Simmelian brokerage, tertius iungens orientation, and idea elaboration

Stefano Tasselli, Hongzhi Chen and Brian R. Dineen

Research Policy, 2025, vol. 54, issue 3

Abstract: In organizations, idea elaboration calls for employees to work with inner-circle coworkers, who may be embedded in separate network cliques. Theories are inconclusive concerning how brokerage position between separate cliques will affect the elaboration and improvement of embryonic ideas. In three studies of R&D scientists and medical professionals in various field settings, we first explored and found that being the sole shared member of separate cliques (i.e., Simmelian brokerage) undermines the quantity and quality of elaborated ideas. To explain this finding, we suggest that the Simmelian brokerage position begets a multi-insider trap: while the idea elaborators benefit from obtaining non-redundant feedback across separate cliques, they also encounter the challenge of selecting, aligning, and integrating potentially conflicting feedback. To investigate a boundary condition, we then explored the role of tertius iungens orientation; i.e., the tendency to bring people together with an inclusive mindset to incorporate divergent perspectives. Prior research suggests that this can reduce both the advantages and disadvantages of brokerage positions. Results show that Simmelian brokerage's detrimental effect is mitigated for people with a higher level of tertius iungens orientation. Overall, this exploratory research identifies a pitfall for innovators who are the sole shared member of separate network cliques, and illuminates who might best navigate such a pitfall.

Keywords: Innovation; Idea elaboration; Knowledge recombination; Social networks; Simmelian brokerage; Tertius iungens orientation (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2025
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733325000149
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:respol:v:54:y:2025:i:3:s0048733325000149

DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2025.105185

Access Statistics for this article

Research Policy is currently edited by M. Bell, B. Martin, W.E. Steinmueller, A. Arora, M. Callon, M. Kenney, S. Kuhlmann, Keun Lee and F. Murray

More articles in Research Policy from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().