How do We Know Who Knows Who: An Empirical Assessment of Social Capital Usage for Turkish and Greek Cypriot Steel Manufacturing Industry Managers

Yıl 2016, Cilt: 30 Sayı: 4, 702 - 724, 01.10.2016

Mustafa Sağsan , Nazım Adem Karasalih

Öz

This paper is concerned with the social capital measurement of Turkish Cypriot and Greek Cypriot steel-manufacturing industry managers studied through the social network analysis method. The aim of thisresearch undertaking isto find out the social capital usage of managers constructed on a relational basis. The comparative analysis between the two communities is conducted to understand to what extent Cypriot managers employed in steel-manufacturing companies fill in structural holes occurring in the Cypriot community. The epistemological dimension of this study is based on the anti-positivist paradigm. For this reason, the methodology refers to the quantitative analysis.10 Turkish Cypriot and 10 Greek Cypriot managers are involved in this study by using the focus group techniques in the context of quantitative methodology. The brief definition on social capital is given to the respondents and they were asked to mark their social relationhip between 0, which represents no relationship, to 10, which refers to the strongest level of relationship. After gathering data, the UCINET software program was used by mapping out the social relationship among the managers. The evidence accumulated confirmed that social capital has played a vital role in the creation of new social networks in the case of Cyprus. The analysis has highlighted the inadequacy of the social interactions between the two communities, likely stemming from the political and economic issues and challenges of the Island.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Social network analysis, relational social capital, structural holes, social embeddedness, brokerage roles, Turkish Cypriots, Greek Cypriots, island economies.

Kimin Kimi Bildiğini Nasıl Biliriz: Kıbrıslı Türk ve Rum Çelik Sanayi Yöneticileri İçin Sosyal Sermaye Kullanımının Ampirik Bir Değerlendirmesi

Öz

Bu çalışma özetle Kıbrıslı Türk ve Kıbrıslı Rum yöneticilerin sosyal ağ analizi metoduyla sosyal sermaye kullanımlarının ölçümlenmesiyle ilgilidir. Bu araştırmanın amacı yöneticilerin aralarında oluşan ilişkisel sosyal sermayenin kullanımını bulmaktır. Çelik sektöründe hizmet vermekte olan Kıbrıslı yöneticilerin Kıbrıs toplumu içerisinde oluşan yapısal boşlukları ne denli doldurabildiğini ölçebilmek adına her iki toplum arasında bir karşılaştırma analizi yürütülmüştür. Bu çalışmanın epistemolojik boyutu anti pozitivist bir yaklaşım üzerine dayanmaktadır.Bu nedenle, çalışma yöntemi kantitatif analize dayanmaktadır. Araştırmada 10 Kıbrıslı Türk ve 10 Kıbrıslı Rum yönetici bir araya getirilerek odak grup tekniğiyle veriler toplanmıştır. Kendilerine sosyal sermaye ile ilgili bilgi verildikten sonra birbirlerini ne kadar iyi tanıdığı sorulmuştur. Aralarında hiç tanıdıklık yok ise 0, birbirleriyle çok iyi tanıdıklık düzeyine sahipseler 10 puan verilmiştir. Daha sonra bu veriler Ucinet programına girilerek sosyal ağ ilişkilerinin haritası çıkartılmıştır. Kıbrıs örneğinde Sosyal Sermaye yeni sosyal ağların oluşumunda çok önemli rol oynamıştır. Analizlere bakıldığı zaman her iki toplum arasındaki sosyal etkileşimin eksikliği görülmüştür. Bu durumun Kıbrıs adasının politik ve ekonomik durumundan oluşmuş olabileceği öngörülmektedir. Sonuç olarak her iki toplumun çelik sektöründe hizmet veren yöneticilerinin ilişkisel sermayelerini artırmalarının toplumda daha sağlıklı sosyal sermaye kullanımına ve yeni sosyal ağların oluşumuyla ekonomik ve politik sorunlarında çözümüne ulaşılabileceği tespit edilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Sosyal ağ analizi, ilişkisel sosyal sermaye, yapısal boşluklar, sosyal yerleşiklik, aracılık rolleri, Kıbrıslı Türkler, Kıbrıslı Rumlar, ada ekonomileri

Kaynakça

• Adler, P. S. (2001). Market, hierarchy, and trust: the knowledge economy and the future capitalism, Organization Science, 12(2), 215-534.
• Adler, P. S. and Kwon, S. W. (2002). Social capital: prospects for a new concept. The Academy of Management Review, 27(1), 17-40.
• Ahlerup, P., Olsson and O., Yanagizawa, D. (2009). Social capital vs. Institutions in the growth process. European Journal ofPolitical Economy, 25, 1-14.
• Ahlin, B., Drnovsek and M., Hisrich, D. (2014). Exploring the moderating effects of obsorptive capacity on the relationship between social networks and innovation. Journal for East European Management Studies, 19(2), 213-235.
• Apostolides, A., Apostolides, C. and Güryay, E. (2012). From Conflict to Economic Interdependece in Cyprus. Peace Review: A Journal ofSocial Justice, 24, 430-437.
• Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) (2000). Discussion Paper. Measuring Social Capital; current collection and future directions.
• Barr, A. (2000). Social capital and technical information flows in the Ghanaian manufacturing sector. Oxford Economic Papers, 52, 539-559.
• Baker, W.E.(1990). Market Networks and corporatebehavior.American Journal ofSociology, 96, 589-625.
• Baker, W.E. and Faulkner, R.R. (2002). Interorganizational networks Joel A. C. Baum (Ed), The Blackwell Companion to Organisations, (pp. 520-540). Oxford: Blackwell.
• Bontis, N. and Fitz-enz (2002). Intellectual capital ROI: a causal map of human capital antecedents and consequents. Journal ofIntellectual Capital, 3(2), 223-247.
• Borgatti, S.P. and Everett, M.G. (1989). The class of all regular equivalences: algebraic structure and computation, Social Networks, 11, 65-88.
• Borgatti, S.P., Everett, M.G. and Freeman, L.C. (2002). UCINET for windows: software for social network analysis, Analytic Technologies, Harvard, MA.
• Bourdieu, P. and Wacquant, L. J. D. (1992). An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology. The University of Chicago Press, USA.
• Bowey, J. L. and Easton, G. (2007). Net social capital processes. Journal ofBusiness & Industrial Marketing, 22(3), 171-177.
• Burt, R. S. (1992). Structural holes: the social structure ofcompetition. UK: Harvard University Press.
• Burt, R. S. (1997). The contingent value of social capital. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(2),339-365.
• Burt, R. S. (2004). Structural holes and good ideas. American Journal ofSociology, 110(2), 349-99.
• Burt, R. S. (2005). Brokerage & closure. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
• Burt, R. S., Hogarth, R. M. and Michaud, C. (2000). The social capital of French and American managers. Organisation Science, 11, 123-147.
• Burt, R.S. (2007). Second hand brokerage: evidence on the importance of local structure for managers, bankers, and analysts.Academy ofManagement Journal, 50(1), 119-148.
• Central Intelligence Agency, CIA, (2012). The World FactBook. Retrieved from [https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/cy.html]
• Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital. The American Journal of Sociology, The University of Chicago, 94, 95-120.
• Cope, J., Jack, S. and Rose, M. B. (2007). Social capital and entrepreneurship: An introduction. International Small Business Journal, 25(3), 213-219.
• Dhanaraj, C. and Parkhe, A. (2006). Orchestrating innovation networks. Academy of Management Review, 31(3), 659-669.
• Emirbayer, M. and Goodwin, J. (1994). Network Analysis, Culture and the Problem of Agency. American Journal ofSociology, 99(6), 1411-1454.
• Echebarria, C. and Barrutia, J. M. (2013). Limits of Social Capital as a Driver of Innovation: An Empirical Analysis in theContext of European Regions. Regional Studies Association, 47 (7), 1001-1017.
• Eisenberg, E.M., Johnson, Z. and Pieterson, W. (2015). Leveraging Social Networks for Strategic Success. International Journal ofBusiness Communication, 52(1), 143-154.
• Fukuyama, F. (1995). Trust: the social virtues and the creation ofprosperity. New York: The Free Press.
• Fukuyama, F. (1997). ‘Social Capital', Tanner Lecture on Human Values, pp. 374-484. Retrieved from tannerlectures.utah.edu/_documents/a-to-z/f/Fukuyama98.pdf.
• Ferris, G. R. and Treadway, D. C (2012). Politics in organisations: theory and research considerations. LLC, USA: Taylor and Francis Group.
• Gargiulo, M. and Benassi, M. (2000). Trapped in your own net? Network cohesion, structural holes, and the adaptation of social capital. Organisation Science, 11(2), 183-196.
• Gantam, A. (2000). Collaboration networks, structural holes, and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45, 425-455.
• Gonzalez, G. R., Claro, D.P. and Palmatier, R.W. (2014). Synergistic effects of relationship managers' social networks on sales performance. Journal ofMarketing, 78, 76-94.
• Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal ofSociology, 78 (6), 1360-1380.
• Granovetter, M. (1983). The strength of weak ties: a network theory revisited. Sociological Theory, 1, 201-233.
• Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic action and social structure: the problem of Embeddedness. American Journal ofSociology, 91, 481-510.
• Granovetter, M. (1992). Economic institutions as social constructions: a framework for analysis. Acta Sociologica, 35(3), 3-11.
• Granovetter, M. (2005). The impact of social structure on economic outcomes. Journal ofEconomic Perspectives, 19(1), 33-50.
• Gulati, R. (1998). Alliances and networks. Strategic Management Journal, 19(4), 293-317.
• Gulati, R., Nohria and N., Zaheer, A. (2000). Strategic networks. Strategic Management Journal, 21(special issue), 203-215.
• Gülle, M. T. (2015). Is it possible for Turkey to be an information society?. Turkish Librarianship, 29(1), 57-62.
• Harper, R. and Kelly, M. (2003). Measuring Social Capital in the United Kingdom. Office for National Statistics, 1-23.
• Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture's consequences: international differences in work-raleted values. Beverly Hills, London, Sage Publications.
• Inkpen, A. C. and Tsang, E. W. K. (2005). Social capital, networks and knowledge transfer. Academy ofManagement Review, 30(1), 146-165.
• Jablin, F.M. and Putnam, L.J. (2001). The New Handbook of OrganizationalCommunication: Advances in Theory, Research and Methods, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
• Jimenez, J. M., Jimenez, J. J. A. M., Santamaria, L. M. S. and Vargas, V. (2011). An empirical assessment of individual-level determinants of social capital in Central European countires. Journal for East European Management Studies, (3), 237-250.
• Kennedy, B.P., I. Kawachi, D. Prothrow-Stith, K. Lochner, and V. Gupta (1998). SocialCapital, Income Inequality, and Firearm Violent Crime. Social Science Medicine, 47, 7-17.
• Kilduff, M. and Brass D. (2010). Organizational social network research. The Academy ofManagement Annals, 4(1), 317-357.
• La Porta, Rafael, Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes, Andrei Shleifer, and Robert W. Vishny. (1997). Legal Determinants of External Finance. Journal ofFinance, 52(3), 1131-50.
• Lawson, B., Tyler, B. B., and Cousins, P. D. (2008). Antecedents and consequences of social capital on buyer performance improvement. Journal ofOperations Management, 26(3), 446-460.
• Lin, N. (2000). Inequality in Social Capital. Contemporary Sociology, 29(6), 785-795.
• Lopez-Fernandez, M. and Sanchez-Gardey, G. (2010). Managing the effects of diversity on social capital, Equality, Diversity and Inclusion. An International Journal, 29(5), 491-516.
• Loosemore, M. (1998). Social network analysis: using a quantitative tool within an interpretative context to explore the management of construction crises. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 5(4), 315-326.
• Lungwitz, R.E. and Campagna, S. (2006). Co-ordination media in cross-national networks ofsmall and medium-sized enterprises. Journal for East European Management Studies, 4, 372-380.
• Moran, P. (2005). Structural and relational embeddedness: social capital and managerial performance. Strategic Management Journal, 26(12), 1129-1151.
• Molina, F. X., and Teresa, T. (2010). Social networks: effects of social capital on firm innovation. Journal ofSmall Business Management, 48(2), 258-279.
• Monge, R. P. and Contractor, S. N. (2001). The new handbook of organizational communication: Advances in theory, research and methods, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
• Nahapiet, J. and Ghoshal, S. (1997). Social capital, intellectual capital and the creation ofvalue in firms. Academy ofManagement Best Paper Proceedings, 35-39.
• Nahapiet, J. and Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organisational advantage. Academy ofManagement Review, 23, 242-266.
• Narayan, Deepa (1997). Voices ofthe poor: poverty and social capital in Tanzania,. Environmentally and Socially Sustainable DevelopmentNetwork, Studies and Monographs Series 20. Washington DC: World Bank.
• O'Neill, B. S. and Adya, M. (2007). Knowledge sharing and the psychological contract: managing knowledge workers across different stages of employment. Journal ofManagerial Psychology, 22(4), 411-436.
• Ozen, S. ve Aslan, Z. (2006). İçsel ve dışsal sosyal sermaye yaklaşımları açısından Türk toplumunun sosyal sermaye potansiyeli: Ortadoğu sanayi ve ticaret merkezi (OSTIM) örneği, (The social capital potential ofTurkish society from the internal and external social capital perspectives: The case ofOSTIM), Akdeniz I.I.B.F. Dergisi, (12), 130-161.
• Parkhe, A., Wasserman, S., and Ralston, A. D. (2006). New frontiers in network development. Academy ofManagement Review, 31(3), 560-568.
• Pharr, S. J. and Putnam, R. D. (2000). Disaffected Democracy. What's Troubling the Trilateral Countries?, Princeton (NJ), Princeton University Press.
• Polanyi, K. (1992). The economy as an instituted process, Granovetter, M. (der), The Sociology of Economic Life, New York: Westview Press.
• Portes, A. and Sensenbrenner, J. (1993). Embeddedness and Immigration: Notes on the Social Determinants ofEconomic Action. The American Journal ofSociology, 98(6), 1320-1350.
• Porter, K. A. and Powell, W. W. (2006). Networks and organisations in The sage handbook of organization studies, 2nd ed. (pp. 776-799). Editors S. Clegg, C. Hardy, T. B. Lawarence and W. Nord. London: Sage.
• Putnam, R. (1993). Making Democracy Work, Princeton University Press, Princeton, Nj.
• Putnam, R. (2000). Bowling alone, New York: Simon and Schuster.
• Robinson, James A., Verdier and Thierry (2002). The Political Economy of Clientelism. CEPR Discussion Paper No. 3205.
• Rogers, E. M. and Kincaid, D. L. (1981). Communication networks: toward a new paradigm for research. New York: The Free Press.
• Rowley, T., Behrens, D. and Krachardt, D. (2000). Redundant governance structures: an analysis of structural and relational embeddedness in the steel and semiconductor industries. Strategic Management Journal, 21, 369-386.
• Sargut, A. S. (2006). Sosyal sermaye: yapının sunduğu bir olanak mi, yoksa bireyin amaçlı eylemi mi?, (Social capital: enabling structures or purposive action?) Akdeniz I.I.B.F. Dergisi, 12, 1-13.
• Serageldin, I (1999). Social capital, Growth and Poverty: A survey ofCross country evidence by Stephan Knack. Social capital Initiative Working Paper, 7.
• Sağsan, M., Yücel, R. ve Sözen, C. (2010). An alternative way in overcoming global crises: information acquiring in the social capital and capacity usage. Bilgi Dünyası, 11(1), 140-154.
• Scull, S. (2001). Social capital: a briefing paper for module development, [Ipswich, Qld. : UQ Boilerhouse Community Engagement Centre]. Retrieved from http ://www.uq.edu.au/boilerhouse/index.html?page=33708
• Sözen, C. H. ve Kırkbeşoğlu, E. (2010). Kamu Kurumlarında Sosyal Ağlar ve Bilgi Yönetimi: Örnek Bir Çalışma. M. Sağsan, (Yay. Haz.). Bilgi Yönetimi Disiplini ve Uygulamaları Kamu Kurumlarından Örneklerle içinde (ss. 191-217). Ankara: Siyasal Kitabevi.
• Sözen, C., Basim, N. ve Hazir, K. (2009). Social network analysis in organisational studies. International Journal ofBusiness and Management, 1, 21-35.
• Sözen, H. C. (2012). Social networks and power in organizations: a research on the roles and positions ofthe junior level secretaries in and organizational network. Personal Review, 41(4), 487-512.
• Sözen, H. C., Varoglu, D., Yeloglu, O., Basim, H. N., Varoglu, M. A. ve Ersoy, K. (2012). Türkiye'de Işsizlik ve Sosyal Sermaye: Örgütlerin istihdam kararları ve stratejileri üzerine bir araştırma, Ankara: Siyasal Basimevi.
• Swedberg, R. and Granovetter, R. (1985). The sociology of economic life. New jersey: Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs.
• Skanavis, C. and Sarri, E. (2002). The role ofenvironmental education as atool for environmental management in Cyprus: strategies and activities. Environmental Management andHealth, 13(5), 529-544.
• Sirin, C. (2012). Examining the role of identity in negotiation decision making: the case of Cyprus. International Journal ofConflict Management, 23(4), 1-55.
• Tsai, W. and Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital and value creation: the role ofIntrafirm networks. The Academy ofManagement Journal, 41(4), 464-476.
• Uzzi, B. (1997). Social structure and competition in interim networks: the paradox of embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 35-67.
• Vryonides, M. (2009). Applying bourdie's concepts ofsocial and cultural capital in educational research in Greece and Cyprus. Quantifying Theory: Pierre Bourdieu, Humanities, Social Sciences and Law.
• Woolcock, M. and Narayan, D. (2000). Social capital: implications for development theory, research and policy. The World Bank Research Observer, 15(2), 225-249.
• Xiao, Z. and Tsui, A. S. (2007). When brokers may not work: the cultural contingency ofsocial capital in Chinese high-tech firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52, 1-31.