Hr Network Analyst Agent Skill

HR Network Analyst

Applies graph theory and network science to professional relationship mapping. Identifies hidden superconnectors, influence brokers, and knowledge mavens that drive professional ecosystems.

Integrations

Works with: career-biographer, competitive-cartographer, research-analyst, cv-creator

Core Questions Answered

• Who should I know? (optimal networking targets)
• Who knows everyone? (superconnectors for referrals)
• Who bridges worlds? (cross-domain brokers)
• How does influence flow? (information/opportunity pathways)
• Where are structural holes? (untapped connection opportunities)

Quick Start

User: "Who are the key connectors in AI safety research?"

Process:
1. Define boundary: AI safety researchers, 2020-2024
2. Identify sources: arXiv, NeurIPS workshops, Twitter clusters
3. Compute centrality: betweenness (bridges), eigenvector (influence)
4. Classify by archetype: Connector, Maven, Broker
5. Output: Ranked list with network position rationale

Key principle: Most valuable people aren't always most famous—they connect otherwise disconnected worlds.

Gladwellian Archetypes (Quick Reference)

| Type | Network Signature | HR Value |

|------|-------------------|----------|

| Connector | High betweenness + degree, bridges clusters | Best for cross-domain referrals |

| Maven | High in-degree, authoritative, creates content | Know who's good at what |

| Salesman | High influence propagation, deal networks | Close candidates, navigate negotiation |

Full theory: See references/network-theory.md

Centrality Metrics (Quick Reference)

| Metric | Meaning | When to Use |

|--------|---------|-------------|

| Betweenness | Controls information flow | Finding gatekeepers, brokers |

| Degree | Raw connection count | Maximizing referral reach |

| Eigenvector | Quality over quantity | Access to power, rising stars |

| PageRank | Endorsed by important others | Thought leaders |

| Closeness | Can reach anyone quickly | Information spreading |

Analysis Workflows

1. Find Superconnectors for Referrals

• Define target domain → Seed network → Expand → Compute betweenness + degree → Rank

2. Map Domain Influence

• Define boundaries → Multi-source construction → Community detection → Identify brokers

3. Optimize Personal Networking

• Map current network → Map target domain → Find shortest paths → Identify structural holes

4. Organizational Network Analysis (ONA)

• Collect data (surveys, Slack metadata) → Construct graph → Find informal vs formal structure

Detailed workflows: See references/data-sources-implementation.md

Data Sources

| Source | Signal Strength | What to Extract |

|--------|-----------------|-----------------|

| Co-authorship | Very strong | Publication collaborations |

| Conference co-panel | Strong | Speaking relationships |

| GitHub co-repo | Medium-strong | Code collaboration |

| LinkedIn connection | Medium | Professional links |

| Twitter mutual | Weak | Social association |

Multi-source fusion: Weight and combine signals for robust network

When NOT to Use

• Surveillance: Tracking individuals without consent
• Discrimination: Using network position to exclude
• Manipulation: Engineering social influence for harm
• Privacy violation: Accessing non-public data
• Speculation without data: Guessing network structure

Anti-Patterns

Anti-Pattern: Degree Obsession

What it looks like: Only looking at who has most connections

Why wrong: High degree often = noise; connectors differ from popular

Instead: Use betweenness for bridging, eigenvector for influence quality

Anti-Pattern: Static Network Assumption

What it looks like: Treating 5-year-old connections as current

Why wrong: Networks evolve; old edges may be dead

Instead: Recency-weight edges, verify currency

Anti-Pattern: Single-Source Reliance

What it looks like: Using only LinkedIn data

Why wrong: Missing relationships not on LinkedIn

Instead: Multi-source fusion with source-appropriate weighting

Anti-Pattern: Ignoring Context

What it looks like: High betweenness = valuable, regardless of domain

Why wrong: Bridging irrelevant communities isn't useful

Instead: Constrain analysis to relevant domain boundaries

Ethical Guidelines

Acceptable:

• Analyzing public data (conference speakers, publications)
• Aggregate pattern analysis
• Opt-in organizational analysis
• Academic research with proper IRB

NOT Acceptable:

• Scraping private profiles without consent
• Building surveillance systems
• Selling individual data
• Discrimination based on network position

Troubleshooting

| Issue | Cause | Fix |

|-------|-------|-----|

| Can't find data | Domain small/private | Snowball sampling, surveys, adjacent communities |

| False edges | Over-weighting weak signals | Require multiple signals, threshold weights |

| Too large | Unconstrained boundary | K-core filtering, high-weight only |

| Entity resolution | Same person, different names | Unique IDs (ORCID), manual verification |

Reference Files

• references/algorithms.md - NetworkX code patterns, centrality formulas, Gladwell classification
• references/graph-databases.md - Neo4j, Neptune, TigerGraph, ArangoDB query examples
• references/data-sources.md - LinkedIn network data acquisition strategies, APIs, scraping, legal considerations

Core insight: Advantage comes from bridging otherwise disconnected groups, not from connections within dense clusters. — Ron Burt, Structural Holes Theory