Gokhan Ertug, Julia Brennecke, Stefano Tasselli

• Multiplexity, the coexistence of more than one type of relationship between two actors, is a prevalent phenomenon with clear relevance for a wide range of management settings and phenomena. While there is a substantial body of work on multiplexity, the absence of a shared terminology and a typology for the mechanisms and arguments that are used in theorizing about its implications nevertheless hamper its appeal to organizational network scholars and slow its progress. Based on content analysis of 103 studies, we propose “relational harmony,” “task complementarity,” and “relational scope” as three categories to integrate the mechanisms and arguments used in the literature to theorize about the implications of multiplexity. We then survey the literature in light of this typology to show how it is also useful in revealing patterns of theorizing; for example, with respect to the types of relationships that are studied in relation to multiplexity. We conclude with suggestions for future research directions, focusing on how these can beMultiplexity, the coexistence of more than one type of relationship between two actors, is a prevalent phenomenon with clear relevance for a wide range of management settings and phenomena. While there is a substantial body of work on multiplexity, the absence of a shared terminology and a typology for the mechanisms and arguments that are used in theorizing about its implications nevertheless hamper its appeal to organizational network scholars and slow its progress. Based on content analysis of 103 studies, we propose “relational harmony,” “task complementarity,” and “relational scope” as three categories to integrate the mechanisms and arguments used in the literature to theorize about the implications of multiplexity. We then survey the literature in light of this typology to show how it is also useful in revealing patterns of theorizing; for example, with respect to the types of relationships that are studied in relation to multiplexity. We conclude with suggestions for future research directions, focusing on how these can be pursued based on our integrative typology. We hope that the common ground we provide for theorizing about the implications of multiplexity will make it an even more engaging topic for organizational network and management scholars, and place it in the company of more prominently used relational constructs in management research, as aligned with its prevalence and relevance.…