Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

Reciprocity is giving with the expectation of receiving in the future. Members of social networks often promote, facilitate, and monitor reciprocity among members. Social networks foster reciprocity more than relationships outside any network. Because social networks provide greater outlets for “payback,” reciprocity is more likely. A perceived greater likelihood of being able to repay leads to increased acceptance of a gift. The type of giving and receiving inside social networks often varies from the general reciprocity seen in individual relationships.

General reciprocity is when a resource available to one person or group is “freely” given to another person(s). Although the resource is given freely, there is a strong expectation, usually implicit, that the recipient will repay the giver with a similar gesture in the future. A typical nuance of general reciprocity is that if the receiver does not return the favor when given an opportunity, it is often understood that no further gifts will be given. Reciprocity promotes a culture of giving and receiving that builds and supports relational ties.

Reciprocity in Social Networks

An important distinction is between interpersonal and social network reciprocity. Within interpersonal relationships, receiving can be limited by the perceived ability to repay the gift. If an individual believes that there will be no opportunity to repay the “gift,” the gesture will often be refused. Otherwise, the receiver will be permanently indebted to the giver with no opportunity to repay the debt. The result is that reciprocity in interpersonal relationships is limited by the recipient's perception of future opportunities with the giver.

Social networks provide a different and more flexible arrangement for repayment. When an individual gives to a member of a social network, the common implication is that repayment does not need to be directly to the original giver but to another person in the network. For example, the requisite invitation to join the network may have to come from a current member. When the member gives the gift of an invitation, the implied understanding may be that the new initiate will do likewise for future potential members. It would be impossible to repay the original giver, but receiving is contingent on agreeing to behave likewise in order to propagate and sustain the social network. The likelihood of repayment increases because of the greater number of potential recipients. If the opportunities for repayment are greater, the initial willingness to receive is also greater.

Similarly, the method of repayment within a social network may be dispersed rather than directed at the primal giver. Because there are more perceived options for repayment, initial willingness to receive is more likely. In other words, individuals are more open to receiving if they believe the chances of relieving the indebtedness are greater.

Members of social networks also promote the sustainment and strength of the network by monitoring a lack of reciprocity. Often members who are judged to not adequately repay are eliminated from the network. This exile can be accomplished by direct means, like removal, or indirect means such as the elimination of access to network resources or a termination of reciprocal acts.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading