Summary Managing Social Capital

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).