4.4 The IMP interaction model and the network theory To decode the rich network behind NESTA’s interactions in a more intuitive and useful way, benefiting from the proposed parallels existing between the concepts and ideas found in the Science of Networks (SON) literature (Barabasi, 2002; Albert et al, 1999; Buchanan, 2002) and IMP literature (Sutton-Brady and Donnan, 2003 and 2004) a hybrid approach and analysis has been taken. Based on the IMP basic levels of analysis: interaction, relationship and network (Ritter, 2003), was easier to break down what was happening in the network and interpret its graphical representations. With formal network theory, in particularly the studies of social networks, was possible to technically characterize the different components of the network. The elemental components and concepts (Scott, 2000) that have been in consideration for the purpose of this study are:
Node: it represents an individual entity connected with at least another node (precondition to be part of a network). In our case, the nodes are NESTA’s internal projects (they are understood as an entity that has relationships with others), NESTA’s spin-offs, first and second-degree external relationships composed by private and public companies, institutions and any other organization.
Centrality: This metric gives an indication of the social power of a node based on how they connect with the rest of the network, a high amount of connections of 1 st and 2nd degree will create better centrality.
Relationship Degree level: It represents the number of intermediaries required to reach a given node in the network, a first degree relationship means a direct relationship while a second level relationship represents an indirect relationship mediated by one direct relationship with another node.
Reach: Is the “easiness” by which a member of the network can reach other members of the network and it is directly dependant on the interconnectivity of the members of the network.
Page 17 of 30