centrality I think Centrality's group would be more successful in implementing a change in the auditing procedure because there appears to be more communication among this group.In addition, the secretary plays a key role in the network, meaning everyone feels comfortable to talk to her.
centrality I believe that Centrality's one will succeed more in implementing a change because their advice circle had many more relationships where everybody had talked to more than one person so therefore a lesser change has to be made.However, the Hierarchy team did not have a good networking system because there is a lot of distance between the individuals and you have everybody talking to Nancy and no one else.More of a change will have to occur with the second group.
centrality I think that Centrality's group is more likely to succeed because I think people are more easily influenced by advice rather than authority.Centrality's group has a more evenly distributed advice network, so I think that will help them succeed in the long run.
centrality I think Centrality's team will be more likely to implement a change because his team has a higher degree of connectedness.
centrality Centrality's team because more lines of communication open between the different people in different departments.
centrality Centrality because they will have to retrain less people than Hierarchy.The power shift was changed a lot by Hierarchy, not as much as Centrality's.
centrality Centrality's auditing group changed the power increase with more people and new people possibly creating a good feedback from emplyees.There is also a strong leader still in effect to oversee.It also however could blow up in his face, doing badly.
centrality Centrality's because Hierarchy's team seem to divide themselves up over two groups causing loyalties to more various sides, while since Centrality's team seems to be more intertwined within one another that change would likely be easier with more widespread respect and leadership.
centrality Centrality's group because it did not seem as hierarchical.Also, everyone had contact with one another.It seems to me that Centrality's group would have an easier time because it is more informal.It was not as easy to designate a person to implement change the best for Hierarchy's group.There needs to be more equality and evenness like Centrality's group.
centrality I think Centrality's group will be more successful in implementing a change because there were more arrows meaning that there was more communication and networking relationships.The hierarchy was broken down more in Centrality's group.It shows to be more efficient.
centrality Centrality's group will be more successful because he stayed at the top of the management, but so will Hierarchy's group since Hierarchy greatly decreased, in my opinion there will be more problems.In conclusion, Hierarchy's group will most likely implement a change in the auditing procedure.
centrality Centrality because there are more links of communication and it is also more centralized.This group seems to share more with each other.
centrality I think Centrality's group will be more successful due to the fact that Centrality has more power than Hierarchy's group.Although it looks like Hierarchy has less people to convince and could probably have an easier change.
centrality I think Centrality's team will most successfully implement a change in the auditing procedure.In his group the advice network grew more.The people at the bottom have access to valuable information.
centrality I believe Centrality's group will be more likely to successfully implement a change in the auditing procedure because many more employees either increased or stayed the same in the power change from authority relationship network to the advice relationship network, when compared to Hierarchy's auditing teams.Centrality's auditing team seems to have better communication throughout the group which I believe will make it easier to implement a change.
centrality Centrality's auditing team looks to be more likely to successfully implement a change in the auditing process due to the fact that less people in Centrality's group (vs Hierarchy's) lost any power means that individuals have either maintained or increased their status.Knowing this then it is easy to assume that the workers will be more apt to change since they have a say in it.
centrality Centrality's team because there are more central figures that the employees speak and interact with.
centrality Centrality's auditing team will more likely be successful implementing change because in the advice relationship the employees tend to have more connections with each other.
centrality I think that Centrality's team would be more successful implementing change because they have a stronger advice relationship network, meaning that the role of people with less power becomes stronger promoting change.
centrality It seemed like Centrality's team talked to more people and the people towards the bottom had more say and more responsibilities than Hierarchy's thus Centrality's team could probably get the job done better.
centrality Centrality's team because more people increased their network.†† There were also more ties between everyone in that team.In Hierarchy's team more people actually decreased their ties.
centrality I think Centrality's group will be more likely to successfully implement a change because it seems to me that their informal advice structure involves more people giving and asking for advice.The more you involve people the bigger the range of ideas and better possibility for change.
centrality Centrality's team will be more successful because there are more informal connections in the group.Also, the pathways of information are better linked through people.The middle managers have good relationships with their manager, and their subordinates. And among the subordinates, better ties exist.
centrality I think that the team of Centrality will be more likely to successfully implement a change in the auditing procedure because they have more people involved in both the authority relationship network and the advice relationship network.The advice network in Centrality's group had more range because there were a lot of people who went to different people for advice.
centrality Probably Centrality because he did not lose so drastic a position as did Hierarchy in the formal advice structure shift.And there seemed to be more all around communications.
centrality Centrality's auditing team would likely be more successful.Within Centrality's team the advice relationship network draws from all aspects of team-it seems that everyone plays some kind of positive role.
centrality Centrality's team may be more successful because though both teams have the same formal network when it comes to the informal Centrality's team has a lot more relationships.When many more people are communicating and getting advice from each other these are better chances of implementing a change.This is not to say that Hierarchy's team will not be successful but the change may be a little more difficult to go about because of the lack of many informal networks.
centrality I think that Centrality's group will likely be successful because there was more change in networks in Centrality's example versus Hierarchy's.
centrality I think Centrality's team will be more successful because there wasnít such a difference between the authority (informal) structure and informal.The same people or mostly the same people who were the bosses also had the most people coming to them for advice; therefore the teams all had good relationships witht their bosses.
centrality Centrality's-decisions seems to be more centralized.
centrality Centrality's group because there seems to be more communicating among people.This will create trust and greater reliability in the job.People will no longer see the hierchical structure but rather see their inputs to the organization as valuable.
centrality I think that Centrality's team will be more successful because the change from formal to informal graphs was not as drastic as Hierarchy's.
centrality Centrality's team will be more successful in implementing a change because of its strong and weak ties.Centrality's team has more weak ties than Hierarchy's team giving him a constant source of new information.Also, the leaders, or bosses, on the formal networks for Centrality's team do not lose power as does some of the leaders in Hierarchy's team.
centrality Centrality's team because there are a greater number of increase and power in his informal network.Keeping in mind that their formal networks were identical.
centrality The team that is more likely to suceed in a change would be Centrality's because there are stronger relationships in that network.
centrality I would pick Centrality's team because they seem to have a better advice relationship with the other employees.
centrality The team most likely to successfully implement change in the auditing procedure is Centrality's group because they have stronger informal relationships within their specific group and some outside their group.This would help make change more likely to occur and be successful.
centrality Centrality's group seems more likely to succeed as it has more internal networking within it.In times of need, they will be able to count on one another.
centrality Based on the information, I believe Centrality's team will be more successful in change.There is more advice spread out in Hierarchy's team to different members.In Hierarchy's, everyone listens to one main person for advice.
centrality I think Centrality's team because both the teams are similarin formal structure but Centrality's has an advantage on the informal relationship because more people talk to each other and work closely for change.
centrality Centrality's group will be more successful because his groups (as a whole) power did not decrease as much as Hierarchy's.This group seems to talk more between other groups in the organization.There are more opinions and creative ideas.
centrality I feel that Centrality's team will have greater success in implementing this change.It seemed that in Centrality's formal organization there was greater change.†† People were going to different people for advice.In Hierarchy's group almost the same people were still the one's to go to for advice.Their role in the organization did not quite change a lot.
centrality Centrality's team will be more successful because it seems to be more stable in the management levels.In this team, the middle managers authority stayed or seemed more consistent, whereas in Hierarchy's team, the authority and communication shifted drastically to having the auditors and administrator with the more power.
centrality Centrality's group is more likely to implement change because the workers are more closely linked.People talk to more of their co-workers than in Hierarchy's group.More betweness centrality exists among members of Centrality's group.Therefore, people are more likely to maintain an open communication about the changes.
centrality Centrality's team.I feel this way because if management went through Nancy and used her as an agent of change they would be in a way affecting everyone in the organization.The relationships to Nancy are all based on some triangle.For example, if the informal relationships look like this in Centrality's group, everyone seems to go to different people for advice but those people then go to Nancy.Thus Nancy has a lot of power because what she says trickles down into the organization.If you look at Hierarchy's team people go to different people for advice but that's about it.†† Those individuals don't then go to one person to get advice.Thus I feel, they wouldn't be as successful in implementing change.
centrality I think that Centrality's team will be more likely to sucessfully implement a change in the auditing procedure.The reason being that in Centrality's group there are more people whose powerhas changed from formal authority network to advice network.Consequently, power and authority in the group/organization is being distributed among group members.
centrality I believe Centrality's group can implement change successfully because their advice network seems to be more linked together.Instead of a group of people all going to one person who goes to another.They go in a triangle effect which I think would spread information more quickly.Also, in this case they can work with each other instead of just one person calling all the shots.There is also more people in powerful positions so there is not as many people needing tobe told what to do.
centrality I think Centrality's team would be more likely to successfully implement a change because it shows shows has people who are lower in authority and formal power in reality hold much power informally because many people come to them for advice, speak to them, or report to them.It seems to me that there is more of an organizational change from formal hierarchies to a more flatten modle of power because there is more interaction between peopel of lower power and those of higher power.
centrality I believe Centrality's group would be able to implement change most successfully because they all rely on each other heavily.All the group leaders are respected by their co-workers enough to ask them for advice so they obviously respect their opinions.When told about the change they would be more opt to do it oposed Hierarchy's team because there is a great deal of interdependence.Hierarchy's team leaders were not trusted as much as Centrality's team leaders were, which could hinder their ability to adapt to change.
centrality I believe that Centrality's team will have a better chance at implementing change because everyone in his group who has authoritive power will respond to Nancy.If both Nancy and Centrality agree in a change, then they will remain smooth.However, if Nancy disagrees with the change and with Centrality, the we will have an opposite effect.Both extremes are presented with Centrality, while the middle ground is with Hierarchy.
centrality Centrality's group will be more likely to implement a change in the auditing procedurebecause most of the increase of change of power occurred within the administrative group has the power to make changes within the organization because it is their responsibility.
centrality Centrality's team seems to have more team members who have higher informal power.In this team the advice relationship network is spread out among four key players.Furthermore, I believe that Nancy has 9 people who report to her for advice.Nancy could be used as a successful tool for implementing a change in the auditing process.
centrality Centrality's team would have less trouble and more success implementing change because power is not lost within the scope of leadership as you optically view them through the windows of both power and advice.They (mgrs) retain the leadership respect from either viewpoint.Therefore, their organization would, theorhetically, work better as a team with out the presence of conflict.Additionally, Centrality's team appears to have less reluctancy going to the administrative staff where that does not appear to be the case with Hierarchy's team.Hierarchy's team does go to the admin staff but it appears to be more involved throughout the entire team of managers team with Centrality's team.
centrality I believe that Centrality's auditing team will be more successful in implementing change because he has more power.More people ask him out for more advice.The turn to him when they have problems and may also have greater trust in him as a leader and mentor.
centrality I believe that Centrality's group is going to implement change in their auditing procedures.From my notes about the two groups, I notices that more change would come from Centrality's group.There would be more people that would increase power when changing from formal to informal.Therefore, because of this I believe Centrality would be more likely to start a change to prevent this shift of power.So in my opinion Centrality's group would change before Hierarchy's.
centrality I think Centrality's group would be more likely to implement change successfully.It seems like the advice power is spread out more evenly. Giving all agents chances to give and get advice.More people increased in power from formal to advice relationships.Hierarchy's group only had a few agents giving advice.A lot of agents were only able to receive advice.Being able to give advice allows oneself to engage in the activity more and really understand whats going on.Responsibility of that agent is dependent on the other agents.Centrality's group is more positively involved with each other.
centrality I feel that Centrality's team could implement the auditing procedure correctly because the informal power in the relationship is concentrated and hierarchical.If in Centrality's group we empower Nancy to be a driving force in the change then the network is such that Nancy's influence can be easily spread downwards.In Hierarchy's group there doesn't seem to be that link that brings all the teams together.Centrality's group is more likely to successfully implement change in the auditing procedure.
centrality Centrality's because it seemed that the transition from formal to informal gave people on the bottom of the network hierarchy, a little more power.These people will probably influence change the most because they have gained a little more authority.
centrality Centrality's team would be more likely to implement a change successfully because they communicate more with each other.The boss is not the only one.Even the people who are not in charge given advice and contribute to the company.This team seems more open to change because of that.They seem like they work together more and do not just depend on one head boss.
centrality I think Centrality's auditing team would more successfully implement a change in auditing procedure.Both teams have the same kind of formal network, but Centrality's group has more informal links.People are communicating, both giving and receiving advice, in a greater quantity than Hierarchys auduting team.To implement change in any organization there has to be a lot of communicating and trust.In addition, 3 of the formal network leaders, are also in power in the informal network.
centrality Centrality's group would be the most successful in implementing a change.His group is a lot closer to each other than Hierarchys group.Most of the people in Centrality's group go to more than one person to ask for advice.†† Hierarchy's group would also be good because of the way they are divided.A couple of key leaders will cause less confusion since the same message will be sent directly.
centrality Centrality's group appeared to have more connections of people within sections as well as to other sections.I have a feeling it is only because it was the last graph I saw and because Centrality's was structured in a more complex looking way.If not they were very similar, but Centrality's looked slightly better.
centrality Centrality's team would probably implement change more succcessfully because they had the most dramatic and detailed change.Their distribution of power was very unique and innovative.New people were given power which allows for new ideas and perspectives.They also kept some of the previous peopel which merges old and new.This allows for knowledge of the history of the company to prevent mistakes and work through problems but still allows for new creative advancement.
centrality I think that Centrality's auditing team will likely be most successful in implementing change in that his team has people with more stable amount of power and can see both ways of situations.
centrality I believe Centrality's group would be better capable of implementing a change in the auditing procedure with greater/stronger leaders who receive information from nearly everyone in the network they are able to better understand the problem that do or may arise and also gather more feedback from others in order to better undestand the views on the auditing procedure.
hierarchy Hierarchy's group would be because they are a closer group with more key players and not as scattered as Centrality's. They would have a much easier time implementing change for sure.
hierarchy Hierarchy's team will be more likely to successfully implement a change in the auditing precedure.The advice network is much more "spread" making it appear as though information and input is dispersed more efficiently.
hierarchy I think Hierarchy's group is more likely to successfully implement the change.The reason is because the advice relationship is more spread out.Everyone goes to almost everyone for advice so it seems they trust a lot more.
hierarchy I think Hierarchy's group will be likely to successfully implement a change because there is one person that almost everybody relates to.
hierarchy Hierarchy's team will be more successful because his centrality is better than Centrality's.Therefore, he lost less power when changing how the data was presented.
hierarchy I think Hierarchy's auditing team will be more successful because the advice relationship network still involves the best players in power.Whereas, in Centralitiy's he has very litte advice influence.
hierarchy Depends on who top management is able to convince key members to implement change.If, in Hierarchy's group, top management is able to convince Nancy, then Hierarchy's team will be more likely to implement a change.This is because Nancy has influence over a wider range.
hierarchy I think Hierarchy's group will be more likely to implement a change because in Hierarchy's advice relationship network, everyone goes to Nancy, which will probably easier to get a hold of her, because she knows everything, instead of having to find different individuals who know a little about certain people, as is the case in Centrality's group.
hierarchy Hierarchy's because more people improved their relationships between one another.
hierarchy Hierarchy's auditing team will be more successful because there is always an individual which is Nancy that the team goes to for advice though Centrality's team is also good Hierarchy's has a strong leader in place to aid and help the rest of the people.
hierarchy Hierarchy's team seems like they'd be more successful because Hierarchy plays a key tole in the two different networks which is really important.In Centrality's team Centrality was not a powerful person in the advice network so it seems as though his team has less trust in his opinions.
hierarchy I think Hierarchy's team will be more successful because they have a greater amount of informal working ties, compared to the other team.Hierarchy also plays a more active role than Centrality making his influence on others more meaningful.
hierarchy I believe Hierarchy's group will be more likely to succeed because based on both formal and informal networks, he is more involved than Centrality.And because he is at the top in the formal situation and just as involved in the informal structure.
hierarchy Probably Hierarchy's group because it seems as though his group's supervisors have closer relationships to each other.
hierarchy I feel Hierarchy's auditing team will be more successful.The reason is that most people either stayed the same or increased in relationships.Nancy is a secretary and does have relationships with all the leader.So I feel Hierarchy's team.
hierarchy I think that Hierarchy's group would definitely be more successful in implementing some changes.Hierarchy's group has many different authority figures but there is still one central figure to oversee everything.There is an excellent flow of input in Hierarchy's group so that by the time ideas are finalized they should be perfect.
hierarchy I think Hierarchy's group will be better at implementing a change because it seems like they focus on their key agents more than Centrality's group.When they focus on their key agents then everybody seems to agree that those people will successfully implement a change.
hierarchy Hierarchy's team would have an easier time.Their authority and advice relationships are very close.Hierarchy, Stuart, and Donna all appear to be in the top 4 for both.Hierarchy as the group leader has apparent authority as well as the trust of the middle managers.Nancy is very involved in the group as well which would make a transition much easier.Power and trust are evenly spread throughout the group.
hierarchy Based on what I have learned and observed, I feel that I would need more information to make a decision like this--> I am indecisive.If I was forced to make a decision however I would choose Hierarchy's group because they seem more closely networked than Centrality's group.
hierarchy Hierarchy's group because the top management levels have more power informally in the company than Centrality's group.Centrality's group had a few managers who lose very much in informal group.
hierarchy Hierarchy's auditing team will be more likely to successfully implement a change in the auditing procedure.In Hierarchy's team there are only 3 people who his/her power stays the same from the formal authority network to the advice network.On the other hand, there are 6 people who his/her stay the same in Centrality's team.In Hierarchy's team, they could gather more informations from several different people in the group.
hierarchy Hierarchy's.His informal network is a lot less complicated than Centrality's.Therefore it will be much easier to implement change in Hierarchy's than Centrality's.Centrality's network has too many people asking each other questions.
hierarchy I think Hierarchy's team will do a better job because the range and power that each person has does change but it doesnít change too much so that nobody could handle it.†† Each person in Hierarchy's group is given more power to change something which will be more effective than only a few people powerful enough to create change.
hierarchy Hierarchy's group would be more successful in implementing a change because the informal relationship is stronger.
hierarchy Hierarchy's team because the 2 out of 3 people under Hierarchy also have good relationships with the bottom level employees.
hierarchy Hierarchy's group because there appears to be more communication among employees.
hierarchy I think Hierarchy's auditing team will be more successful because his structure is more of a learning organization with really everybody going to everybody else for answers.A lot of the people had enough power to go straight through to Nancy or go to other directors for answers.People will participate more and be more involved for their company with this structure.
hierarchy I think Hierarchy's team will be more likely to successfully implement a change in the auditing procedure because the power is more evenly distributed.There is more participation among all the participants.
hierarchy Hierarchy's auditing team will be more likely to successfully implement a change in the auditing procedure because the team is more balanced and better distributed.
hierarchy Based on all the information given, I think Heriarchy's team will be more likely to successfully implement a change in the auditing procedure because the authority is more distributed than in Centrality's team.
hierarchy I think Hierarchy's group would be the most likely to successfully implement a change in auditing procedure, simply because all information comes from Nancy in some route or another.In Centrality's group information comes from all over, making it difficult to share the message.In Hierarchy's group, everyone will follow Nancy, so as long as we convince her, we'll suceed.
hierarchy Hierarchy's group because they get down to the lowet management more effectively by going through Nancy.
hierarchy Hierarchy's group would be more likely to successfully implement change because Nancy is the person more of the higher ranked authorities go to.Since she is in the auditors group, she can promote change.She directly deals with the head of the department, too.
hierarchy Hierarchy's team because more people would be involved.It would me a more informal relationship, more people working together.
hierarchy I think Hierarchy's group.Their informal structure was very mixed and connected.In one way or another, they are all interacting with one another in Hierarchy's group.Their informal structure allows their ideas and thought to be showed and passed around more freely.
hierarchy I think Hierarchy's team will be more successful because when the roles became informed most of the group increased in power.
hierarchy Hierarchy's auditing team will be more likely to successfully implement a change in the auditing procedure because the team members either stayed the same or increased slightly with power.It is easier than increasing or decreasing power greatly.
hierarchy Overall I think Hierarchy's group would be more successful in implementing a change in the auditing procedure.Mainly due to the fact that Hierarchy's group had more people whom had better relationships or more relationships in the informal organization.Generally, the people in both teams remained the same for formal/informal organization but thre were more people changing for the better when it came to informal networks for Hierarchy's group.therefore people should get along better, happier, and work better/more productive.because people know about their concerns and therefore know what they want or need.
hierarchy I think Hierarchy's group would be more successful because everyone seems to have some input in decision-making.I feel when a manager can stoop below someone with less authority, the employee will feel more inclined to be more productive and efficient.anytime an upper mangement person goes to a lower authority employee.
hierarchy I think that Hierarchy's team will be more successful because they had the most people improve their power from the formal structure to the informal structure.Centrality's group had more people that stayed the same from the formal to the informal, giving them a disadvantage over Hierarchy's group for change.
hierarchy Hierarchy's team would implement change easier than Centrality's team.Hierarchys team is much simpler in its connections and many people would not be getting the same information from different people.Due to the simplicity of Hierarchy's team, change would occur at a much faster rate.As we know the goal is for faster and more efficient and Hierarchy's team is much more equipped to implement any of the changes they need for success.
hierarchy I think Hierarchy's team would be better able to implement change because their informal advice structure is simpler and more spread out.In Centrality's team they have a lot of people going to claire for advice which may cause her to be overwhelmed.In Hierarchy's team the advice links are more spread out.Nancy does give out a lot of advice but also receives help.Where Nancy from Centralitys team does not.Hierarchy's team can succeed because everybody is working together in a more efficient manner.
hierarchy The team that will change more successfully in Hierarchy's group because people's power from formal to informal stay the same or increase.Centrality's group changes more drastically because more peope lose power and there should only be people with some power to help an organization run smoothly.There will be more efficiency in Hierarchy's group in formal and informal.
hierarchy Hierarchy's team!Hierarchy's team does not have so many increase and decreases in power as much as Centrality's team.Therefore, it would most likely be Hierarchy's team.They mostly have to do a couple of minor adjustments in the sense of promotion and little bit in the opposite direction.
hierarchy Probably Hierarchy's team.It just seems like they have a more balance of power from informal and formal changes, making change to the procedures easier.Where there is a more spread out balance it is much easier for people to work together through the obstacles they will face because of the implement of changes.People have to feel comfortable with more than just one or two people and Centrality's team when informal seems to have less people receiving people who need advice from them.The more balance in a team the more power they have to be successful in going through change together.
hierarchy In Hierarchy's group I think Donna that group more likely to successfully implement a change in the auditing procedure because all her group people have more connection to each other.It is not one on one people to deal anything.
hierarchy I think Hierarchy's team will be more successful because there is a difference between who has formal and informal power.By having 2 people with power from the secretarial side there will be a greater push to finish and finalize all paperwork.Thus, making sure the auditing process is complete and paperwork is done on time.
hierarchy I believe Hierarchy has the most potential among the teams because they have the most interconnections among the other groups.Meaning, they would have the most information to work with and therefore can make changes.
hierarchy I think that Hierarchy's auditing team will; be more likely to successfully implement a change in the auditing procedure because based in the two networks, Hierarchy's network seems to have stronger connections to produce change.The people in Hierarchy's team seem to have more power to influence change than the people in Centrality's team.
hierarchy Hierarchy's group would implement change most successfully because they use each other for information.Opposed to bombarding one person.They also seem to all communicate with each other as opposed to sticking to a particular group, each department may be well informed of the other simply because of their communication.
missing Neither.The groups are equally as strong, the diagrams and social relationships are drawn and represented differently, but just the names are changed.Each person in each network corresponds with the other, both in Centrality and Hierarchy's group.
missing I think the secretarial team pool would be the most successful in implementing a change because in both auditing teams everyone who had the highest power in the authority relationship network later, all got or has to go to a person in the secretarial pool for advice.Nancy in Hierarchy's team.
missing In my opinion, both teams seem as if they will both be successful.Both teams share the fact that they have roughly the same people in both networks.However, they each have their own strategy to go about making these changes.Each way seems to accomplish their goal.
missing I believe that all the teams are equal in the ways to audit the graphs might be drawn.Because on a circle are equidistant from the center.
missing Depending on the situation.
missing They both seem about the same.I didnít detect a difference.
missing They are the same changes so will have the same results.
missing I think they will have equal success in implementing changes.They both have the lower levels handle the main ground work thay eventually goes into the decision making processes.The system that needs changes should start with that of those who are most involved.
missing The supervisor group will be in its majorority the more successful team to influence change, not the president and neither the lower group of workers (with exception of a few employees who might be apparently really capable and liked because all kinds of people seem to be getting their advice--they are probably leaders in the company)
missing They all come from the same roots.
missing I think that both teams have the same propensity to successfully change.This is because the formal and informal structures are very much alike.The formal structures are identical and the informal structures have the same basic changes.The head of the department moves down the ladder while most of the bottom level move up, some more than others.But the changes seemed to be equal in that the same amount of people moved up slightly and greatly on both departments.
missing I think it would be about even.Both formal and informal structures look about the same to me.In both cases, some people lost power and some people gained power.I can not say which group would do better.
missing They will be equally successful because they have identical strengths in their authority and advice networks.
missing N/A
missing They both appear to have equal chance of success because they have extremely similar formal and informal structures to each other.
missing They are both almost exactly alike.I donítunderstand how or who can be successful.Both have a very similar hierarchy and relationship system.
missing Neither will more sucessful from what structures have been shown because in both cases middle management seems to have the most power maintained in both structures.To choose Centrality's or Hierarchy's auditing teams without looking at how productive the company is would be choosing one over the other blindly.
missing I believe that the formal will be more likely to successfully implement a change in the auditing procedure.The reason why is because the managers are more aware of the procedure and they still have the informal advice relationship.