Mapping the Great Beyond: Identifying Meaningful Networks in

MAPPING THE GREAT BEYOND 7
of action is a focus on behavior. The importance of recognizing
this focus on behavior is not least because hierarchy is a form of
network structure. It is not a question of drawing false distinctions
between hierarchies and networks, but rather the need to focus on
the behavior and power relationships which exist in the different
forms of network. Figure 1 shows the same network arranged using
three different algorithms. None of the relationships is altered by
the different arrangements, just the way we visualize them and the
assumptions we make as a result.
This may be easier to argue at a conceptual level than for the
individual on the ground to do while operating within existing
reporting mechanisms, bureaucratic structures or organizational
cultures. Indeed, the degree to which a Public Diplomacy
organization itself is a hierarchy may well limit the ability of one
of its representatives to become immersed in an external network of
activists.
While it is necessary to be clear that hierarchy is a form of
network, the emphasis on shifting approaches of communication to
acknowledge other network forms alongside the more traditionally
applied hierarchy creates important considerations for Public
Diplomacy. An individual or organization’s position in a network
creates a perspective through which relationships with other network
members have to be viewed. Hierarchies create the classic look up or
look down perspectives; other forms of network create the potential
to look in many directions. The variety of network arrangements
provides the potential for numerous positions, perspectives and
understandings of importance and power. In some hierarchies,
everyone may be looking to a particular actor, creating a centralized
or star network), and in others relationships may take on a cyclical
form of communication or the image of hub and spoke, among
the wide variety of options. These network forms are shown in
Figure 2.