This conclusion has its origin in the work of drooling them (2000), about the different types of communication networks. Networks are horizontal and vertical. The networks defined as horizontal, appear in the group, when there is egalitarian climate, that is, when each individual within the group is perceived as a full member, and as such, enjoys status of equality with respect to the other members.

This type of network, will include two subtypes: first, the network of circle, which exists in the groups whose work and power structures are truly democratic. The leader seeks in maintaining open communications among members. The second is the network of chains, typical in groups Laissiz Faire authority is exercised in a passive way, communications are set simply according to the attractions or similar affinities between the members. This prevents the integration of the group, communication makes, based on misunderstandings and ambiguities, which distorts relationships. Vertical networks, are seen in groups of work whose interpersonal relationships are hierarchical, and the lines of authority are defined in form pyramidal Summit is the Supreme authority.

Relationships are hierarchical in terms of subordination and domain. These are subdivided into: Y: network communications occur in an apparently democratic climate but on track to become autocratic, since certain members are realizing that one of them is dedicated to take control of the group, hoping the absolute power for himself. Open communications become closed, spontaneous become artificial. The network at a Conference: is characteristic of groups autocratic, within which the authority is focused on one single, this authority is exercised in an arbitrary manner and according to whether willingness. All communications are controlled by him.