[NOISE] Thank you for being here again. In this video we will move further in the study of social networks and innovation. And we will show whether and how the position occupied by actors in the structural of social network interactions effect innovation. First, let's summarize what have learned from the previous video. What are social networks? The simplest definition is that social networks are sets of notes, the actors, and sets of ties connecting the notes in a given social space. In social networks ties are not independent of each other. The four properties of metro structure arise, explaining whether and how people interact in a network. We have reviewed the most important of these properties in the previous video. Now, let's introduce the question that we will face in this video. What are the effects of social network structure on innovation? We argue that the position occupied by actors in network structure are things that are likely hooked to generate innovation. In this figure, we have drawn a simplified sociogram representing interactions and male managers in a company. With focused attention on four actors. A, B, C and D that occupy idiosyncratic positions in this network. Who of them is more likely to generate innovation in the organization? Let's start with Actor C in this sociogram. Actor C is the broker. The broker can be defined as an actor who bridges between unconnected groups. C connects the two otherwise distinct parts of the network. The broker is a highly privileged in his position for the development of innovation. She tends to have access to no redundant information coming from the other wives and connected parts of the network. For example, the broker can be the manager connecting the research and development department with the commercial department. By [INAUDIBLE] diverse and buyer's information, the broker is more likely to recombine information from these different sources, and therefor to generate good ideas and innovation. By recombining technical knowledge arising from their department and business knowledge from the commercial department she can, for example, come up with a possible successful innovation. What About actor B? Actor B can be defined as the gatekeeper, the actor who is at the gate between a group and external world. She can be considered a particular type of broker who belongs at least to a fully connected group. The gatekeeper is usually the actor who brings innovation from outside into a specific social group. However, there are possible negative consequences of being a gatekeeper. We shall summarize these dark sides with the Latin expression, nemo propheta en patria, nobody is a prophet in his homeland. The gatekeeper risks distrust because group members can perceive she plays in favor of the other, or the side group. The third actor we rely to focus on, is Actor D. We can simply say Actor D is the most popular in the network. She's the actor with the largest number of contacts, six in the sociogram. Actor D is likely to gain social support. If she needs social support, she is likely to find it. Actor D can ask five people. Where Actor C for example can ask only two. Research has shown that people like D tend to live longer and tend to escape infections like common cold. However there can be limitations in terms of accessed knowledge. D has access to multiple sources, but redundant. Moreover, managing multiple connections requires time and effort. It could decrease likelihood of focusing on idea generation. Finally we focus on Actor A, A is the actor in a full interconnected network of nodes. On the one end, Actor A is close to all other actors that surround her. That position can guarantee social support. Specifically, A has less contacts than D, but she's a part of a highly cohesive social group, like a clan or a family, that can be a source of support when needed. And because she's close to others, Actor A is also likely to know the language of the other actors and to share knowledge with them. In this sense, Actor A can facilitate easy knowledge transfer in the network. However, Actor A is also closed by the surrounding complex. Therefore, the group exerts social control. Actor A will access knowledge only after all others in his or her or her group didn't. This could hamper idea generation. In conclusion of this video, what we've learned about teams, social networks, and innovation. We have learned have teams and social networks can importantly effect and explain innovation processes at the conditions that they're properly managed in organization. Specifically, in this last video, we're seeing that the position occupied by actors in social networks can predict innovation outcomes. The big challenge is the following, how to make innovation being generated and if used in organizations. In conclusion, thank you again for your attention and for your participation. It was great to have you here, and I hope you will find a way to apply these concepts soon, either in your research, in your organization, or in your life. Thank you. [BLANK AUDIO]