When business network success hurts employee wellbeing

Research shows business network success can strain employee wellbeing and offers suggestions for reducing stress among workers while sustaining key partnerships

In today’s interconnected business world, forming strategic partnerships has become essential for corporate success. Companies actively seek prominent positions in business networks to access resources, enhance innovation, and improve performance. Yet while the organisational benefits of network prominence are well documented, less attention has been paid to its impact on the employees who manage these vital relationships.

These employees, known as alliance officers, face mounting pressures as their companies become more central in business networks. They must coordinate complex partnerships, protect company interests, and navigate increasing demands from multiple stakeholders – responsibilities that can significantly affect their wellbeing.

The petroleum industry in Tanzania provides a compelling example of this challenge. When petroleum wholesalers in the country form partnerships to enter new markets, build joint fuel depots, coordinate marketing activities, and conduct corporate social responsibility initiatives, the employees managing these relationships often face mounting pressures that impact their wellbeing.

In this heavily networked industry, wholesalers rely extensively on partnerships with other firms to operate effectively. The complexity of these relationships is heightened by the standardised nature of petroleum products. Since fuel quality is globally standardised, companies must differentiate themselves through their network relationships and partnership management capabilities rather than product features. This places additional pressure on alliance officers to maintain and leverage these vital business relationships effectively.

This example illustrates findings from new research published in Industrial Marketing Management that examined how a company’s prominence in business networks affects employee wellbeing. The study, Effects of B2B partnerships on the role stressors and well-being of alliance officers: A multi-level investigation, was conducted by Carolyn Yesse Ngowi, an Associate Lecturer in the School of Management and Governance at UNSW Business School, together with Associate Professors Salih Zeki Ozdemir and Steven Lui from UNSW Business School.

“The primary aim of the research was to investigate the potential dark sides of social networks, and the researchers focused on unintended consequences of interfirm networks on those within the firms,” said A/Prof. Ozdemir. “Social network theory literature shows overwhelming evidence that occupying a central network position enhances firm performance. However, the question of who bears the costs of maintaining such a beneficial network position for the firms has received little to no attention.”

Network position creates complex tensions

The research revealed that while occupying central positions in business networks provides companies with valuable resources and improved performance, it creates significant challenges for employees managing those relationships. Central network positions enhance a firm’s status, visibility and influence, leading to increased access to resources and improved innovation capabilities.

“Despite being beneficial to firm performance, firm prominence has a curvilinear relationship with alliance officers’ role stressors,” the researchers found. This creates what they termed a “sweet spot” – an optimal level of firm prominence where alliance officers can effectively manage partnerships without becoming overwhelmed.

Read more: How mindfulness can help tackle healthcare’s burnout crisis

The study collected comprehensive data through surveys with top managers of the whole population of 42 licensed petroleum wholesalers in Tanzania and 103 alliance officers who managed their 533 B2B partnerships. “Occupying prominent positions in B2B networks fosters privileged access to network resources and enhances firms’ status, visibility and influence,” the researchers noted. This allowed them to examine how network positioning affects both organisational performance and employee wellbeing.

Managing complex partnership demands

As firms gain prominence, their alliance officers face three distinct types of role stressors; role overload, role conflict and role ambiguity. Role overload occurs when partnership demands exceed an employee’s capacity. Alliance officers must process increasing volumes of partnership opportunities while protecting company knowledge and mediating conflicts between partners.

“These alliance officers face amplified expectations to devote significant time and effort to mitigate relational hazards and uncertainties while they communicate and monitor many interactions with network partners,” the researchers found. This is a typical example of a role conflict where alliance officers must balance one partner’s push for rapid knowledge sharing against their firm’s demands for strict confidentiality.

The complexity of managing multiple partnerships also creates role ambiguity. “Higher visibility and influence within the network may induce greater dependency on prominent firms to set network norms, increased demands to reciprocate favours, and more requests to mediate conflicts among network members,” the study revealed.

In turn, Dr Ngowi said the study underlines a critical but often overlooked challenge in industries where business partnerships are essential: the hidden toll of network prominence on the employees managing these relationships. “Senior leaders need to recognise that forging alliances with other companies can yield many advantages for the firm while at the same time posing unique stressors on those who are directly responsible for making the partnership work,” she said.

For example, in Tanzania’s petroleum sector, Dr Ngowi said alliance officers face heightened tensions in their roles such as balancing devotion to their firm’s goals versus partnership goals, cooperating versus competing with their firm’s partners, sharing knowledge versus protecting their firm’s trade secrets from leaking and of the like.

“In all these settings, employees managing interfirm partnerships may be pulled in multiple, often contradictory directions as they strive to secure benefits for their own firm without jeopardising the collective network or valuable relationships with key partners. The challenge lies in balancing the benefits of network prominence with the wellbeing of the employees tasked with sustaining these relationships. Businesses that fail to recognise and mitigate role stressors risk burnout, reduced productivity, and even the loss of key talent, ultimately undermining the very partnerships that drive their competitive advantage," she said.

Solutions through structure and mindset

The research identified several crucial factors that help companies better support alliance officers and mitigate the stress of network prominence. Job autonomy emerged as particularly significant in reducing role stressors.

“Job autonomy signifies the degree of control, freedom, independence, and discretion an employee has in setting goals and making decisions about how to approach their work within broad organisational guidelines,” the researchers explained. This autonomy proves especially valuable when alliance officers need to manage multiple partnership demands.

“Since autonomy encourages ownership of responsibilities,” the study found, “alliance officers of prominent firms with more job autonomy have the authority over their role scheduling and partnership management tactics.” This reduces work demands and conflicting directives, enabling alliance officers to handle network responsibilities more effectively.

Growth mindset emerged as another crucial factor. “Holding a growth mindset helps individuals overcome fear of failure and social anxiety, enhancing their ability to excel in their roles,” the researchers explained. The study found that alliance officers with growth mindsets exhibit adaptability, engage in preparatory activities to acquire skills, explore options before taking action, and cultivate mutually supportive relationships aimed at win-win outcomes.

“Moreover, growth mindset may also facilitate the ability of the alliance officers to unlearn – to think again about what they know and what they don’t know – and enable them to enhance knowledge management processes,” said A/Prof. Liu.

However, the strength of partnerships had complex and sometimes counterintuitive effects. “When alliance officers are called to mediate relationship conflicts, the strength of their firms’ B2B partnerships would make it more challenging for them to find common ground without hampering partnership strength with either partner.” The researchers noted that strong partnerships involve emotional investment and reciprocity obligations, which can increase pressure on alliance officers managing these relationships.

Practical implications for business leaders

While the research focused on Tanzanian petroleum wholesalers, A/Prof. Ozdemir said these insights have important implications wherever companies rely on a network of partners – whether in tech, healthcare, consumer goods, or logistics. As organisations scale their partnerships, employees responsible for maintaining them face growing demands. For companies seeking prominent network positions while supporting employee wellbeing, the research suggests key recommendations.

Find the right balance in network positioning. While network prominence benefits company performance, leaders should consider employee impact when pursuing new partnerships. The goal is finding an optimal level that unlocks resources, visibility, and market opportunities, and yet doesn’t overburden alliance officers.

Empower employees. Providing alliance officers with decision-making authority and flexibility in managing relationships helps them better handle partnership demands. As the researchers noted: “Job autonomy enables alliance officers handle demands and expectations associated with their firms’ prominence by allowing them tailor their efforts to specific network needs.”

Subscribe to BusinessThink for the latest research, analysis and insights from UNSW Business School

Foster a growth mindset culture. Companies can support alliance officers by creating an environment that emphasises learning and development. “Beyond encouraging individuals to adopt and develop a growth mindset, there are benefits for the organisations in developing a growth mindset culture within,” said A/Prof. Ozdemir. This includes providing contexts for giving and receiving constructive feedback and instilling processes so that challenges are viewed as opportunities for improvement rather than insurmountable obstacles.

Consider partnership portfolio composition. Rather than pursuing only strong partnerships, companies may benefit from maintaining relationships of varying strengths. This can provide alliance officers more flexibility in managing different partner relationships.

Don’t over-engineer knowledge management processes. Formalising the knowledge management processes regarding what knowledge to share with which firms’ partners – and when and how – could streamline decision-making and reduce role stressors, said Dr Ngowi. “In excess, however, such formalisation may cause unproductive bureaucracy further burdening alliance officers. Therefore, firms should structure their knowledge management processes as guiding aids rather than checklists of stringent rules. And leaders should carefully evaluate whether all those formalities are essential or if your teams can manage knowledge flows more flexibly.”