In The Liquid Form...

One of the things that have always interested me in networks deals with their liquidity. Whether the relationship is mutual, or whether more hierarchial (with central and peripheral people), there is always some movement from who plays the central role and who plays more of an outside role. For instance, looking at person A, B, C and D, and assuming that A and B are central people while C and D are on the peripherary, one year later, the opposite could be true. That is, to say that A and B could be on the peripherary. There are many factors for this transition, including distance changes, changes in personality, and a breakdown of the network in general.

For instance, with my friends I used to be more on the periphery. Now, I am central. Several reasons for that include getting closer with my friends, but really when we are all home being able to drive (yet it is more than that because we all take crazy flights/trains/buses just to be able to visit each other). While we are not in the same neighborhoods, we still remain tight knit. We have many different views about the world too, so it isn't that we all became the same. Really no subgroups exist except to categorize those who are "perhiperhal people" and those who are the "central people". What's more, the people who aren't there on the everyday level make up the outer rim, like myself, who used to be there.

Even in a situation in the workplace sees the roles changing on a repeating basis. How many times are people promoted? How many times are people demoted or fired? It all seems very liquid, yet the texts read would convince one that it is more static.

Cross, Rob, Nitin Nohria, and Andrew Parker. "Six Myths About Informal Networks -- and How To Overcome Them." MIT Sloan Management Review 43, 3(2002): 69.

Kadushin, Charles. "Introduction to Social Network Theory." 17 Feb 2004 1-60. 09 Sept 2007 .