员工网络建构行为的概念内涵及作用机制

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1042.2023.00840

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

网络建构行为(networking behavior, 也被译作“结网行为”)是指员工为实现职业目标开展的联系构建、维持与使用行为。与聚焦结构特征的传统社会网络研究不同, 网络建构行为研究强调个体能动性, 认为员工可以通过主动开展网络建构行为提高工作绩效、促进职业发展。在系统回顾以往研究的基础上, 首先提炼出员工网络建构行为的概念内涵; 其次, 结合资源、情感、网络与交换等视角, 梳理员工网络建构行为的影响结果及作用机制; 最后, 围绕深化并整合不同理论视角、扎根社交工作平台研究新场景、应用非结构性数据和仿真算法等方向提出未来研究建议, 推进员工网络建构行为研究的持续深化, 增进管理实践对员工网络建构行为的理解。

关键词: 网络建构行为, 个体能动性, 社会网络, 资源保存理论, 情感事件理论

Abstract:

Networking behavior refers to employee’s behaviors that build, maintain, and use relationships to achieve work-related goals. Different from traditional social network research which primarily focuses on the decisive influence of network structure, research on networking behavior responds to the call of "individual agency" in the stream of social network research in recent years and holds the belief that employees can improve job performance and promote career management by taking the initiative to carry out networking behavior.
Employee networking behavior is found to be endowed with the four characteristics: 1) goal-directed in performing networking behavior, 2) selective in deciding whom to network with, 3) composed of different stages such as relationship building, maintaining and using, and 4) reciprocity in exchanging with others during the networking process. Existing studies have further examined the antecedents and outcomes of employee networking behavior. Employee networking behavior have been found to be mainly affected by a wide range of antecedents across individual, organization and environment levels. In addition, employee networking behavior also affect the employee and the organization in a variety of positive and negative ways. However, in contrast to studies on antecedents, research focusing on the outcomes of employee networking behavior is still limited, providing room for further studies, particularly of the underlying mechanisms. Hence, we introduce resources, affect, network and exchange perspectives and make efforts to identify and summarize the influencing mechanisms of employee networking behavior.
Based on resources and affect perspectives, previous studies have mostly focused on the outcomes of employees networking behavior. In addition to these two well-researched perspectives, we suggest to adopt network and exchange perspectives to depict the mechanisms in depth. According to the network perspective and the social network theory, networking behavior is likely to make an impact on the employee and the organization through changing employees’ network structures and assisting them in making use of the resources endowed by the positions they occupied. The exchange perspective introduces the dyadic relationship between "actor" and "partner" into the networking behavior research, breaking through the limitation that prior research solely considered the role of "actor". By doing so, the networking behavior research can enrich the analysis of moderating variables and deepen the conversation about the impact of networking behavior.
Finally, considering the limitations of existing research on employee networking behavior, six future research directions that merit attention are proposed: 1) extending the examination of the negative impacts of employee networking behavior base on resources and affect perspectives and providing further research support for effective networking behavior management; 2) analyzing the dynamic relationship between employee networking behavior and social network and uncovering the mechanisms through which networking behavior takes effect based on network perspective; 3) expanding the research towards boundary conditions of the employee networking behavior based on exchange perspective; 4) integrating different theoretical perspectives to deepen the employee networking behavior research; 5) taking root in new contexts such as the enterprise social media platform to explore the characteristics and possible unique effects of online networking behavior; 6) adopting new methods to broaden the methods for measuring and researching employee networking behavior; for example, using unstructured data like texts and images to develop objective networking behavior measures, or introducing simulation methods like Agent-Based Modeling to explore how networking behavior affects both employees and their teams or organizations.

Key words: networking behavior, individual agency, social network, conservation of resources theory, affective events theory

中图分类号:

B849: C93

王颂, 张了丹, 栾琨. (2023). 员工网络建构行为的概念内涵及作用机制. 心理科学进展 , 31(5), 840-853.

WANG Song, ZHANG Liaodan, LUAN Kun. (2023). The concept of employee networking behavior and its influence mechanisms on working outcomes. Advances in Psychological Science, 31(5), 840-853.

图/表 5

参考文献 77

[1]	段锦云, 傅强, 田晓明, 孔瑜. (2011). 情感事件理论的内容、应用及研究展望. 心理科学进展, 19(4), 599-607.
[2]	廖化化, 黄蕾, 胡斌. (2022). 资源保存理论在组织行为学中的应用:演变与挑战. 心理科学进展, 30(2), 449-463. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2022.00449
[3]	罗家德, 高馨, 周涛, 刘黎春, 傅晓明, 刘知远, 苏毓淞. (2021). 大数据和结构化数据整合的方法论——以中国人脉圈研究为例. 社会学研究, 36(2), 69-91+227.
[4]	孙元, 贺圣君, 尚荣安, 傅金娣. (2019). 企业社交工作平台影响员工即兴能力的机理研究——基于在线社会网络的视角. 管理世界, 35(3), 157-168.
[5]	王颂. (2017). 横向交往还是纵向交往?——工具性交往对社会资本的影响. 心理学报, 49(1), 116-127.
[6]	吴静珊, 王才康. (2010). 网络建构行为的研究现状与展望. 心理科学进展, 18(6), 1011-1017.
[7]	吴湘繁, 关浩光, 马洁. (2016). 与同事多打交道会增强员工创造力吗?——一个被调节的中介模型. 预测, 35(4), 8-14+62.
[8]	于桂兰, 孙瑜. (2015). 中国情境下企业员工网络建构行为量表开发. 吉林大学社会科学学报, 55(2), 62-70+173.
[9]	Acquaah, M. (2012). Social networking relationships, firm-specific managerial experience and firm performance in a transition economy: A comparative analysis of family owned and nonfamily firms. Strategic Management Journal, 33(10), 1215-1228. doi: 10.1002/smj.v33.10 URL
[10]	Acquaah, M., & Eshun, J. P. (2010). A longitudinal analysis of the moderated effects of networking relationships on organizational performance in a sub-saharan african economy. Human Relations, 63(5), 667-700. doi: 10.1177/0018726709342928 URL
[11]	Baumeler, F., Johnston, C. S., Hirschi, A., & Spurk, D. (2018). Networking as predictor of work-nonwork enrichment: Mechanisms on the within- and between-person level. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 109, 166-177. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2018.10.015 URL
[12]	Bendella, H., & Wolff, H. G. (2020). Who networks? - A meta-analysis of networking and personality. Career Development International, 25(5), 461-479. doi: 10.1108/CDI-12-2019-0289 URL
[13]	Bensaou, B. M., Galunic, C., & Jonczyk-Sédès, C. (2014). Players and purists: Networking strategies and agency of service professionals. Organization Science, 25(1), 29-56. doi: 10.1287/orsc.2013.0826 URL
[14]	Brennecke, J. (2019). Dissonant ties in intraorganizational networks: Why individuals seek problem-solving assistance from difficult colleagues. Academy of Management Journal, 63(3), 743-778. doi: 10.5465/amj.2017.0399 URL
[15]	Burt, R. S. (1992). Structural holes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
[16]	Casciaro, T., Gino, F., & Kouchaki, M. (2014). The contaminating effects of building instrumental ties: How networking can make us feel dirty. Administrative Science Quarterly, 59(4), 705-735. doi: 10.1177/0001839214554990 URL
[17]	Casciaro, T., & Lobo, M.S. (2008). When competence is irrelevant: The role of interpersonal affect in task-related ties. Administrative Science Quarterly, 53(4), 655-684. doi: 10.2189/asqu.53.4.655 URL
[18]	Chiaburu, D. S., Oh, I. S., Stoverink, A. C., Park, H., Bradley, C., & Barros-Rivera, B. A. (2022). Happy to help, happy to change? A meta-analysis of major predictors of affiliative and change-oriented organizational citizenship behaviors. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 132, 103664. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2021.103664 doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2021.103664 URL
[19]	Clement, J., Shipilov, A., & Galunic, C. (2018). Brokerage as a public good: The externalities of network hubs for different formal roles in creative organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 63(2), 251-286. doi: 10.1177/0001839217708984 URL
[20]	Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M. S. (2005). Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 31(6), 874-900. doi: 10.1177/0149206305279602 URL
[21]	Davison, R. M., Ou, C. X. J., Martinsons, M. G., Zhao, A. Y., & Du, R. (2014). The communicative ecology of Web 2.0 at work: Social networking in the workspace. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(10), 2035-2047. doi: 10.1002/asi.23112 URL
[22]	de Janasz, S. C., Dowd, K. O., & Schneider, B. Z. (2018). Interpersonal skills in organizations. Burr Ridge, IL: Irwin/McGraw-Hill.
[23]	de Janasz, S. C., & Forret, M. L. (2008). Learning the art of networking: A critical skill for enhancing social capital and career success. Journal of Management Education, 32(5), 629-650.
[24]	Elfenbein, H. A., Eisenkraft, N., Curhan, J. R., & DiLalla, L. F. (2018). On the relative importance of individual-level characteristics and dyadic interaction effects in negotiations: Variance partitioning evidence from a twins study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 103(1), 88-96. doi: 10.1037/apl0000255 pmid: 28805427
[25]	Ertug, G., Brennecke, J., Kovács, B., & Zou, T. (2022). What does homophily do? A review of the consequences of homophily. Academy of Management Annals, 16(1), 38-69. doi: 10.5465/annals.2020.0230 URL
[26]	Forret, M. L., & Dougherty, T. W. (2001). Correlates of networking behavior for managerial and professional employees. Group & Organization Management, 26(3), 283-311.
[27]	Forret, M. L., & Dougherty, T. W. (2004). Networking behaviors and career outcomes: Differences for men and women? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(3), 419-437. doi: 10.1002/(ISSN)1099-1379 URL
[28]	Galunic, C., Ertug, G., & Gargiulo, M. (2012). The positive externalities of social capital: Benefiting from senior brokers. Academy of Management Journal, 55(5), 1213-1231. doi: 10.5465/amj.2010.0827 URL
[29]	Gelfand, M. J., Severance, L., Lee, T., Bruss, C. B., Lun, J., Abdel-Latif, A.-H.,... Moustafa Ahmed, S. (2015). Culture and getting to yes: The linguistic signature of creative agreements in the United States and Egypt. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 36(7), 967-989. doi: 10.1002/job.2026 URL
[30]	Gibson, C., H. Hardy III, J., & Ronald Buckley, M. (2014). Understanding the role of networking in organizations. Career Development International, 19(2), 146-161. doi: 10.1108/CDI-09-2013-0111 URL
[31]	Gino, F., Kouchaki, M., & Casciaro, T. (2020). Why connect? Moral consequences of networking with a promotion or prevention focus. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 119(6), 1221-1238. doi: 10.1037/pspa0000226 URL
[32]	Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360-1380. doi: 10.1086/225469 URL
[33]	Greguletz, E., Diehl, M.-R., & Kreutzer, K. (2019). Why women build less effective networks than men: The role of structural exclusion and personal hesitation. Human Relations, 72(7), 1234-1261. doi: 10.1177/0018726718804303
[34]	Kilduff, M., & Brass, D. J. (2010). Organizational social network research: Core ideas and key debates. Academy of Management Annals, 4(1), 317-357. doi: 10.5465/19416520.2010.494827 URL
[35]	Kilduff, M., & Krackhardt, D. (1994). Bringing the individual back in: A structural analysis of the internal market for reputation in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 37(1), 87-108. doi: 10.2307/256771 URL
[36]	Kilduff, M., & Tsai, W. (2003). Social networks and organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
[37]	Kuwabara, K., Hildebrand, C. A., & Zou, X. (2018). Lay theories of networking: How laypeople’s beliefs about networks affect their attitudes toward and engagement in instrumental networking. Academy of Management Review, 43(1), 50-64. doi: 10.5465/amr.2015.0076 URL
[38]	Lazar, M., Miron-Spektor, E., Agarwal, R., Erez, M., Goldfarb, B., & Chen, G. (2020). Entrepreneurial team formation. Academy of Management Annals, 14(1), 29-59. doi: 10.5465/annals.2017.0131 URL
[39]	Levin, D. Z., & Walter, J. (2019). Before they were ties: Predicting the value of brand-new connections. Journal of Management, 45(7), 2861-2890. doi: 10.1177/0149206318769994
[40]	Levinthal, D. A., & Workiewicz, M. (2018). When two bosses are better than one: Nearly decomposable systems and organizational adaptation. Organization Science, 29(2), 207-224. doi: 10.1287/orsc.2017.1177 URL
[41]	Liu, Y., He, H., & Zhu, W. (2020). Motivational analyses of the relationship between negative affectivity and workplace helping behaviors: A Conservation of Resources perspective. Journal of Business Research, 108, 362-374. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.11.019 URL
[42]	Luo, Y. (2003). Industrial dynamics and managerial networking in an emerging market: The case of China. Strategic Management Journal, 24(13), 1315-1327. doi: 10.1002/(ISSN)1097-0266 URL
[43]	Macintosh, G., & Krush, M. (2014). Examining the link between salesperson networking behaviors, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment: Does gender matter? Journal of Business Research, 67(12), 2628-2635. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.03.022 URL
[44]	Mannucci, P. V., & Perry-Smith, J. E. (2022). “Who are you going to call?” Network activation in creative idea generation and elaboration. Academy of Management Journal, 65(4), 1192-1217. doi: 10.5465/amj.2019.0333 URL
[45]	McCallum, S. Y., Forret, M. L., & Wolff, H. G. (2014). Internal and external networking behavior: An investigation of relationships with affective, continuance, and normative commitment. Career Development International, 19(5), 595-614. doi: 10.1108/CDI-08-2013-0101 URL
[46]	Merton, R. K. (1940). Bureaucratic structure and personality. Social Forces, 18(4), 560-568. doi: 10.2307/2570634 URL
[47]	Michael, J., & Yukl, G. (1993). Managerial level and subunit function as determinants of networking behavior in organizations. Group & Organization Management, 18(3), 328-351.
[48]	Ng, T. W. H., & Feldman, D. C. (2014). Community embeddedness and work outcomes: The mediating role of organizational embeddedness. Human Relations, 67(1), 71-103. doi: 10.1177/0018726713486946 URL
[49]	Offermann, L. R., Thomas, K. R., Lanzo, L. A., & Smith, L. N. (2020). Achieving leadership and success: A 28-year follow-up of college women leaders. The Leadership Quarterly, 31(4), 101345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2019.101345 doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2019.101345 URL
[50]	Park, S. H., & Luo, Y. (2001). Guanxi and organizational dynamics: Organizational networking in Chinese firms. Strategic Management Journal, 22(5), 455-477. doi: 10.1002/(ISSN)1097-0266 URL
[51]	Phan, T. Q., & Airoldi, E. M. (2015). A natural experiment of social network formation and dynamics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 112(21), 6595-6600. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1404770112 pmid: 25964337
[52]	Porter, C. M., & Woo, S. E. (2015). Untangling the networking phenomenon: A dynamic psychological perspective on how and why people network. Journal of Management, 41(5), 1477-1500. doi: 10.1177/0149206315582247 URL
[53]	Porter, C. M., Woo, S. E., & Campion, M. A. (2016). Internal and external networking differentially predict turnover through job embeddedness and job offers. Personnel Psychology, 69(3), 635-672. doi: 10.1111/peps.2016.69.issue-3 URL
[54]	Ren, S., & Chadee, D. (2017). Influence of work pressure on proactive skill development in China: The role of career networking behavior and guanxi HRM. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 98, 152-162. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2016.11.004 URL
[55]	Smith, C., Smith, J. B., & Shaw, E. (2017). Embracing digital networks: Entrepreneurs’ social capital online. Journal of Business Venturing, 32(1), 18-34. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2016.10.003 URL
[56]	Smith, C. G., & Smith, J. B. (2021). Founders’ uses of digital networks for resource acquisition: Extending network theory online. Journal of Business Research, 125, 466-482. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.032 URL
[57]	Soltis, S. M., Brass, D. J., & Lepak, D. P. (2018). Social resource management: Integrating social network theory and human resource management. Academy of Management Annals, 12(2), 537-573. doi: 10.5465/annals.2016.0094 URL
[58]	Sturges, J., Guest, D., Conway, N., & Davey, K. M. (2002). A longitudinal study of the relationship between career management and organizational commitment among graduates in the first ten years at work. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(6), 731-748. doi: 10.1002/(ISSN)1099-1379 URL
[59]	Tasselli, S., & Kilduff, M. (2021). Network agency. Academy of Management Annals, 15(1), 68-110. doi: 10.5465/annals.2019.0037 URL
[60]	Thompson, J. A. (2005). Proactive personality and job performance: A social capital perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(5), 1011-1017. pmid: 16162073
[61]	Vissa, B. (2011). A matching theory of entrepreneurs’ tie formation intentions and initiation of economic exchange. Academy of Management Journal, 54(1), 137-158. doi: 10.5465/amj.2011.59215084 URL
[62]	Vissa, B. (2012). Agency in action: Entrepreneurs’ networking style and initiation of economic exchange. Organization Science, 23(2), 492-510. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1100.0567 URL
[63]	Volmer, J., Orth, M., & Wolff, H. G. (2018). Multidimensional networking behavior in Germany and China: Measurement invariance and associations with objective career success. Journal of Career Assessment, 26(4), 678-696. doi: 10.1177/1069072717723302 URL
[64]	Volmer, J., & Wolff, H. G. (2018). A daily diary study on the consequences of networking on employees’ career-related outcomes: The mediating role of positive affect. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 2179. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02179 doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02179 URL
[65]	Wanberg, C. R., Kanfer, R., & Banas, J. T. (2000). Predictors and outcomes of networking intensity among unemployed job seekers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(4), 491-503. pmid: 10948794
[66]	Wellman, N., Applegate, J. M., Harlow, J., & Johnston, E. W. (2020). Beyond the pyramid: Alternative formal hierarchical structures and team performance. Academy of Management Journal, 63(4), 997-1027. doi: 10.5465/amj.2017.1475 URL
[67]	Wingender, L. M. (2018). The dark and bright side of networking behavior: A resource-theoretical cost-benefit approach (Unpublished doctorial dissertation). Universität zu Köln.
[68]	Wise, S. E. (2014). Can a team have too much cohesion? The dark side to network density. European Management Journal, 32(5), 703-711. doi: 10.1016/j.emj.2013.12.005 URL
[69]	Wolff, H. G., & Kim, S. (2020). The costs of networking in nonwork domains: A resource-based perspective. Career Development International, 25(5), 501-516. doi: 10.1108/CDI-09-2019-0213 URL
[70]	Wolff, H. G., and Kim, S. (2012). The relationship between networking behaviors and the Big Five personality dimensions. Career Development International, 17(1), 43-66. doi: 10.1108/13620431211201328 URL
[71]	Wolff, H. G., & Moser, K. (2006). Entwicklung und validierung einer networkingskala [Development and validation of a networking scale]. Diagnostica, 52(4), 161-180. doi: 10.1026/0012-1924.52.4.161 URL
[72]	Wolff, H. G., & Moser, K. (2009). Effects of networking on career success: A longitudinal study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(1), 196-206. doi: 10.1037/a0013350 URL
[73]	Wolff, H. G., & Moser, K. (2010). Do specific types of networking predict specific mobility outcomes? A two-year prospective study. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 77(2), 238-245. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2010.03.001 URL
[74]	Wolff, H. G., Moser, K., & Grau, A. (2008). Networking:Theoretical foundations and construct validity. In J.Deller (Ed.), Readings in applied organizational behavior from the Lüneburg Symposium - Personality at work (pp. 101-118). Mering, Bavaria: Rainer Hampp.
[75]	Wolff, H. G., & Spurk, D. (2020). Developing and validating a short networking behavior scale (SNBS) from Wolff and Moser’s (2006) measure. Journal of Career Assessment, 28(2), 277-302. doi: 10.1177/1069072719844924 URL
[76]	Wolff, H. G., Weikamp, J. G., & Batinic, B. (2018). Implicit motives as determinants of networking behaviors. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 411. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00411 doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00411 URL
[77]	Yu, K. Y. T., & Davis, H. M. (2016). Autonomy’s impact on newcomer proactive behaviour and socialization: A needs- supplies fit perspective. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 89(1), 172-197. doi: 10.1111/joop.12116 URL

关注点	定义	特征	具体表现
行为动机	·以目标为导向, 创建、培养、使用与组织内外个体间联系的行为(Gibson et al., 2014, p. 150) ·为实现职业目标而主动地构建、管理、使用联系的行为(Kuwabara et al., 2018, p. 51)	目的性	·近期目标：资源获取等 ·远期目标：工作绩效、职业管理与发展等
联系对象	针对那些能够给自身带来工作或职业帮助的对象, 员工主动开展的建立、维持联系的行为(Forret & Dougherty, 2001, p. 284)	选择性	选择拥有目标资源的联系对象
行为过程	旨在创建、维持、使用非正式联系, 期间联系双方自愿提供资源, 促进相关工作的开展, 实现双方共同利益最大化(Wolff & Moser, 2009, p. 196)	阶段性	网络建构行为可分为创建、维持、使用三个阶段
联系内容	·与组织内、外的个体构建非正式联系以交换情感(喜爱与友谊)、信息、利益与影响力(Michael & Yukl, 1993, p. 328) ·构建、培养人际联系与职业联系, 发展包含信息、社会关系及支持等的系统或链(de Janasz et al., 2018, p. 389)	交换性	·经济交换 ·社会交换

关注点	定义	特征	具体表现
行为动机	·以目标为导向, 创建、培养、使用与组织内外个体间联系的行为(Gibson et al., 2014, p. 150) ·为实现职业目标而主动地构建、管理、使用联系的行为(Kuwabara et al., 2018, p. 51)	目的性	·近期目标：资源获取等 ·远期目标：工作绩效、职业管理与发展等
联系对象	针对那些能够给自身带来工作或职业帮助的对象, 员工主动开展的建立、维持联系的行为(Forret & Dougherty, 2001, p. 284)	选择性	选择拥有目标资源的联系对象
行为过程	旨在创建、维持、使用非正式联系, 期间联系双方自愿提供资源, 促进相关工作的开展, 实现双方共同利益最大化(Wolff & Moser, 2009, p. 196)	阶段性	网络建构行为可分为创建、维持、使用三个阶段
联系内容	·与组织内、外的个体构建非正式联系以交换情感(喜爱与友谊)、信息、利益与影响力(Michael & Yukl, 1993, p. 328) ·构建、培养人际联系与职业联系, 发展包含信息、社会关系及支持等的系统或链(de Janasz et al., 2018, p. 389)	交换性	·经济交换 ·社会交换

维度数量	方面 (facets)	维度内容	来源	题项内容(题项数)
单维	-	联系频次	Casciaro et al., 2014	在阐述网络建构行为定义后直接询问其网络建构行为频次(1题)
		联系频次	Gino et al., 2020	在阐述网络建构行为定义后直接询问其网络建构行为频次(1题)
		联系管理	Sturges et al., 2002	选取职业自主管理概念的维度之一, 围绕管理自身与他人的联系进行测量(7题)
多维	对象	对内/ 对外联系	Michael & Yukl, 1993	管理者与组织内、外成员开展的联系行为(19题)
			Ng & Feldman, 2014	员工与组织内、外成员开展联系(12题)
			Porter et al., 2016	从Wolff和Moser (2006)的量表中提取最具代表性的对内、外联系题项(18题)
		联系广度/ 深度	Vissa, 2012	联系拓宽与深化行为(15题)
		联系广度/ 深度	Wanberg et al., 2000	联系次数及以人数为代表的联系范围(9题)
		具体联系对象	Acquaah & Eshun, 2010	企业高层管理者与其他企业的高层管理者、政府官员、政治家及社区领袖等人的联系(11题)
		具体联系对象	Macintosh & Krush, 2014	与同事、专业人员、顾客之间的联系(13题)
	过程	创建/维持/使用联系	Volmer & Wolff, 2018	从Wolff和Moser (2006)的量表中筛选题项以测量每日联系创建、维持与使用行为(8题)
	过程	创建/维持/使用联系	Baumeler et al., 2018	将Ng和Feldman (2014)的量表缩减至3题, 对应组织内联系创建、维持与使用行为(3题)
	对象与过程	创建对内/对外联系; 维持对内/对外联系; 使用对内/对外联系	Wolff & Moser, 2006	结合网络建构行为的对象与过程视角提出六类员工网络建构行为的测量(44题)
	对象与过程	创建对内/对外联系; 维持对内/对外联系; 使用对内/对外联系	Wolff & Spurk, 2020	从Wolff和Moser (2006)的量表中筛选出各个维度最具代表性的测量题项(18题)
	内容	具体联系行为	Forret & Dougherty, 2001	维持联系、交际、从事专业活动、参加教会或团体活动以及提高内部可视度行为(28题)
	内容	具体联系行为	于桂兰, 孙瑜, 2015	结合中国情境对Forret和Dougherty (2001)的量表进行改编(19题)

维度数量	方面 (facets)	维度内容	来源	题项内容(题项数)
单维	-	联系频次	Casciaro et al., 2014	在阐述网络建构行为定义后直接询问其网络建构行为频次(1题)
		联系频次	Gino et al., 2020	在阐述网络建构行为定义后直接询问其网络建构行为频次(1题)
		联系管理	Sturges et al., 2002	选取职业自主管理概念的维度之一, 围绕管理自身与他人的联系进行测量(7题)
多维	对象	对内/ 对外联系	Michael & Yukl, 1993	管理者与组织内、外成员开展的联系行为(19题)
			Ng & Feldman, 2014	员工与组织内、外成员开展联系(12题)
			Porter et al., 2016	从Wolff和Moser (2006)的量表中提取最具代表性的对内、外联系题项(18题)
		联系广度/ 深度	Vissa, 2012	联系拓宽与深化行为(15题)
		联系广度/ 深度	Wanberg et al., 2000	联系次数及以人数为代表的联系范围(9题)
		具体联系对象	Acquaah & Eshun, 2010	企业高层管理者与其他企业的高层管理者、政府官员、政治家及社区领袖等人的联系(11题)
		具体联系对象	Macintosh & Krush, 2014	与同事、专业人员、顾客之间的联系(13题)
	过程	创建/维持/使用联系	Volmer & Wolff, 2018	从Wolff和Moser (2006)的量表中筛选题项以测量每日联系创建、维持与使用行为(8题)
	过程	创建/维持/使用联系	Baumeler et al., 2018	将Ng和Feldman (2014)的量表缩减至3题, 对应组织内联系创建、维持与使用行为(3题)
	对象与过程	创建对内/对外联系; 维持对内/对外联系; 使用对内/对外联系	Wolff & Moser, 2006	结合网络建构行为的对象与过程视角提出六类员工网络建构行为的测量(44题)
	对象与过程	创建对内/对外联系; 维持对内/对外联系; 使用对内/对外联系	Wolff & Spurk, 2020	从Wolff和Moser (2006)的量表中筛选出各个维度最具代表性的测量题项(18题)
	内容	具体联系行为	Forret & Dougherty, 2001	维持联系、交际、从事专业活动、参加教会或团体活动以及提高内部可视度行为(28题)
	内容	具体联系行为	于桂兰, 孙瑜, 2015	结合中国情境对Forret和Dougherty (2001)的量表进行改编(19题)

视角	主要理论	理论观点	机制解释	关键变量
资源视角	资源保存理论	个体将尽最大努力获取、保护与维持他们的现有资源, 并将资源损失视为威胁	(1) 员工开展网络建构行为以从联系对象处获取有价值的资源; (2) 员工需要投入时间和精力等资源来创建、维持、使用联系, 因此网络建构行为还会导致资源损耗。	·资源收益：物质资料、资金、声誉、影响力等 ·资源损耗：注意力、时间、精力等
情感视角	情感事件理论	员工经历的事件将影响员工情感状态, 包括其心境与情感的变化, 进而影响其工作态度与行为	(1) 开展网络建构行为, 能够满足员工对亲密感、归属感和关联感等情感的需要, 促进正向情感; (2) 开展网络建构行为时带有的利己性目的, 导致员工产生愧疚感等负向情感。	·正向情感：积极情感、工作/职业满意感、组织承诺等 ·负向情感：愧疚感、道德耻感等
网络视角	社会网络理论	个体所处网络的结构、位置以及个体间的联系强度将影响其获取信息、资源的数量与价值	(1) 通过网络建构行为创建新联系, 改变员工所处社会网络的结构和位置; (2) 通过网络建构行为, 强化现有联系, 改变现有社会网络中员工与其他个体联系的强度。	·网络结构：网络规模、结构洞的数量等 ·网络位置：中心性、结构洞等 ·联系强度：强联系、弱联系
交换视角	社会交换理论	一方的行为取决于另一方的行为, 倘若一方提供了资源, 那么另一方也需给出相当的资源作为回报	(1) 网络建构行为积极效用的实现, 需要联系双方能够自愿地提供、交换资源, 实现互利互惠。因此, 行动者、联系对象在解释网络建构行为效应时均发挥重要作用; (2) 长期开展网络建构行为有助于联系双方建立信任, 从而放宽互惠限制, 双方的交换从经济交换转向社会交换。	·交换条件：取决于双方的特征、动机, 以及是否具有对方重视的有价值资源等 ·交换形式：经济交换与社会交换