orgtheory.net

the network that runs the world

About these ads

Written by teppo

October 20, 2011 at 2:32 pm

Posted in networks

5 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. I’ll reserve comment until I’ve read this more thoroughly, but… “econophysicists?”

    Trey

    October 20, 2011 at 3:07 pm

  2. Some of us might claim to have shown essentially the same thing several years back, without the benefit of training in physics:
    In French: http://webuser.bus.umich.edu/gfdavis/Papers/davis_yoo_03.pdf
    and in English: http://webuser.bus.umich.edu/gfdavis/Papers/davis_08_EMR.pdf.pdf

    The Orbis data these guys used are fun, and are available to just about every researcher at top business schools, but may not unerringly reflect true ownership positions (whose definition is not nearly as trivial as one might think–for instance, what happens with Sergey, Larry, and their friends each get 10 votes per share, while the rest of us get only one?).

    In any case, data for 2010 show something interesting that I’m writing up now: since BlackRock bought the iShares business from Barclays (which was #1 on the physicists’ list for 2007), BlackRock is now the biggest corporate owner in the US, holding 5% or more of the shares of roughly 1800 public corporations (out of the 4300 traded on Nasdaq and NYSE). It’s a “network” where nearly half the population is tied into one big blob, connected via BlackRock. Yet who among us can name the CEO of BlackRock without looking it up?

    Jerry Davis

    October 20, 2011 at 5:20 pm

  3. Jerry – thanks for the links. Definitely should have linked to your work too (it’s just that any orgtheorist worth their salt has already read and internalized your work on networks, it is common knowledge).

    I admit – I had to look up BlackRock and its CEO. Fascinating.

    teppo

    October 20, 2011 at 10:49 pm

  4. It is comforting to know that the world is in good hands.

    When the Vulcans realize that we have warp drive, whom do you think they will seek out to represent Earth? By that I mean that such networks have always existed … and always have been swept aside by unforeseeable events.

    Michael Marotta

    October 21, 2011 at 4:39 am

  5. my usual take on rankings is the following: there’s no fundamental reason why a given set of weights imposed on a case analysis are the right set, in most situations (granted there are some where a given set of weights are “natural” in some sense). what justifies the need for some set, any set of weights, in all case analytic frameworks, is our descent from baboons. and if we reject an imposition of weights, we deny evolution. we deny that we’re baboons. in small groups, we can do that. hypothetically. in larger groups where we concede we’re all human, we embrace our baboonness and rank indiscriminately.

    Tony

    October 22, 2011 at 5:23 am


Comments are closed.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 656 other followers

%d bloggers like this: