1
Managing Social Capital
Inhoud
Lecture 1: Social Capital Theory..............................................................................................................2
Lecture 2: Human and Social Capital......................................................................................................7
Lecture 3: HRM and Social Capital........................................................................................................10
Lecture 4: Social Capital and Turnover..................................................................................................14
, 2
Lecture 1: Social Capital Theory
I – History of Social Capital theory:
Capital: a product of an investment process; part of surplus value.
Capitalization: the investment process in which surplus value is produced and captured by a
class.
Classical theories:
Classical theory (Marx):
o Exploitative relations between two classes will become a classless society,
because the oppressed workers will ultimately take control of the means of
production themselves.
o Dichotomous view on society; only two outcomes were possible.
Neo-Capitalist theories:
Human Capital Theory (Becker, 1964):
Human capital: individual knowledge, skills, abilities and other traits (KSAOs).
o Education and training are an important form of capital.
o Individuals have a choice in what KSAOs they want to invest.
o The labour market determines the value of an individual’s human capital.
Cultural Capital Theory (Bourdieu, 1990):
Cultural capital: the investments on the part of the dominant class (regular people) in
reproducing a set of symbols and meanings of the bourgeoise (upper class).
o Three forms of cultural capital: embodied cultural capital (upbringing and
experience), objectified cultural capital (e.g., artworks, books), and
institutionalized cultural capital (e.g., formal degrees).
o People use cultural capital to maintain their status and exclude others.
Psychological Capital Theory (Luthans, 2002; Doci et al., 2022):
Psychological capital (PsyCap): having high levels of self-efficacy, hope, optimism,
and resilience.
o PsyCap is trait-like, but can be developed.
o PsyCap facilitates individual (and firm) performance.
o PsyCap is rooted in different social learning trajectories due to inequalities in
society (different social expectations, learning opportunities, role models, etc.).
Social capital: who you know.
Relationships
Network of contacts
Friends
Multilevel perspectives:
Differences in social capital between/within individuals:
How do individuals invest in social relations?
o E.g., mentorships
How do individuals generate a return from social relations?
o E.g., feedback seeking
, 3
Differences in social capital between groups:
How do certain groups develop social capital?
o E.g., how does trust in teams facilitate knowledge-sharing?
How do such collective assets enhance group member’s life chances?
o E.g., does being part of a student association provide more access to study
resources?
Social network perspective:
Three types of network structures:
1. Centralized: one person is connected to everyone else, but the rest is not connected to
each other. (flower)
2. Dense, not centralized: there are a lot of connections amongst people.
May be more suitable for preserving resources (Lin, 1999)
3. Fragmented: people from different study associations, who don’t have a lot of
connections to each other.
Small world: a special network structure in which any two people in the network can reach
each other through a short sequence of acquaintances.
Three types of network ties:
1. Closure: everyone is connected to everyone (in a triangle).
2. Ties between actors with different attributes: different genders, different age groups,
teacher/student, supervisor/employee.
3. Two types of ties: dislike, friendship.
II – Conceptualizing and measuring social capital:
Conceptualization of social capital
Social Capital (Lin, 1999): resources embedded in a social structure which are accessed
and/or mobilized in purposive actions.
Two types of resources:
1. Network resources: resources embedded in social network that are directly
accessible.
2. Contact resources: resources embedded within contacts that are used as helpers in an
instrumental action.
Measurement of social capital:
Embedded network resources:
Range of possible resources: e.g., number of colleagues.
, 4
Best possible resources: e.g., expert opinion.
Variety of resources: e.g., interdisciplinary research.
Composition of resources: e.g., all colleagues at assistant professor level.
Embedded contact resources:
Wealth
Status
Power of the contacts (e.g., editorial board member)
Measurement:
Name generator with a content-frame.
Problem: bias towards strong ties (availability bias)
Position generator: names of people who have access to certain resources, inclusion
(…)
Saturation survey: complete mapping of network (restricted to small networks)
III – Antecedents and mobilization of social capital:
What explains inequality of social capital?
Theory of Social Capital:
1. Inequality in social capital: due to restricted access to
network locations and embedded resources.
2. Returns from social capital (capitalization): due to
mobilization of embedded resources
What restricts access to networks and embedded social capital resources?
Relational characteristics: “collective assets”
o Norms
o Trust
o Identification
Structural characteristics:
o Physical separation
o SES
o Poverty
o Lack of time
o Lack of diversity
What do people gain from mobilizing embedded social capital resources?
Returns to instrumental action (searching and accessing resources):
o Economic return/material wealth
o Political return/power/hierarchical positions
o Social return/reputation.
Returns to expressive action (preserving resources):
o Mental health
o Life satisfaction
o Loyalty
, 5
The better accessible the contacts, the easier the mobilization of embedded resources.
However, it takes effort to maintain contacts, and dense social networks can contain redundant
information.
Social Capital (Nahapiet & Ghoshal, 1998): Actual and potential resources embedded
within, available through, and derived from the network of relationships of an individual or
social unit.
Who owns social capital?
It is jointly owned by parties in a relationship, no one has exclusive rights.
It cannot be traded easily compared to economic capital.
Conceptualization:
Structural properties:
o Network ties
o Network configuration
Relational characteristics:
o Trust
o Norms
o Identification
Cognitive characteristics:
o Shared language and codes
o Shared narratives
Forms of knowledge:
Explicit/declarative knowledge: knowing what
Tacit/procedural knowledge: knowing how
Intellectual capital:
Social explicit knowledge: collective knowing what
o Shared corpus of knowledge
Social tacit knowledge: collective knowing how
o Routines that are embedded in the forms of social and institutional practices.
How is intellectual capital created?
1. Combination:
o Incremental: e.g., development within a paradigm
o Radical: e.g., paradigmatic change
2. Exchange:
o Social interaction: e.g., conferences
o Co-activity: e.g., people doing research on similar topic
Conditions for Intellectual capital:
1. Opportunity: e.g., meeting structure
2. Expectancy: e.g., relevance of the meeting
3. Motivation to combine and exchange: e.g., levels of attendees’ energy and enthusiasm
4. Combination capability, which may depend on (a) integrative complexity (individual),
or (b) absorptive capacity (collective).
Managing Social Capital
Inhoud
Lecture 1: Social Capital Theory..............................................................................................................2
Lecture 2: Human and Social Capital......................................................................................................7
Lecture 3: HRM and Social Capital........................................................................................................10
Lecture 4: Social Capital and Turnover..................................................................................................14
, 2
Lecture 1: Social Capital Theory
I – History of Social Capital theory:
Capital: a product of an investment process; part of surplus value.
Capitalization: the investment process in which surplus value is produced and captured by a
class.
Classical theories:
Classical theory (Marx):
o Exploitative relations between two classes will become a classless society,
because the oppressed workers will ultimately take control of the means of
production themselves.
o Dichotomous view on society; only two outcomes were possible.
Neo-Capitalist theories:
Human Capital Theory (Becker, 1964):
Human capital: individual knowledge, skills, abilities and other traits (KSAOs).
o Education and training are an important form of capital.
o Individuals have a choice in what KSAOs they want to invest.
o The labour market determines the value of an individual’s human capital.
Cultural Capital Theory (Bourdieu, 1990):
Cultural capital: the investments on the part of the dominant class (regular people) in
reproducing a set of symbols and meanings of the bourgeoise (upper class).
o Three forms of cultural capital: embodied cultural capital (upbringing and
experience), objectified cultural capital (e.g., artworks, books), and
institutionalized cultural capital (e.g., formal degrees).
o People use cultural capital to maintain their status and exclude others.
Psychological Capital Theory (Luthans, 2002; Doci et al., 2022):
Psychological capital (PsyCap): having high levels of self-efficacy, hope, optimism,
and resilience.
o PsyCap is trait-like, but can be developed.
o PsyCap facilitates individual (and firm) performance.
o PsyCap is rooted in different social learning trajectories due to inequalities in
society (different social expectations, learning opportunities, role models, etc.).
Social capital: who you know.
Relationships
Network of contacts
Friends
Multilevel perspectives:
Differences in social capital between/within individuals:
How do individuals invest in social relations?
o E.g., mentorships
How do individuals generate a return from social relations?
o E.g., feedback seeking
, 3
Differences in social capital between groups:
How do certain groups develop social capital?
o E.g., how does trust in teams facilitate knowledge-sharing?
How do such collective assets enhance group member’s life chances?
o E.g., does being part of a student association provide more access to study
resources?
Social network perspective:
Three types of network structures:
1. Centralized: one person is connected to everyone else, but the rest is not connected to
each other. (flower)
2. Dense, not centralized: there are a lot of connections amongst people.
May be more suitable for preserving resources (Lin, 1999)
3. Fragmented: people from different study associations, who don’t have a lot of
connections to each other.
Small world: a special network structure in which any two people in the network can reach
each other through a short sequence of acquaintances.
Three types of network ties:
1. Closure: everyone is connected to everyone (in a triangle).
2. Ties between actors with different attributes: different genders, different age groups,
teacher/student, supervisor/employee.
3. Two types of ties: dislike, friendship.
II – Conceptualizing and measuring social capital:
Conceptualization of social capital
Social Capital (Lin, 1999): resources embedded in a social structure which are accessed
and/or mobilized in purposive actions.
Two types of resources:
1. Network resources: resources embedded in social network that are directly
accessible.
2. Contact resources: resources embedded within contacts that are used as helpers in an
instrumental action.
Measurement of social capital:
Embedded network resources:
Range of possible resources: e.g., number of colleagues.
, 4
Best possible resources: e.g., expert opinion.
Variety of resources: e.g., interdisciplinary research.
Composition of resources: e.g., all colleagues at assistant professor level.
Embedded contact resources:
Wealth
Status
Power of the contacts (e.g., editorial board member)
Measurement:
Name generator with a content-frame.
Problem: bias towards strong ties (availability bias)
Position generator: names of people who have access to certain resources, inclusion
(…)
Saturation survey: complete mapping of network (restricted to small networks)
III – Antecedents and mobilization of social capital:
What explains inequality of social capital?
Theory of Social Capital:
1. Inequality in social capital: due to restricted access to
network locations and embedded resources.
2. Returns from social capital (capitalization): due to
mobilization of embedded resources
What restricts access to networks and embedded social capital resources?
Relational characteristics: “collective assets”
o Norms
o Trust
o Identification
Structural characteristics:
o Physical separation
o SES
o Poverty
o Lack of time
o Lack of diversity
What do people gain from mobilizing embedded social capital resources?
Returns to instrumental action (searching and accessing resources):
o Economic return/material wealth
o Political return/power/hierarchical positions
o Social return/reputation.
Returns to expressive action (preserving resources):
o Mental health
o Life satisfaction
o Loyalty
, 5
The better accessible the contacts, the easier the mobilization of embedded resources.
However, it takes effort to maintain contacts, and dense social networks can contain redundant
information.
Social Capital (Nahapiet & Ghoshal, 1998): Actual and potential resources embedded
within, available through, and derived from the network of relationships of an individual or
social unit.
Who owns social capital?
It is jointly owned by parties in a relationship, no one has exclusive rights.
It cannot be traded easily compared to economic capital.
Conceptualization:
Structural properties:
o Network ties
o Network configuration
Relational characteristics:
o Trust
o Norms
o Identification
Cognitive characteristics:
o Shared language and codes
o Shared narratives
Forms of knowledge:
Explicit/declarative knowledge: knowing what
Tacit/procedural knowledge: knowing how
Intellectual capital:
Social explicit knowledge: collective knowing what
o Shared corpus of knowledge
Social tacit knowledge: collective knowing how
o Routines that are embedded in the forms of social and institutional practices.
How is intellectual capital created?
1. Combination:
o Incremental: e.g., development within a paradigm
o Radical: e.g., paradigmatic change
2. Exchange:
o Social interaction: e.g., conferences
o Co-activity: e.g., people doing research on similar topic
Conditions for Intellectual capital:
1. Opportunity: e.g., meeting structure
2. Expectancy: e.g., relevance of the meeting
3. Motivation to combine and exchange: e.g., levels of attendees’ energy and enthusiasm
4. Combination capability, which may depend on (a) integrative complexity (individual),
or (b) absorptive capacity (collective).
