not your father’s network analysis

Sean’s book (hereafter WtGCCSY) is in some ways what you’d expect from a sociologist at the University of Chicago business school and from someone who got his Phd at network-central, MIT. The answer to the question, why did Allentown fare so much better than Youngstown after the collapse of the steel industry, is a story about social networks. If you just skim through the book, you’ll notice lots of pretty network maps, comparing the interorganizational links in the two cities. Sean creates eigenvector centrality scores and uses the precise language of network analysis (at times it seems as if he’s channeling Ron Burt himself). The puzzle begins to come together when we learn that civic organizations, like the Boy Scouts or the Historical Society, are much more central in the interorganizational network of Allentown than they are in Youngstown.  It would appear that the differences between the two cities can be explained by the presence of network brokers in Allentown that helped transmit the information and resources that business leaders needed to plan the revitalization of their economy. Allentown recovered because it was interconnected in the right way. The story is elegant and structural – case closed.

But that’s not where WtGCCSY concludes. Rather than simply pointing out the structural differences between the two cities, Sean’s historical analysis digs deeper into the “why ” and “how” of the formation of the two networks. And this is where WtCGCCSY departs from the expected.  He discovers that Allentown’s interorganizational networks reflect a history of strategic attempts by business leaders to bridge social class divides in order to deal with ethnic fragmentation. Elite families invested their profits in the civic infrastructure of the city to muffle potential unrest and assimilate the various ethnic groups into the city. Over time, this civic infrastructure changed in purpose, becoming the foundation for the community’s identity and creating places where local citizens could engage in community building alongside the respected business leaders in the city. By contrast, Youngstown was relatively homogenous in its ethnic makeup early on and so the strong civic infrastructure and culture never developed. Inasmuch as Youngstown had civic organizations, they were not foundational to the community identity and they did not serve the same participatory function as they did in Allentown.

The result of these historical differences was that Youngstown was much less prepared to weather the storm of the steel industry collapse. Allentown had the institutional tools to deal with the crisis, which led to further investing in the community by business leaders. Youngstown business leaders, by comparison, became more isolated from the community. The community in Youngstown became a source of dependence for its business leaders rather than a source of identity and pride. One of the most vivid examples from the book of how alienated (for lack of a better word) these companies became is when the local university, Youngstown State, decides to give an award to a local business leader who has done well (hoping to create some civic pride) and half of the nominees for the award refuse to accept the nomination for fear of of becoming snared in the community’s webs of dependency.

Allentown was able to create a sense of community despite the troubles of the steel industry (and in fact, these troubles may have even strengthened their shared identity). The civic organizations became a location for the cultivation of common purpose and a forum for citizen involvement in the revitalization efforts. These organizations weren’t mere brokers. They had a distinct institutional function that enabled collective action among elites and the middle class. Sean states how his conclusions differ from the typical network analysis:

Rather than simply providing mechanisms for conducting information and resources or even trust, the value of organizations like the Boy Scouts or its descendant – the Lehigh Valley Partnership – has to do with being sources of participatory democracy. That is, just as important as the ability to address issues and resolve conflict is the fact that such organizations provide opportunities for engagement, the ability to interact, to have one’s voice heard and one’s identity as a citizen of a given community affirmed. It is this kind of dynamic interaction that has led to the continued participation of economic leaders in the social and civic life of Allentown as a community, and it is the absence of this kind of meaningful engagement that has led to the disintegration of Youngstown’s social fabric (149).

Because WtGCCSY is more interested in the civic organizations as institutions than as network brokers, the conclusion is more cultural than it is structural. The take home message is also very different from what you’d expect from a typical network analyst. Rather than going out and creating lots of brokerage ties in a community, the analysis suggests that community leaders ought to be more concerned about creating organizational forms that facilitate participatory democracy, grass roots organizing, and coalition building. Brokerage, in a sense, occurs in forums, like the civic organizations in Allentown, that sustain community identities. Networks are mere reflections of sustained interactions that carry meaning for their participants. The fact that Youngstown never developed those networks reflects the failure to create the right institutions. That is definitely not the kind of conclusion you’d expect from a network analyst.