Social capital and entrepreneurial growth aspiration: a comparison of technology- and non-technology-based nascent entrepreneurs ☆

Social capital is broadly described by researchers as an asset embedded in relationships—of individuals, communities, networks or societies [Admin. Sci. Q. 42 (1997) 339; Acad. Manage. Rev. 23 (1998) 242; Organ. Sci. 8 (1997) 109]. This study will build upon Nahapiet and Ghoshal's [Acad. Manage. Rev. 23 (1998) 242] three dimensions of social capital, including the structural, the relational, and the cognitive. The purpose of this research is to investigate (1) how the three dimensions of social capital interact among themselves in technology-intensive new ventures, (2) to what extent the interactions are different from those in the context of non-technology-based new ventures, (3) how the three dimensions of social capital influence the growth aspiration of the technology-based new ventures in a way that is different from non-technology-based ventures. We examined these questions using a data set from Panel Study of Entrepreneurial Dynamics (PSED) [Reynolds, P. (2000). National panel study of US business start-ups: background and methodology. In Databases for the study of entrepreneurship Vol. 4 (153–227) Greenwich, CT: JAI Press/Elsevier]. Results from structural equation modeling suggest that technology-based entrepreneurs benefit more from relational embeddedness—the freer and greater exchange of non-redundant information. Non-technology-based entrepreneurs benefit more from structural embeddedness—the extensiveness of social networks. Each dimension of social capital reinforces the creation of the other dimensions in technology-based new ventures, which in turn, contributes to entrepreneurial growth aspiration. Our findings suggest that the closure [Am. J. Sociol. 94 (1988) S95] and hole arguments [Burt, R.S. (1992). Structural holes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business Press; Admin. Sci. Q. 42 (1997) 339] are not as contradictory as they might seem. Implications and future research directions are proposed.

[1]  J. Jacobs.  The Death and Life of Great American Cities , 1962 .

[2]  L. Kolvereid.  Growth aspirations among Norwegian entrepreneurs , 1992 .

[3]  James N. Baron,et al.  Resources and Relationships: Social Networks and Mobility in the Workplace , 1997 .

[4]  J. March,et al.  Handbook of organizations , 1966 .

[5]  Howard E. Aldrich,et al.  Entrepreneurship Through Social Networks , 1986 .

[6]  William G. Ouchi,et al.  Markets, Bureaucracies, and Clans. , 1980 .

[7]  Raymond W. Smilor,et al.  The Art and Science of Entrepreneurship , 1986 .

[8]  R. Burt.  The contingent value of social capital. , 1997 .

[9]  P. Adler,et al.  Social Capital: Prospects for a New Concept , 2002 .

[10]  J. Beckmann,et al.  Action control : from cognition to behavior , 1985 .

[11]  P. Davidsson.  Continued Entrepreneurship: Ability, Need, and Opportunity as Determinants of Small Firm Growth , 1991 .

[12]  J. V. Maanen,et al.  Toward a theory of organizational socialization , 1977 .

[13]  R. Hisrich,et al.  ANTECEDENT INFLUENCES ON WOMENOWNED BUSINESSES , 1991 .

[14]  I. MacMillan,et al.  Resource Cooptation Via Social Contracting: Resource Acquisition Strategies for New Ventures , 1990 .

[15]  P. Wallace,et al.  Women, Minorities, and Employment Discrimination. , 1978 .

[16]  Per Davidsson,et al.  Entrepreneurship — And after? A study of growth willingness in small firms , 1989 .

[17]  Glenn C. Loury,et al.  A Dynamic Theory of Racial Income Differences , 1976 .

[18]  C. O'Reilly,et al.  Social Capital at the Top: Effects of Social Similarity and Status on CEO Compensation , 1996 .

[19]  S. Ghoshal,et al.  Social Capital, Intellectual Capital, and the Organizational Advantage , 1998 .

[20]  J. Coleman.  Foundations of Social Theory , 1990 .

[21]  G. Fields,et al.  Social Capital and Capital Gains in Silicon Valley , 1999 .

[22]  M. Lerner,et al.  Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research , 2003 .

[23]  B. Uzzi,et al.  Social Structure and Competition in Interfirm Networks: The Paradox of Embeddedness , 1997 .

[24]  R. Eccles,et al.  Networks and Organizations: Structure, Form, and Action , 1992 .

[25]  B. Johannisson.  Network Strategies: Management Technology for Entrepreneurship and Change , 1986 .

[26]  Howard E. Aldrich,et al.  Entrepreneurial Networks and Business Performance: A Panel Study of Small and Medium-Sized Firms in the Research Triangle , 1995 .

[27]  D. Krackhardt.  Graph theoretical dimensions of informal organizations , 1994 .

[28]  M. M. Hart,et al.  From initial idea to unique advantage: the entrepreneurial challenge of constructing a resource base , 2001, IEEE Engineering Management Review.

[29]  L. Gundry,et al.  The Ambitious Entrepreneur: High Growth Strategies of Women-Owned Enterprises , 2001 .

[30]  Jeffrey H. Dyer,et al.  The Relational View: Cooperative Strategy and Sources of Interorganizational Competitive Advantage , 1998 .

[31]  S. Shane,et al.  Explaining the Formation of International New Ventures: The Limits of Theories from International Business Research , 1994 .

[32]  R. Grant,et al.  Knowledge and the firm: Overview , 1996 .

[33]  P. A. Abetti,et al.  Impact of entrepreneurial and management experience on early performance , 1990 .

[34]  W. Baker.  Market Networks and Corporate Behavior , 1990, American Journal of Sociology.

[35]  K. Talluri,et al.  The Alliances of Spin-Offs Versus Start-Ups: Social Ties in the Genesis of Post-Soviet Alliances , 1998 .

[36]  Icek Ajzen,et al.  From Intentions to Actions: A Theory of Planned Behavior , 1985 .

[37]  I. Ajzen.  The theory of planned behavior , 1991 .

[38]  Andrea L. Larson.  Partner networks: Leveraging external ties to improve entrepreneurial performance☆ , 1991 .

[39]  R. Kramer,et al.  Trust in Organizations: Frontiers of Theory and Research , 1995 .

[40]  Paul D. Reynolds,et al.  National panel study of U.S. business startups: Background and methodology , 2001 .

[41]  N. Lin,et al.  Social Resources and Strength of Ties: Structural Factors in Occupational Status Attainment , 1981, Social Capital, Social Support and Stratification.

[42]  J. Hair.  Multivariate data analysis , 1972 .

[43]  R. Charan,et al.  How networks reshape organizations--for results. , 1991, Harvard business review.

[44]  K. Eisenhardt,et al.  Resource-based View of Strategic Alliance Formation: Strategic and Social Effects in Entrepreneurial Firms , 1996 .

[45]  B. Kogut,et al.  Social Capital, Structural Holes and the Formation of an Industry Network , 1997 .

[46]  R. Putnam.  The Prosperous Community: Social Capital and Public Life , 1993 .

[47]  Stanley Wasserman,et al.  Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications , 1994 .

[48]  Andrea L. Larson.  Network Dyads in Entrepreneurial Settings: A Study of the Governance of Exchange Relationships , 1992 .

[49]  Kathleen R. Allen,et al.  The Creation Corridor: Environmental Load and Pre-Organization Information-Processing Ability , 1992 .

[50]  W. Powell,et al.  The iron cage revisited institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields , 1983 .

[51]  J. Coleman,et al.  Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital , 1988, American Journal of Sociology.

[52]  C. Golightly,et al.  Liking and loaning. , 1972 .

[53]  Jerome A. Katz,et al.  Properties of Emerging Organizations , 1988 .

[54]  S. Ghoshal,et al.  Social Capital and Value Creation: The Role of Intrafirm Networks , 1998 .

[55]  Mark S. Granovetter.  Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness , 1985, American Journal of Sociology.

[56]  B. Uzzi,et al.  The Sources and Consequences of Embeddedness for the Economic Performance of Organizations: The Network Effect , 1996 .