Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Table 1.

Basic statistics of the largest connected components of boards projections.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Figure 1.

Board interlocks among EU countries in 2005 (Left) and 2010 (Right).

The size of a node is proportional to the square root of the number of companies from that country, the thickness of an edge is proportional to the number of interlocks between the boards of companies from the connecting countries. Each node reports in a pie-chart the distribution of companies among the sectors listed on the right.

More »

Figure 1 Expand

Figure 2.

Board interlocks among sectors in 2005 (Left) and 2010 (Right).

The size of a node is proportional to the square root of the number of companies in that sector, the thickness of an edge is proportional to the number of interlocks it represents.

More »

Figure 2 Expand

Figure 3.

Assortative mixing in the boards projection in 2005 (Left) and 2010 (Right).

The plots show the behavior of the weighted average degree of a node's nearest neighbors as a function of the node degree. Thin red lines display linear regressions: slope coefficients are and for 2005 and 2010, respectively, whereas the regression is and .

More »

Figure 3 Expand

Figure 4.

Centrality measures on the boards projection in 2005 (Left) and 2010 (Right).

Each point in the plane corresponds to a company; and coordinates define its betweenness (here renamed brokerage), and eigenvector centrality (here called accessibility) scores, respectively. Due to readability reasons, only those who rank higher are labeled (refer to Tables 2 and 3).

More »

Figure 4 Expand

Table 2.

Top 10 ranked firms with respect to three different measures of centrality – Year 2005.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

Top 10 ranked firms with respect to three different measures of centrality – Year 2010.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Figure 5.

Brokerage against transnational character in 2005 (Left) and 2010 (Right).

Each point in the plane corresponds to a company; and coordinates define its normalized node betweenness (brokerage) and its ratio of transnational edges, respectively. For readability reasons, only company names in the upper -quantile of the betweenness distribution are shown.

More »

Figure 5 Expand

Figure 6.

Communities in the largest connected components of firms projection in 2005 (Left) and 2010 (Right).

The size of a node is proportional to the square root of its number of connections, the thickness of an edge is proportional to the number of shared directors between the connecting boards. Colors refer to the best-found community partition, whose weighted modularity score is for 2005 and for 2010.

More »

Figure 6 Expand

Table 4.

Country distribution of the best-found subdivision into communities – Year 2005.

More »

Table 4 Expand

Table 5.

Country distribution of the best-found subdivision into communities – Year 2010.

More »

Table 5 Expand

Figure 7.

Communities in the subgraph of firms projection in 2005 (Left) and 2010 (Right) considering transnational links only.

The size of a node is proportional to the square root of its number of connections, the thickness of an edge is proportional to the number of shared directors between the connecting boards. Colors refer to the best-found community partition, whose weighted modularity score is for 2005 and for 2010. Note that the largest connected component covers of the transnational subgraph in 2005, and in 2010.

More »

Figure 7 Expand