Asking the Right Questions: Collecting Meaningful Data About Your Network
David Ehrlichman & Matthew Spence, Converge (converge.net)
The effectiveness of any collaborative effort — whether it’s a network or an organization — depends primarily on the strength of the connections that exist between the participants involved. Social network analysis (SNA), using mapping tools like Gephi or Kumu, is the most effective method currently available for visualizing that connectivity and for evaluating a collaboration’s effectiveness. However, SNA is only useful if it is constructed with meaningful data and applied with the “so what” in mind.
In our practice at Converge, we use SNA to track three measures of connectivity in networks and organizations:
- The depth of relationship between participants,
- The degree to which participants are communicating with each other, and
- The history of participants’ collaboration with one another.
The data we collect helps us assess the progress of a network during its formative stages, and evaluate the effectiveness of network convenings in enabling participants to establish and deepen their relationships with one another. Mapping a network can also help a network coordinator to identify patterns of connection in a network, intentionally weave connections, facilitate conversations that increase a group’s awareness of itself, and maximize its potential for collaborative action. And organizations can benefit from SNA by identifying gaps in communication within or between departments, supporting the critical information hubs within the organization, and identifying opportunities to improve connections across silos.
To gather useful information, however, it’s important to ask the right questions. In particular, we work hard at Converge to make sure that our survey questions ask participants about tangible aspects of their relationships with one another and are therefore easy to answer.
Following are specific questions we ask each participant to evaluate their relationship with each person in the network:
To reveal a network’s periphery, or participants’ connections beyond the boundaries of the network being analyzed, we sometimes ask an additional question, such as “List up to 5 other leaders with whom you have a personal or professional relationship” and “Who do you know who would be a valuable connection for the network?”
The quantitative data gathered from the survey questions above is used to complete the Kumu “Connections” sheet. We also gather qualitative information about participants, such as a short bio, personal photo, board affiliations, the focus of their professional work (in terms of sector, issue-area, or geography), and sometimes more. This qualitative information is used to complete the Kumu “Elements” sheet. These two sheets are all that is needed in Kumu to create an interactive network map.
For a one-time network analysis, we find it is most efficient to manually organize the data into a format that Kumu can read. To analyze a network over time, however, using maps that will be continually updated, we create an online questionnaire that participants access individually. We then use a series of Import Range functions to automatically collect the data from participants’ surveys. Although this requires the creation of an additional layer of front-end setup, in the long run it saves time.
For a template you can use to create a Network Mapping Survey for your own mapping projects, click here. For models of the Connections and Elements sheets you will need, click here.
For case study examples of how we have used network maps to support network evaluation, design, and facilitation, check out this blog post about the Fresno New Leadership Network, as well as page 16 in this case study for the Santa Cruz Mountains Stewardship Network.
About the Authors
David Ehrlichman and Matthew Spence are partners of Converge (converge.net), a team of strategists and designers committed to social and environmental impact through collaboration and networks. In their work with Converge, they have helped build cross-sector collaborations and networks taking action on issues as diverse as environmental conservation, urban revitalization, health system coordination, summer learning expansion, and democracy reform.
Ehrlichman was previously a network coordinator for the Santa Cruz Mountains Stewardship Network and the James Irvine Foundation New Leadership Network, as well as a consultant with Monitor Institute. He is co-author of multiple articles in Stanford Social Innovation Review including Cutting Through the Complexity: A Roadmap for Effective Collaboration and The Tactics of Trust. Ehrlichman lives in Seattle, Washington.
Spence is also president of Spence & Company, where he conducts training for professionals in a broad range of industries on how to organize complex information for more effective communication. He previously served for five years as a director of research at Amana-Key, one of Brazil’s leading executive development firms, and recently led a collaborative effort by Fortune 100 tech companies and their suppliers to improve practices in sustainable supply chain management.
