Generosity News

Social Capital

As the poet John Donne observed, “No man is an island”: “…any man’s death”, he continued, “diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind”. As social animals it is natural that we should take an interest in the mechanics of social networking, particularly in this Internet age. Generosity – the subject of this website – is just one example of how people may interact with those around them; but the wider topic of social capital can also be an interesting area of study, helping us understand the ‘how’ and ‘why’ of much altruistic behaviour. In the last few years Tara Hunt and others have put considerable emphasis on the use of properly channelled social capital as a powerful marketing tool. While, IMHO, this ‘whuffie’ approach to social capital may rather trivialise it (perhaps putting too much emphasis on ‘what it can do for me’, rather than viewing the networking process as an essential part of who I am as a human being… not a human ‘doing’!) it does highlight the important role that our interactions play, whether online or IRL. And this applies just as much in the world of charitable and philanthropic activities as in more commercially-orientated ventures.

If you’d like to learn more about social capital, you can download a primer HERE (PDF format). And you might be interested in the following Definitions of Social Capital…

• “a resource that actors derive from specific social structures and then use to pursue their interests; it is created by changes in the relationship among actors.”
  • Baker, W. 1990. ‘Market Networks and Corporate Behaviour.’ American Journal of Sociology 96: 589 – 625.

• “an individual’s personal network and elite institutional affiliations.”
  • Belliveau, M. A, C. A III O’Reilly, and J. B Wade. 1996. ‘Social Capital at the Top: Effects of Social Similarity and Status on CEO Compensation.” Academy of Management Journal 39: 1568 – 1593.

• “the aggregate of the actual or potential resources which are linked to possession of a durable network of more or less institutionalized relationships of mutual acquaintance or recognition.”
  • Bourdieu, P. 1986. ‘The Forms of Capital.’ Pp. 241-58 in Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education, edited by John G Richardson. New York: Greenwood Press.

• “made up of social obligations (‘connections’), which is convertible, in certain conditions, into economic capital and may be institutionalized in the form of a title of nobility.”
  • Bourdieu, P. 1986. ‘The Forms of Capital.’ Pp. 241-58 in Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education, edited by John G Richardson. New York: Greenwood Press.

• “the sum of the resources, actual or virtual, that accrue to an individual or a group by virtue of possessing a durable network of more or less institutionalized relationships of mutual acquaintance and recognition”.
  • Bourdieu, P., and L. P. D. Wacquant. 1992. An Invitation to Reflexive sociology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

• “the number of people who can be expected to provide support and the resources those people have at their disposal”.
  • Boxman, E. A. W, P. M De Grant, and H. D Flap. 1991. ‘The Impact of Social and Human Capital on the Income Attainment of Dutch Managers.” Social Networks 13: 51 – 73.

• “the web of cooperative relationships between citizens that facilitate resolution of collective action problems”.
  • Brehm, John, and W Rahn. 1997. ‘Individual-Level Evidence for the Causes and Consequences of Social Capital.’ American Journal of Political Science 41: 999 – 1023.

• “friends, colleagues, and more general contacts through whom you receive opportunities to use your financial and human capital”.
  • Burt, Ronald. 1992. Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

• “the brokerage opportunities in a network”.
  • Burt, Ronald. 1997. ‘The Contingent Value of Social Capital.’ Administrative Science Quarterly 42: 339-65.

• “Social capital is defined by its function. It is not a single entity, but a variety of different entities having two characteristics in common: They all consist of some aspect of social structure, and they facilitate certain actions of individuals who are within the structure”.
  • Coleman, James S. 1990. Foundations of social theory. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

• “the ability of people to work together for common purposes in groups and organizations”.
  • Fukuyama, Francis. 1995. Trust: the social virtues and the creation of prosperity. London: Hamish Hamilton.

• “Social capital can be defined simply as the existence of a certain set of informal values or norms shared among members of a group that permit cooperation among them”.
  • Fukuyama, Francis. 1997. ‘Social capital and the modern capitalist economy: Creating a high trust workplace.’ Stern Business Magazine 4.

• “a culture of trust and tolerance, in which extensive networks of voluntary associations emerge”.
  • Inglehart, R. 1997. Modernization and post-modernization: cultural, economic and political change in 43 societies. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

• “the process by which social actors create and mobilize their network connections within and between organizations to gain access to other social actors’ resources”.
  • Knoke, D. 1999. ‘Organizational networks and corporate social capital.’ Pp. 17 – 42 in Corporate Social Capital and Liability, edited by S. M. Gabbay. Boston: Kluwer.

• “naturally occurring social relationships among persons which promote or assist the acquisition of skills and traits valued in the marketplace. . . an asset which may be as significant as financial bequests in accounting for the maintenance of inequality in our society”.
  • Loury, G. 1992. ‘The economics of discrimination: Getting to the core of the problem.’ Harvard Journal for African American Public Policy 1: 91 – 110.

• “the sum of the actual and potential resources embedded within, available through, and derived from the network of relationships possessed by an individual or social unit. Social capital thus comprises both the network and the assets that may be mobilized through that network”.
  • Nahapiet, Janine, and Sumantra Ghoshal. 1998. “Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage.” Academy of Management Review 23: 242.

• “….the rules, norms, obligations, reciprocity and trust embedded in social relations, social structures and society’s institutional arrangements which enable members to achieve their individual and community objectives.”
  • Narayan (1997) Voices of the Poor: Poverty and Social Capital in Tanzania, World Bank, Washington D.C., USA.

• “the web of social relationships that influences individual behavior and thereby affects economic growth”.
  • Pennar, K. 1997. “The tie that leads to prosperity: The economic value of social bonds is only beginning to be measured.” Business Weekly: 153 – 155.

• “the ability of actors to secure benefits by virtue of membership in social networks or other social structures”.
  • Portes, Alejandro. 1998. “Social capital: its origins and applications in modern sociology.” Annual Review of Sociology 24: 1-25.

• “those expectations for action within a collectivity that affect the economic goals and goal-seeking behavior of its members, even if these expectations are not oriented toward the economic sphere”.
  • Portes, Alejandro, and Julia Sensenbrenner. 1993. “Embeddedness and immigration: Notes on the social determinants of economic action.” American Journal of Sociology 98: 1320 – 1350.

• “features of social organization such as networks, norms, and social trust that facilitate coordination and cooperation for mutual benefit”.
  • Putnam, Robert D. 1995. “Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital.” Journal of Democracy 6: 65-78.

• “…features of social organisation, such as trust, norms [or reciprocity], and networks [of civil engagement], that can improve the efficiency of society by facilitating co-ordinated actions.”
  • Putnam, Leonardi and Nanetti (1993) Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy, Princeton University Press, Princeton, USA.

• “the set of elements of the social structure that affects relations among people and are inputs or arguments of the production and/or utility function”.
  • Schiff, M. 1992. “Social capital, labour mobility, and welfare: The impact of uniting states.” Rationality and Society 4.

• “those voluntary means and processes developed within civil society which promote development for the collective whole”.
  • Thomas, C. Y. 1996. “Capital markets, financial markets and social capital.” Social and Economic Studies 45: 1 – 23.

• “the information, trust, and norms of reciprocity inhering in one’s social networks”.
  • Woolcock, Michael. 1998. “Social capital and economic development: Towards a theoretical synthesis and policy framework.” Theory and Society 27: 151-208.

• “….the institutions, relationships, and norms that shape the quality and quantity of a society’s social interactions.”
  • World Bank (2000) What is Social Capital? http://goo.gl/smMzC (accessed 19 December 2011)