If social capital is the foundation of networks, and players are the building blocks then trust is the mortar that holds the strategically together. According to (Cross, Borgatti & Parker, 1992), informal employee networks and relationships can be far more telling than relationships built as a result of a formal structure. Existing within these often overlooked relationships are a strong element of social capital and trust (Adler & Kwon, 2002).
Within informal networks, players invest in building their network of actors that foster power, solidarity and information gathering (Adler & Kwon, 2002). Using a network analysis involving the advice network, trust network and communication network, mangers can discover how these players relate to each other and trust each other (Krackhardt & Hanson, 1993). By examining relationships and understanding the differences of operational networks, personal networks and strategic networks and devising a plan to build them (Ibarra & Hunter, 2007) a leader can connect nonredundant players, bridge structural holes and increase social capital amongst a team or cross-departmentally. When bridges are gapped and interconnectivity happens, trust begins to grow. The analysis of network structure must include the quality of ties and attention to both direct and indirect ties (Adler & Kwon, 2002). Additionally, in organizations, informal networks have a strong element of reciprocity (Adler & Kwon, 2002). This reciprocity is often unnoticed by managers, yet, it resolves internal problems and creates communal ties (Adler & Kwon, 2002). If one player does something for another, regardless of motivation, trust will develop (Adler & Kwon). Adler & Kwon (2002) suggest managers pay attention to this reciprocity and invest in bridging social capital among individuals.
Social capital can exist in formal networks and can be grown, using informal networks, depending on the resources made available within an organization (Adler & Kwon, 2002). For example, a technology company who is seeing slump in sales may not understand why their once phenomenal product is no longer the leader in the industry. The sales department, who has no contact with R&D or marketing, is frustrated and resentment among these players is growing a affecting morale. The R&D department, who has little contact with the sales and marketing departments, is unaware of new competitive trends and keeps designing similar products. If the company were to form a strategic task force that included key players from each department (Krackhardt & Hanson, 1993) the sales department could relay important consumer information to the marketing and R&D department. In turn marketing and R&D could then answer the concerns of the consumer by creating innovative products and strategically marketing them. This task force will act as a collaborative effort, bridge structural holes, grow social capital and create an element of trust.
As argued by Leana and Van Buren (1999), the source of organizational social capital lie in accessibility and trust among actors. As evidenced by the Calder example (Krackhardt and Hanson, 1993), respect does not equate to trust. In order for mangers to cultivate organizational social capital and foster trust among players, them must encourage social and inter-departmental ties, grow motivation and provide resources in more innovative ways other than cross-departmental memos, chat rooms or video conferences (Adler & Kwon, 2002). True social capital and trust can be built by engagement, social interaction and reciprocation (Adler & Kwon, 2002).
References
Adler, P. S., & Kwon, S. (2002). Social capital: Prospects for a new concept. Academy of
Management Review, 27(1), 17-40.
Leana, C.R., & Van Buren, H. J., III. (1999). Organizational social capital and employment practices. Academy of Management Review, 24, 538-555.
Krackhardt, D., & Hanson, J. (1993). Informal networks: The company behind the chart. Harvard Business Review. 104-111
Ibarra, H., & Hunter, M., (2007). How leaders create and use networks. Harvard Business Review. 1-9.
Cross, R., Borgatti, S. P., & Parker, A., (2002). Making invisible work visible: Using social network analysis to support strategic collaboration. California Management Review, 44(2), 25-46.
Interesting post, Lisa. In the readings this week we learned about strong and weak ties. How do you think tie strength plays into the formation of social capital and trust (also see Levin & Cross, 2004)? In your own career, have strong or weak ties been more important? Why?
ReplyDeleteGood questions, Courtney. The Levin & Cross article has great information to add to the topic of my post. I should have used contributions from it. Like Brenda, I may be experiencing end of semester "brain drain."
Delete"Mayer et al. (1995, p. 712) define trust as "the willingness of a part to be vulnerable" (Levin & Cross, 20004). According to Levin & Cross (2004), trust leads to greater knowledge exchange and absorption. As Levin & Cross (2004) state, people have greater trust in their stronger ties, because the players have proven their competencies to each other. However, because nonredundant knowledge can come from trusted weaker ties (Levin & Cross, 2004), weaker ties can help build one's social capital in a more diverse way. For example, someone on Linkedin may be secondarily connected to me through my director. Because I trust and seek knowledge from my director, I'm interested in learning more about those who are connected to her, and by association, I trust that they also have knowledge to share. If I connect with those weak ties, I have expanded my social capital and may potentially turn a weak tie into a strong one.
I think both have been equally important. My weak ties allow me to build on social capital by connecting to and learning from them in an ancillary way, like what their previous and existing careers are and how they got there. Whereas my strong ties have helped me further my career. For example, because my current director and I trust each other, she is a strong tie. We exchange knowledge, and I have better insight to how networks within the company operate. Without this strong tie, I would not have important information that helps make me successful in my current position. Additionally, my strong ties who have empirical evidence of my performance have written letters of recommendation to potential employers and provided sound career advice, i.e., knowledge.
Levin, D., & Cross, R. (2004). The strength of weak ties you can trust: The mediating role of trust in effective knowledge trasfer. Management Science, 50(11), 1477-1490.
Lisa, I liked your blog a lot. Social capital has been loosely mentioned in our weekly live sessions, and I've been waiting to learn more. Your post, especially the last two paragraphs, explained the term in a comprehensive way. I understand social capital can be earned through building trust and more engaging interaction, but can you give an example of social capital in use? Also, I like your reaction to Courtney's questions. Strong ties can definitely further one's career.
ReplyDeleteThank you, Thomas! I actually just read and commented on your post. I really enjoyed reading it and learned a lot ~ very intriguing. Yes, social capital has been a growing interest of mine since the mid-term paper and my study of structural holes. It's a very fascinating and complex theroy for me, with so many interesting twists and turns and more than one definition. I've been picking Casey's brain on it, when we have time. He studied that extensively in his undergrad work. Courtney's questions were very good ones that helped me further understand how ties (weak and strong) can strengthen one's social capital.
DeleteLisa, I really enjoyed the great examples you used in your blog and response to highlight the importance of social capital. In your blog you used the example of the disconnect between the R&D and sales team to show how a company could benefit by investing in employees' social capital to bridge knowledge gaps. You also mentioned in your response how LinkedIn can be a great tool, at an individual level, to build social capital. This confirms what we've been learning in our readings this week - that strategic networks (and as I've learned from your blog, social capital) can be advantageous both for organizations and individuals. Thanks!
ReplyDeleteThanks Marissa! As I expressed in my reply to Thomas, I find this topic fascinating. It's also interesting to me how trust can make or break ties, (strong or weak), bridge structural holes and fortify organizations at all levels. It would appear that the operative word in networking is "work." It takes effort to build, strengthen and utilize networks, formal or informal, and to keep them alive and growing.
ReplyDelete