Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Chih-Hui Lai
School of Communication, the University of Akron, 105C Kolbe Hall, Akron, OH 44325
Applying an ecological and evolutionary perspective, this study examines the evolution and the sus-
tainability of mixed-mode groups, a type of voluntary association created and organized online to
interact physically ingeographically defned ways. Meetup.comis a website that facilitates the creation
and coordination of mixed-mode groups. Analysis of interviews with 34 Meetup group organizers
and a longitudinal analysis of 100 randomly selected Meetup groups revealed the evolutionary pro-
cesses at the group and population level, respectively. Specifcally, the ecological factor of population
density, the demographic factor of group age, the groups proft orientation, experience of leadership
change and shared leadership, and external ties played decisive roles in predicting group survival.
Implications of the fndings for theoretical and practical contributions are discussed.
Key words: mixed-mode groups, survival, voluntary associations, mixed modality, social network,
ecology and evolution.
doi:10.1111/jcc4.12075
People are and always have been oriented towards involvement in voluntary organizations (Anderson
1971; Rainie Purcell &Smith 2011). Participation in associational activities has long been linked to posi-
tive outcomes at individual and collective levels such as creation of horizontal social networks and social
capital (Putnam 2000) formation of social ties and occupational diversity (Davis Renzulli & Aldrich
2006) and assimilation of democratic values and attitudes (Hooghe 2003). Voluntary associations are
characterized by volitional involvement and specialization of interest; they are avocational in nature and
are of secondary importance to an individuals daily routine (Warner 1972). To some extent these char-
acteristics highlight the challenges voluntary associations face (e.g relatively limited human and physical
resources) for growth and survival over time (Knoke & Prensky 1984).
Interestingly, usage of information and communication technologies (ICTs) has been shown to
increase the likelihood of individuals belonging to traditional local voluntary groups such as a neigh-
borhood associations, sports leagues, youth groups, churches, or social clubs (Hampton, Lee, & Her,
2011). Technology also contributes to the creation of newforms of voluntary associations, by integrating
physically based and virtual communities of interest (Blanchard & Horan, 1998). Te sustainability of
voluntary associations seems to have bearing on the intersection of online and physical spaces, a topic
that is socially signifcant but has thus far received little scholarly attention.
Te relationship between population density and group survival was a directional hypothesis, hence
the coefcient was signifcant at p =.058 (2-tailed signifcance).
Leadership change was transformed with a lagged form to avoid the problem of simultaneity.
observed as intact cases, no lef-censoring occurred. Among the 46 groups that closed down, 38 groups
(82.6%) were aged one year or younger. A signifcant age diference was found between ongoing groups
(M=40.91, SD=22.06) and defunct groups (M=15.04, SD=11.67) (t(83) =7.48, p <.001); H3 was
thus supported, suggesting that older groups had a greater likelihood of survival than younger groups.
To test the rest of the hypotheses, all the variables were entered in the Cox regression model. Te
results revealed that the number of other Meetup groups existing within a radius of 25 miles (H2)
(B=.953, p =.058), with a not-for-proft orientation (H4) (B=1.614, p <.001), leadership team
(B=1.094, p <.05), the experience of leadership change (H5) (B=1.455, p <.01), and external
ties (H6) (B=1.935, p <.001) signifcantly infuenced group survival (see Table 1). In other words,
proximity to other Meetup groups increased the probability of group closure. On the other hand, a
not-for proft orientation, the existence of a leadership team with the experience of leadership change,
and possession of external ties reduced the probability of group closure. Member requirement was
not a signifcant predictor of survival time (H1) (B=.197, p >.10). Hence, all hypotheses, with the
single exception of H1, were supported. Due to space limitations, the survival function (a graphical
representation of the cumulative survival distribution) is not shown in the paper. Based on the survival
function, at the mean of the predictors, the survival rates of a group at 1-year, 2-year, and 3-year
thresholds were 88%, 73%, and 65%, respectively.
Does, then, the evolutionary process of Meetup groups at the population level refect the V-S-R
mechanisms (RQb)? Te above-noted results suggest that it does. Specifcally, variations were observed
to occur in diferent dimensions, including group niche, population density, group age, group type,
8 Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication (2014) 2014 International Communication Association
Figure 1 Two-mode external networks of survival groups. Te red circles are the Meetup groups that
survived at the end of observation and the blue boxes represent diferent types of external ties that sur-
viving groups had connections with.
leadership factors, and network confgurations. Over time, older and not-for-proft groups living
under low-population density, surviving with a leadership team with an experience of leadership
change, and maintaining external ties with other groups or organizations (be they inside or outside
the population of Meetup groups), were more likely to be selected and retained within the population
of Meetup groups. A visualization was drawn using NetDraw (Figure 1), which illustrated that local
businesses were the most-cited source of external ties by surviving groups, followed by local nonproft
organizations, national and international nonproft organizations, and local voluntary organizations.
Within Meetup.com, groups with goals such as socializing, pursuit of hobbies, and sports and recreation
were common targets for collaboration.
Te Evolutionary Process of Meetup Groups
Analysis of interview data revealed the evolutionary processes of groups (RQa). Specifcally, the V-S-R
mechanisms were represented in diferent aspects of internal group processes as well as external inter-
action with the environment. When a group was frst created, organizers focused mainly on recruitment
and advertising; the strategies they used included a combination of traditional word-of-mouth and
unique online search afordances. For example, an organizer of a philosophy group (MDTinkGroup
1) described his multimodal advertising eforts:
I know when I talk with them, they, of course, I tell them about my group and a lot of groups and a
lot of people join, cause we do some cool things. So, just pretty much, other than the Meetup page,
Ive talked to people at other Meetup groups.
As groups developed, the strategies that organizers found initially useful might be selected and
retained as part of organizing routines, or subjected to later modifcations. Te organizer of a walk
group (MIWalkGroup) mentioned that instead of actively contacting prospective members through
Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication (2014) 2014 International Communication Association 9
numerous e-mails, she later relied on the search function provided on Meetup.com to do the work
for her to attract members. It appears that the technological afordances of search engines played a
pivotal role in determining the niche a group could occupy in the population. Te organizer of a social
philosophy group (OHTinkGroup) mentioned the efect of online search engine functionality on the
growth of the group:
And the bigger we get, the easier it is to search us. Because more and more people talk
about the group, then they fnd Meetup and they keep using words that will pull out
for a search engine. And that makes it easier for people to then fnd our group through
these words that they use. Tey dont even realize theyre doing it.
Diferent organizing structures took shape, depending on the nature of group topic. In groups with
focused activities (e.g., concert going or rock climbing), help from assistant organizers was minimal,
since the organizer could easily handle the planning and organizing work. In groups whose activities
were diverse (e.g., social groups), organizers used the expertise of their assistant organizers in a variety
of ways. If no help was available from inside the group, organizers would solicit help from their per-
sonal networks, such as workplace colleagues or friends, at least to generate ideas for events. It is worth
mentioning that among the 34 participating organizers, 17 were not the originators of their groups. Yet,
thanks to the selected and retained strategies, those groups were able to sustain themselves with routine
self-organizing accomplished by several assistant organizers, even when the organizer lef.
It seems that the personal relationships that were observed to develop among members might have
served as a motivation for members to continue participating in group activity. As some organizers
pointed out, though, these relationships sometimes led to a shif of communication and activity away
fromthe grouplevel to a smaller andmore private level these members no longer attendedgroupmeet-
ings. In response to this issue, organizers sometimes created subgroup activities. For example, members
of a womens social group (ORWSocialGroup) organized among themselves a separate dancing Meetup
group. Te organizer of a language group (CAESLGroup) witnessed this pattern in her group, but she
chose to refrain from responding to it.
Organizers reported that they were well received in local venues, and some groups were actively
sought out by local businesses. It was not uncommon for local establishments to reserve meeting space
for groups or provide them with group discounts. An organizer of a new technology group (COTech-
Group) had local businesses that reached him through Meetup.com serve as group sponsors. Relation-
ships with these businesses varied in nature; depending on the group, the connection might turn out to
be a one-time business transaction, with no deeper ties cultivated.
Certain groups organized joint events with other Meetup groups on the basis of direct mutual ties.
Tat is, if multiple Meetup groups shared organizers or assistant organizers, these individuals would
either cross-post events on both groups pages or organize events together. Locale and characteristics of
the group also played a part in the initiation and implementation of joint events. For example, an orga-
nizer of a classics book club (MIBookGroup) mentioned that she was welcomed by the local community
and was contacted by local organizations (e.g., the library). Another organizer of an adventure group
(MIADGroup) described her personal links with other local cultural groups that facilitated intergroup
links:
I go to the tabling events that all the clubs and organizations have every year, which is
how I found them. And then because theyre closer to my age and they are just as
active and basically invited them to some of the meetups, or we do our own thing with
them.
10 Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication (2014) 2014 International Communication Association
In sum, fndings from the interviews suggest that Meetup group organizers engaged in V-S-R pro-
cesses at diferent stages of group development to build and strengthen the ftness of the group. At the
group-formation stage, online and ofine recruitment eforts were made; later, connections for logis-
tic arrangements were built both within and outside of the group. In turn, these connections resulted
in various advantages and disadvantages: group transition as a result of leadership change, formation of
subgroup activities and/or spin-of groups due to the development of personal relationships, joint events
with other groups, and interaction with local communities.
Discussion
Applying an ecological and evolutionary perspective to understand the growth, survival, and disbanding
of mixed-mode groups, this study extends the existing evolutionary research, which mainly treats formal
and well-structured organizations, to the domain of technology-mediated voluntary associations. Tere
are similarities between the ecological and evolutionary processes of mixed-mode groups and those that
have been previously studied. For example, results of age-dependence and group survival are consistent
with the prediction of liability of newness as explored in work and traditional face-to-face voluntary
organizations (e.g., Fernandez, 2008; Hager, Galaskiewicz, &Larson, 2004). Te positive efects of shared
leadership and leadership change on survival of mixed-mode groups are also reported in existing studies
on work organizations (e.g., Carson et al., 2007; Mehra et al., 2006; Rowe et al., 2005).
Consistent with research demonstrating the usefulness of institutional embeddedness and interor-
ganizational linkages for organizational survival (Baum et al., 2000; Selle & ymyr, 1992), this studys
fndings point to the key role played by external ties in the growth and survival of mixed-mode groups
at group and population levels. Specifcally, the network visualization shown in Figure 1 demonstrates
that Meetup groups tend to have interorganizational links with other Meetup groups as well as with local
organizations; these links can provide sources of networking and collaboration and contribute to group
survival. Similarly, analysis of the interview data also suggests that group organizers engage in diferent
ways to build and strengthen their ftness over time through cooperation with other Meetup groups, as
well as by interacting with local establishments and the community. Tis study enriches the ecological
and evolutionary perspective by considering the technological afordances of mixed-mode commu-
nication and organizing. Tat is, the environment of those Meetup groups can take both online and
ofine forms, from which groups build and maintain their communication infrastructures and acquire
resources for operation.
In fact, the result of a nonsignifcant efect of group niches (measured by member requirements
for group topics) on survival raises the question of the applicability of the measures used in existing
ecological and evolutionary research to mixed-mode groups. Niche refers to the varied capacities that
organizations or populations possess to procure resources and exploit these resources in the environ-
ment (McKelvey, 1982; McPherson, 1983; Popielarz & Neal, 2007). Future research is needed to provide
a more fne-grained conceptual and methodological approach to investigating the multimodal resource
environment of mixed-mode groups. For example, search engines were commonly mentioned by inter-
viewed organizers as a useful mechanismfor deciding howgroups attract potential members. It suggests
that niches of a mixed-mode group may be better measured by group topics as well as the online search-
able range within which a group can recruit members.
Te advantage of the ecological and evolutionary perspective is its ability to explain phenomena
using the same theoretical process at diferent levels (Monge et al., 2008). Te cross-level conceptualiza-
tion also allows for the investigation of V-S-R processes enacted within and outside the organization
(Aldrich & Ruef, 2006; Monge et al., 2011a). Interview data revealed that Meetup group organizers
Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication (2014) 2014 International Communication Association 11
were involved with diferent aspects of group development, including recruitment, leadership issues,
and choice and location of activities. In other words, group organizers play a pivotal role in infuencing
the internal evolutionary process of the group. Indeed, as Miner (1994) points out, an organizational
managers job is to monitor how the evolutionary processes at the higher level afect the whole organi-
zation, and to infuence the internal evolutionary process. Te behavior of the Meetup group organizers
under study exemplifed this description.
In response to a call for more eforts to make the level of analysis as explicit and inclusive as possible
(Monge & Contractor, 2003), this study used a mixed approach of interviews and archived group data,
which aforded me the ability to articulate which level of the ecosystem is being investigated. Regarding
group disbanding, cost was a major reason singled out by a number of participating organizers leading
to the decision for group closure. For example, two organizers (NJPRGroup & NMChannelingGroup)
explained that they closed their groups on Meetup.com because they did not fnd a Meetup presence
helped achieve their set goals to recruit newmembers to their existing business activities. Another orga-
nizer of a sports watching group (COSportsGroup) mentioned that her group migrated to Facebook,
another population of mixed-mode groups, because it costs nothing, whereas she paid the subscription
fees to Meetup.com as the single organizer of her group. Te traits of these less ft individual groups
may together refect the niche attributes at the population level of Meetup.com. It can be argued that
Meetup.comis carving out its macropopulation niche and coexists with other free-of-charge populations
of mixed-mode groups, such as Facebook and BigTent, in the larger environment. Further, the selection
event of group closure on Meetup.com and group creation in another population can be described as
a cross-level V-S-R process, because the selection at the lower group level refects the adaptations and
transformations at the higher level of populations (Monge et al., 2011b).
On the basis of this multilevel conceptualization of evolutionary processes, future research might
examine how diferent populations of mixed-mode groups interact with each other in the form of com-
mensalism; that is, howorganizations or groups fromsimilar populations engage in competition and/or
cooperation with one another (Aldrich & Ruef, 2006; Monge & Contractor, 2003). Another avenue of
inquiry might be the phenomenon of group migration among similar (e.g., from Meetup.com to Face-
book) or dissimilar populations (i.e. from Meetup.com to a business networking website) as this would
provide insight into the evolutionary dynamic at group, population, and community levels.
Conclusion
Tis study is limited in three ways. First, analyses from interviews and archived data did not difer-
entiate the reasons for group decline and closure; caution should thus be used when interpreting the
results. Second, because the study drewon interviews with group organizers using Meetup.com, fndings
may be biased, as the participating organizers were likely to be successful organizers. Extra eforts were
made, however, to prompt the organizers to share their thoughts about the less active groups they orga-
nized. Tird, the evolution of Meetup groups may not adequately represent the general phenomenon of
mixed-mode groups. Future research would do well to encompass diferent populations of mixed-mode
groups.
Despite these shortcomings, this study makes a major contribution to the understanding of the sus-
tainability of mixed-mode groups by viewing the issue through an ecological and evolutionary lens.
Overall, the results of this study are convergent with existing research on organizational ecology and
evolution, suggesting that factors such as population density, group age, proft orientation, leadership,
and external links are vital to predicting the survival of mixed-mode groups. Te cross-level conceptu-
alization allows for interpretation that the V-S-R processes can take place across group and population
12 Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication (2014) 2014 International Communication Association
levels. Most importantly, considering technological afordances of mixed-mode communication and
organizing, this study sheds light on the role of technology in facilitating the organization of voluntary
associations in diferent phases of evolution, such as the efortless accomplishment of online recruitment
and the initiation of collaboration with other groups and organizations, be they online or ofine. Te
growing use of the Internet for face-to-face and geographically-defned grouping activities demands that
the phenomenon of mixed-mode groups will both garner attention and spur future research.
Acknowledgements
Te author wouldlike to thank James Katz, Marya Doerfel, Jennifer Gibbs, andtwo anonymous reviewers
for their most helpful comments and invaluable feedback on the earlier drafs of this manuscript
Notes
1 Tese 100 groups were randomly selected from the database of all the ongoing groups listed under
Meetup.com when the request was made.
2 Te assumption that groups coded with no leadership team had no leadership team before was based
on a pilot study observing another 12 Meetup groups over 8 months.
3 Groups and organizations involved in group events were defned as external ties. In total, 22 types of
external ties were identifed, including academic organization, local business,
state/national/international business, individuals, media organization, Meetup social group, Meetup
art and entertainment group, Meetup business and career group, Meetup cultures and languages
group, Meetup education group, Meetup hobbies group, Meetup parenting and family group, Meetup
religion and beliefs group, Meetup sports and recreation group, local non-proft organization, state
non-proft organization, national/international non-proft organization, political organization,
public agency, local voluntary organization, state voluntary organization, and national/international
voluntary organization.
4 Local population size was further classifed based on the four categories of metropolitan statistical
areas (MSAs) (http://www.census.gov/population/www/metroareas/mastand.html), that is, Level A
MSAs corresponding with 1 million or more local population, Level B MSAs with 250,000 to
999,999, Level C MSAs with 100,000 to 249,999, and Level D MSAs with less than 100,000. Te
locale data related to the 100 random groups represent 42% of Level D MSAs, 18% of Level C, 23%
of Level B, and 17% of Level A.
5 External ties, leadership team and leadership change (in lagged form) variables were analyzed as
covariates representing state in the Cox regression model. Tese variables were meant to indicate
whether a group has ever experienced the target event, that is, whether a group has constructed an
external tie, has shared leadership, or has experienced leadership change over the course of group
development. Tus they were not recorded at various points in time. Two assumptions related to Cox
regression analysis were tested. First, squared multiple correlations (SMC) were conducted to check
for evidence of multicollinearity. No SMC exceeded the recommended threshold of .90 (Tabachnick
& Fidell, 2001); thus it was concluded that the variables under study were nonredundant. Te
assumption of proportional hazards required in the Cox regression model was also tested by adding
to the model interaction of time with all the variables, and then assessing the efect of these
interactions (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2001). None of the covariates signifcantly interacted with time.
Hence, it was considered that the assumption of proportionality was not violated. Tabachnick, B. G.,
& Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics (4
th
ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication (2014) 2014 International Communication Association 13
6 Please refer to the authors other paper for more details about the implementation of purposive
sampling and details about these interviewed groups. Lai, C. H. (2014). Understanding the
evolution of bona fde mixed-mode groups: An example of Meetup groups.First Monday, 19(1).
Available at: http://frstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/4681/3810
7 In addition to the 30 interviews, three other interviews were completed via email upon the
participants request, and one face-to-face interview was performed without the use of the recording
device due to ambient interruptions.
8 Te interview protocol and the coding categories are available upon request.
References
Anderson, R. T. (1971). Voluntary associations in history. American Anthropologist, 73(1), 209222.
Aldrich, H. E., & Auster, E. R. (1986). Even dwarfs started small: Liabilities of age and size and their
strategic implications. Research in Organizational Behavior, 8, 165198.
Aldrich, H. E., & Ruef, M. (2006). Organizations evolving (2nd ed.). London, UK: Sage.
Baum, J. A. C. (1999). Organizational ecology. In S. R. Clegg & C. Hardy (Eds.), Studying organization
theory and method (pp. 71108). London: Sage.
Baum, J. A. C., Calabrese, T., & Silverman, B. S. (2000). Dont go it alone: Alliance network
composition and startups performance in Canadian biotechnology. Strategic Management Journal,
21(3), 267294.
Baum, J. A. C., & Oliver, C. (1991). Institutional linkages and organizational mortality, Administrative
Science Quarterly, 36, 187218.
Baum, J. A. C., & Oliver, C. (1992). Institutional embeddedness and the dynamics of organizational
populations. American Sociological Review, 57(4), 540559.
Baum, J. A. C., & Shipilov, A. V. (2006). Ecological approaches to organizations. In S. R. Clegg, C.
Hardy, W. Nord, & T. Lawrence (Eds.), Sage handbook for organization studies (pp. 55110).
London: Sage Publications
Baum, J. A. C., & Singh, J. V. (1994). Organizational niche overlap and the dynamics of organizational
founding. Organization Science, 5, 483501.
Baym, N. K. (2009). A call for grounding in the face of blurred boundaries. Journal of
Computer-Mediated Communication, 14, 720723.
Blanchard, A., & Horan, T. (1998). Virtual communities and social capital. Social science computer
review, 16(3), 293307.
Campbell, D. T. (1965). Variation and selective retention in socio-cultural evolution. In H. R.
Barringer, G. I. Blanksten, & R. W. Mack (Eds.), Social change in developing areas: A
reinterpretation of evolutionary theory (pp. 1948). Cambridge, MA: Schenkman.
Carson, J. B., Tesluk, P. E., & Marrone, J. A. (2007). Shared leadership in teams: An investigation of
antecedent conditions and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 12171234.
Chambr, S. M., & Fatt, N. (2002). Beyond the liability of newness: Nonproft organizations in an
emerging policy domain. Nonproft and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 31, 502524.
Davis, A. E., Renzulli, L. A., & Aldrich, H. E. (2006). Mixing or matching? Te infuence of voluntary
associations on the occupational diversity and density of small business owners networks. Work
and Occupations, 33, 4272.
Dobrev, S. D., Kim, T.-Y., & Hannan, M. T. (2001). Dynamics of niche width and resource partitioning.
Te American Journal of Sociology, 106(5), 12991337.
Fernandez, J. J. (2008). Causes of dissolutions among Spanish nonproft associations. Nonproft and
Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 37, 113137.
14 Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication (2014) 2014 International Communication Association
Fichman, M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1991). Honeymoons and the liability of adolescence: A new
perspective on duration dependence in social and organizational relationships. Academy of
Management Review, 16, 442468.
Freeman, J. H., Carroll, G. R., & Hannan, M. T. (1983). Te liability of newness: Age dependence in
organizational death rates, American Sociological Review, 48, 692710.
Granovetter, M. S. (1985). Economic action and social structure: Te problem of embeddedness.
American Journal of Sociology, 91(3), 481510.
Hager, M. A., Galaskiewicz, J., & Larson, J. A. (2004). Structural embeddedness and the liability of
newness among nonproft organizations. Public Management Review, 6(2), 159188.
Hampton, K. N., Lee, C-J., & Her, E. J. (2011). How new media afords network diversity: Direct and
mediated access to social capital through participation in local social settings. New Media &
Society, 13(7), 10311049.
Hannan, M.T., & Carroll, G. R. (1992). Dynamics of organizational populations: Density, competition,
and legitimation. New York: Oxford University Press.
Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. H. (1977). Te population ecology of organizations. American Journal of
Sociology, 82, 92964.
Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. (1989). Organizational ecology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press.
Homans, G. C. (1950). Te human group. New York: Harcourt, Brace.
Hooghe, M. (2003). Participation in voluntary associations and value indicators: Te efect of current
and previous participation experiences. Nonproft and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 32, 4769.
Knoke, D., & Prensky, D. (1984). What relevance do organization theories have for voluntary
associations? Social Science Quarterly, 65, 320.
Lazar, J., & Preece, J. (2002). Social considerations in online communities: Usability, sociability, and
success factors. In H. van Oostendorp (Ed.), Cognition in a digital world (pp. 127152 ). Mahwah:
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc. Publisher.
McKelvey, B. (1982). Organizational systematics. Berkeley: University California Press.
McPherson, J. M. (1983). An ecology of afliation. American Sociological Review, 48(4), 519532.
McPherson, J. M. (1988). A theory of voluntary organization. In C. Milofsky (Ed.), Community
organizations: Studies in resource mobilization and exchange (pp. 4276). New York: Oxford
University Press.
Mehra, A., Smith, B., Dixon, A., & Robertson, B. (2006). Distributed leadership in teams: Te network
of leadership perceptions and team performance. Leadership Quarterly, 17, 232245.
Miner, A. S. (1994). Seeking adaptive advantage: Evolutionary theory and managerial action. In J. A. C.
Baum & J. V. Singh (Eds.), Evolutionary dynamics of organizations (pp. 7689). New York, NY:
Oxford University Press.
Monge, P. R., & Contractor, N. S. (2003). Teories of communication networks. Oxford: University Press.
Monge, P. R., Heiss, B. R., & Margolin, D. (2008). Communication network evolution in organizational
communities. Communication Teory, 18, 449477.
Monge, P., Lee, S., Fulk, J., Frank, L. B., Margolin, D., Schultz, C., . . .Weber, M. (2011a). Evolutionary
and ecological models for organizational communication. In V. Miller, M. S. Poole, D. R. Seibold &
Associates (Eds.), Advancing research in organizational communication through qualitative
methodology, Management Communication Quarterly, 25(1), 2634.
Monge, P., Lee, S., Fulk, J., Weber, M., Shen, C., Schultz, C., . . . Frank, L. B. (2011b). Research methods
for studying evolutionary and ecological processes in organizational communication. Management
Communication Quarterly, 25(2), 211251.
Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication (2014) 2014 International Communication Association 15
Monge, P. R., & Poole, M. S. (2008). Te evolution of organizational communication. Journal of
Communication, 58(4), 679692.
Popielarz, P. A., & Neal, Z. P. (2007). Te niche as a theoretical tool. Annual Review of Sociology, 33,
6584.
Postmes, T., Spears, R., & Lea, M. (2000). Te formation of group norms in computer-mediated
communication. Human Communication Research, 26(3), 341371.
Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: Te collapse and revival of American community. New York:
Simon & Schuster.
Rainie, L., Purcell, K., & Smith, A. (2011). Te social side of the internet. Pew Internet & American Life
Project. Retrieved January 25, 2011, from
http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2011/Te-Social-Side-of-the-Internet.aspx
Rothaermel, F. T., & Sugiyama, S. (2001). Virtual internet communities and commercial success:
Individual and community-level theory grounded in the atypical case of TimeZone.com. Journal of
Management, 27(3), 297312.
Rowe W., Cannella, A., Rankin, D., & Gorman, D. (2005). Leader succession and organizational
performance: Integrating the common-sense, ritual scapegoating, and vicious-circle succession
theories. Te Leadership Quarterly, 16, 197219.
Selle, P., & ymyr, B. (1992). Explaining changes in the population of voluntary organizations: Te
roles of aggregate and individual level data. Nonproft and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 21(2),
147179.
Singer, J. D., & Willett, J. B. (1991). Modeling the days of our lives: Using survival analysis when
designing and analyzing longitudinal studies of duration and the timing of events. Psychological
Bulletin, 110, 268290.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research. Tousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Tushman, M. L., & Rosenkopf, L. (1996). Executive succession, strategic reorientation and performance
growth: A longitudinal study in the US cement industry. Management Science, 42(7), 939953.
Uzzi, B. (1999). Embeddedness in the making of fnancial capital: How social relations and networks
beneft frms seeking fnance. American Sociological Review, 64, 481505.
Walther, J. B., & Parks, M. R. (2002). Cues fltered out, cues fltered in: Computer mediated
communication and relationships. In M. L. Knapp, J. A. Daly & G. R. Miller (Eds.), Te handbook
of interpersonal communication (3rd ed., pp. 529563). Tousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Wang, X., Butler, B., & Joyce, E. (2006). An ecological perspective on online communities. In
Proceedings of Academy of Management (pp. I1I6). New York: Academy of Management.
Warner, W. K. (1972). Major conceptual elements of voluntary associations. In D. H. Smith, R. D.
Reddy, & B. R. Baldwin (Ed.), Voluntary action research: 1972 (pp. 7180). Lexington, Mass:
Lexington Books.
Wollebk, D. (2009). Survival in local voluntary associations. Nonproft Management and Leadership,
19, 267284.
About the Author
Chih-Hui Lai (PhD, Rutgers University) is an Assistant Professor in the School of Communication at the
University of Akron. Her research interests focus on the intersection of technology use, organizational
communication, and voluntary groups.
Address: School of Communication, the University of Akron, 105C Kolbe Hall, Akron, OH 44325.
E-mail: chihhui@uakron.edu
16 Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication (2014) 2014 International Communication Association