Compare methods

	Organizational Network Analysis	Organizational Identification Scale
Field	Organizational Behavior	Organizational Behavior
Family	Process / pipeline	Latent structure
Year of origin	1984	1992
Originator	Daniel J. Brass; David Krackhardt; Herminia Ibarra	Fred Mael & Blake E. Ashforth
Type	Intraorganizational social network mapping and position-to-outcome pipeline	Unidimensional latent-construct measurement model
Seminal source	Krackhardt, D. (1990). Assessing the political landscape: Structure, cognition, and power in organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(2), 342-369.	Mael, F., & Ashforth, B. E. (1992). Alumni and their alma mater: A partial test of the reformulated model of organizational identification. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13(2), 103-123.
Aliases	ONA, Intraorganizational Network Analysis, Workplace Social Network Analysis, Advice and Friendship Network Analysis	Mael and Ashforth Identification Scale, OID Scale, Organizational Identification Questionnaire, Social-Identity Organizational Identification Measure
Related	3	3
Summary	Organizational network analysis studies the informal web of relationships — who goes to whom for advice, who is friends with whom, who works with whom — that runs alongside the formal org chart and often determines who actually gets things done. Daniel Brass's 1984 study of a newspaper publishing company showed that an employee's position in workflow, communication, and friendship networks predicted perceived influence and promotion better than formal rank. David Krackhardt's 1990 work added a cognitive twist, demonstrating that accurately perceiving the informal network is itself a source of power. Herminia Ibarra's 1993 study related network centrality to involvement in technical and administrative innovation, distinguishing the network bases of different kinds of influence. Together these works established a pipeline: collect relational data on the organization, compute each member's structural position, and link those positions to power, influence, and innovation. The approach treats the organization as a structure of relationships rather than a hierarchy of boxes.	The Organizational Identification Scale is Mael and Ashforth's widely used measure of the extent to which people define themselves in terms of their organizational membership. It rests on the social-identity reformulation of identification that Ashforth and Mael advanced in their 1989 Academy of Management Review article, which defined organizational identification as a perceived oneness with an organization and the experience of its successes and failures as one's own. Their 1992 Journal of Organizational Behavior study, using alumni of a college, introduced and validated a concise self-report scale and tested a model of its antecedents and consequences. The scale treats identification as a self-definitional, cognitive construct distinct from organizational commitment, which is more attitudinal and exchange-based. Validated as essentially unidimensional, the instrument links organizational antecedents such as distinctiveness and prestige to outcomes such as support and advocacy. It became the standard measure of organizational identification in the field.