Social networks play a role in exacerbating or ameliorating inequality. The persistence of network-based inequality is well documented. However, the mechanisms that disrupt this unequal access to resources remain poorly understood. This study investigates how structurally disruptive events, such as mergers and acquisitions (M&As), reshape gender homophily and resource sharing in networks. We examine how 59 M&As shape the evolution of 82,064 physicians’ referral and patient-sharing networks. We find that disruptive events enhance women’s access to resources by altering gender-homophily dynamics in formation, and maintenance. Specifically, acquisitions intensify men’s tendency to form ties with other men. In contrast, women are more likely to preserve ties with other women, with all-women dyads exhibiting greater resilience and higher maintenance rates than mixed-gender or all-men dyads. This dynamic results in richer networks for women, shielding them from the adverse effects of organizational disruption. These results highlight contrasting network behaviors following disruption:women winnow their networks, reinforcing stable, trust-based relationships with women, while men widen theirs, forming new distant ties with men. By demonstrating how gendered network dynamics evolve in response to disruptions, this study contributes to scholarship on gender inequality, network resilience, and conditions underwhich homophilous ties can mitigate disparities.

For full paper: https://journals.aom.org/doi/10.5465/amj.2024.0199

Experts and clients across various industries engage in interactions orchestrated by network dynamics. Although considerable literature has examined homophily—the tendency for individuals to associate with similar others—far less is understood about the catalysts for heterophily, engagement across dissimilar groups, and its subsequent effects on organizational performance. This paper explores how organizational ethnic diversity and its alignment with regional demographics influence patterns of both homophily and heterophily in expert-client relationships. I constructed a comprehensive dataset encompassing 5,728 real estate brokerages, 54,785 sale agents, and 237,860 clients for the years 2012-2018, examining how the congruence between the ethnic composition of organizations and their regional environments impacts the formation of representation relationships and organizational outcomes. Findings reveal that greater ethnic similarity between organizations and their regional contexts significantly enhances the likelihood of forming ethnically diverse relationships. This alignment facilitates access to a more diverse clientele, enabling organizations that mirror their regional demographics to engage with higher-quality real estate opportunities and achieve superior performance. This research advances understanding of the intricate social processes underpinning interactions between experts and clients within their organizational and social contexts. By highlighting ethnic diversity's role in promoting heterophily, this study contributes to broader discussions on diversity management and network dynamics, offering key insights into leveraging demographic alignment for enhanced market success.

Social similarity shapes professional relationships, particularly in markets where underrepresented populations face structural biases. This study examines how racial and ethnic homophily influences agent selection and transaction outcomes in the U.S. residential real estate market. While homophily fosters trust, it may also limit underrepresented sellers’ and agents’ access to high-status networks, exacerbating market disadvantages. Using a large-scale dataset of Florida residential real estate transactions (2012–2018), I analyze (1) how underrepresented sellers choose real estate agents and (2) how these choices affect sale probability and time on market. Findings reveal a paradox: underrepresented sellers display stronger preferences for demographically similar agents than white sellers, yet homophilous ties correlate with lower sale probabilities and longer listing durations. These penalties diminish when underrepresented agents have extensive experience or strong network positions. Conversely, heterophilous dyads—especially those pairing underrepresented sellers with white agents—yield superior transaction outcomes, suggesting that bridging social capital mitigates homophily’s market inefficiencies. This study advances understanding of how homophily, discrimination, and professional capital interact in market exchanges. While prior research highlights homophily’s trust benefits, these results reveal its costs in structurally unequal markets. Agent experience partly mitigates disadvantages, but network centrality proves more effective in overcoming market frictions. The findings bridge social identity theory, economic discrimination models, and network-based performance explanations, illustrating how individual preferences and structural conditions jointly shape economic opportunities. By highlighting agent selection’s impact on transaction success, this study informs debates on diversity in professional services and persistent disparities in market access.

Collaboration is increasingly the norm in scientific endeavors, with scholars hoping to harness creative potential by bringing together diverse perspectives. Yet, while the research published by teams that bridge different disciplines tends to be more highly cited, scholars who work in diverse teams are typically less productive. Using data on accepted and rejected grant applications submitted by 3,950 scientific teams from a major American research university, we show that intellectual diversity within the team is associated with a higher likelihood of a grant application being rejected. We also show that teams with prior collaboration experience can overcome this penalty and that, over time, persistence may increase the team’s chances of success. This suggests that collaboration in diverse teams is difficult and only experienced teams are able to capture the benefits of diversity 

How does professional diversity translate into innovation? This study examines the conditions under which diverse expertise enhances creative outcomes in teams. We draw on data from 820 participants exogenously assigned by organizers into 171 teams during a hackathon, thereby reducing concerns of endogeneity in team composition. Using two waves of network surveys, we construct measures of intra-team cohesion based on both broad and deeper interactions. Results show that professional diversity—capturing participants’ self-identified orientations areas of expertise—positively predicts external evaluations of innovation. Critically, the effect of diversity is moderated by cohesion: professionally diverse teams achieved higher levels of innovation only when they were also denser in their internal networks. By contrast, diverse but fragmented teams failed to realize these potential gains. These findings advance research on diversity and innovation by demonstrating that professional heterogeneity is not inherently advantageous, but becomes a strategic resource when reinforced by strong relational integration. More broadly, the study contributes to theories of team composition and network cohesion by highlighting their interactive role in fostering collective innovation.