Maintaining Inter-Organizational Relationships 19
is “positively related to the formation of structural holes, as high constraint indicates more
structural holes” (p. 36). Hierarchy indicates the extent to which constraint on the focal
organization is concentrated in a single other organization (Borgatti, et al. 1992). Its algorithm
includes the constraint measure and ranges from zero to one, where zero means equal constraint
from all contacts and one means that constraints come from just one contact.
Results
The first series of hypotheses looked to positive relations during the election year and
their relationship to the nature of current relationships in terms of cooperation, importance, and
influence. Results indicate that the time-1 periphery -- the less important organizations (M =
346.47, SD = 28.44) are more cooperative at time-2 than the time-1 core -- the more important
organizations (M = 276.93, SD = 64.04), t(9) = 2.39, p < .05. However, the hypotheses are only
partially supported because there were no significant differences for importance and influence.
H2a and H2b predicted that more central organizations in the communication network at
time-2 will also be considered more cooperative. Results indicate that indeed, the time-2 in-
degree centrality of cooperation for core members (M = 323.20, SD = 30.60) is greater than the
periphery (M = 187.92, SD = 149.61), t(9) = 2.65, p < .05, thus, H2a is supported. There were no
significant differences between the core and periphery for in-degree competition and thus H2b is
not supported. H3 predicted that highly central organizations at time-1 will have high
betweenness centrality at time-2. A moderate, positive correlation was found between time-1 in-
degree centrality and time-2 betweenness centrality, r = .48, p < .05, thus H3 is supported. Table
2 provides the time-2 organizations and their corresponding betweenness centralities.
The fourth series of hypotheses predicted that highly central communicators at time-1
will enjoy the foundational benefits of these relationships at time two. Table 3 provides the in-
Convention