the advice seeker (Lazega and Patiison 1999) as a means to aid learning (Lazega et al. 2006). • Does ethnic similarity impact on advice information networks ? • Does the ethnically diverse environment ( internal and external ) induce ethnic similarity on relations ? Or not?

9. Research Hypotheses • H1: Advice information networks are important in ethnically diverse settings. • H2: Ethnicity Homophily ties in ethnically diverse environments are strongly assortative. • H3: There are differences in ethnicity homophily on advice information between ethnicity groups • H4: There is tendency for actors to preference advice information based on ethnicity similarity.

10. Methodology • Research is situated in field of organisational sociology • A social network approach adopted • A questionnaire survey conducted at 2 months on 60 graduate students • Students were asked about their advice information relationships • The participants were asked to use the student number code in the list class to respond to the following question: • ‘ in the context of your academic studies, whom do you go to or share advice information with?’ For example, advice information about articles, books, assignments challenges etc. • Friendship data was also collected

11. TABLE I: Network demographics of respondents in advice information network see Box 19.4

12. Network Measures • 1. Density • L • D = N (N-1) • 2. E-I index • E- the number of external ties • I – the number of internal ties • 3. Assortativity Matrix • r = Σi eii – Σi aibi • 1 – Σiaibi • 4. P* • P 0 (X=x) = exp{0' u (x) -U(0)} • To model structural and node effects in networks.

13. Variables • Independent Variable • . Ethnicity Homophily • Dependent Variable • Actual advice information network ties • Control Variable • Friendship ties

14. H1 • Advice information networks are important in ethnically diverse settings.

15. Key to identity groups • Red circle= Indians • Grey square = other Asian • purple up triangle = Chinese • Black diamond = Black • Blue down triangle = White European

16. FIGURE I : A sociogram on actual advice information network Box 19.3

17. No Support for H1 • Further descriptive analyses find that the network contains 1770 dyads. Of the proportion of dyads M= (55) 31%f ties are reciprocal, 117 are asymmetrical and 1598 and null. Thus, the network density is (d = 227/3540) 0.0647. The average degree indicates 3.783 ties and varies from 0 - 10 for outdegree and 1 - 8 for indegree. • Thus, the average degree of ties generates a network that is structurally fully connected – there are no isolates

18. H2 • Ethnicity Homophily ties in ethnically diverse environments are strongly assortative.

19. Interactions by Ethnicity (Assortativity Matrix) Asian Asian other Chinese Black White Asian 13 4 1 4 14 Asian other6 14 16 4 11 Chinese4 13 20 6 8 Black 4 2 4 2 6 White12 5 5 3 46

20. Assortativity Coefficient • Ethnicity • We find that r = 0.2239 is statistically significant for ethnicity assortativity mixing • Gender • The assortativity mixing by gender is a value r = 0.1276 and is statistically significant.

21. H3 • There are differences in ethnicity homophily on advice information between ethnicity groups

22. E-I index on advice information Interactions by Ethnicity Internal External Total E-I index In-Ranking Asian 1636 52 0.385 4 Asian other34 43 77 0.117 3 Chinese34 40 74 0.018 2 Black 4.0 23 27 0.704 5 White64 52 116 -0.103 1

23. E-I index on Knowledge by Ethnicity

24. E-I INDEX ON FRIENDSHIPS

25. H4 • There is tendency for actors to preference advice information based on ethnicity similarity.

26. P* Model

27. Discussion • Advice information Network • 6% of potential network of Advice information ties occur by 2 months • This figure equates to 0.6 of business school and 0.6 of University. • Other networks are being used • Network configuration consists of structural characteristics and node similarity • Structural characteristics • Reciprocity and out2 stars are indicated to configure the network • Reciprocity = self interest Rational Choice behaviour • Out2=star = similarity effect on identity

28. Discussion • Ethnicity homophily • Ethnicity homophily is indicated. More likely an indicator than gender similarity. • There are differences between the ethnic groups observed. • European Whites and Chinese more likely to preference advice selection on ethnicity. Other groups less inclined to do so. • The importance of diversity in the network • Group A = advice information is important over ethnicity. Factors other than ethnicity is important. ( Indians etc ) • Group B = ethnicity is important because of advice information relations – interactions. Then ethnicity is antecedent to advice information selection. The two forms of behaviour coexist in advice information networks. ( White and Chinese).

29. DISCUSSION • A diverse Ethnic and Multi –cultural context - the UK • Enables ethnic attitudes to develop on selecting advice information relationships and relations • Enables self interested behaviour. Thus, cross ethnicity relationships and relations. • Conclusion • Some ethnic groups are more inclined to develop cross ethnicity relationships on advice information relations. In other words, in the pursuit of self interest individuals are less conscious about their ethnic identity. Therefore, their behaviour transcends ethnic boundaries. • Some ethnic groups become more conscious of their collective – ethnic identity. Identity is therefore important over and above the negotiating and securing of resources. This can be seen as a expression of who we are……. Ethnic identity.

30. DISCUSSION • Numeric Distinctiveness ? • Other factors must be considered. In this context, it might be that ethnicity homophily is dependent on the current situation facing an actor, structural and process context factors and the collective importance attached to ethnicity; in other words, non size factors

31. Interpretations of ethnic identity • ‘inbred quality that makes me the part of a group, that distinguishes me from the other groups & it is an important part of who I am’ • Defined boundaries and dimensions : • Wearing distinctive clothing • Cultural distinctions • Living next to one another • Behaving in a distinctive manner • Speaking their own language • Maintaining a distinct identity • Performing traditional rituals • Evidence of collectivity: historically recognized values and beliefs • Geographical, class and religious importance • Educating others about ones ethnic background and lived ethnicity • Names and foods • Collective activities and Lifestyles • Feelings, thoughts, perceptions, expectations – from shared history ( • Cognitive similarity

32. Interpretations of instrumental behaviour • Wânt to get the work done • Need to get information from the poeple that know • They are availalble to me • Time is important

33. Social Processes in advice information Advice Information problem Simple Interactions Self interested behaviour Emphasising differences Same ethnicity selections on advice Inf Cost and benefit analysis Ethnic identity might be more important than securing Of material resources Selection of Appropriate person Within group orientation Behaviour transcends Ethnic boundaries Socially active and might be Ethnic bridgers and brokers Network structure not clustered. A complex social network of advice information relations

34. T1 ( would like to ex advice info )