assesing social capital

8/3/2019 Assesing Social Capital

1/21

71

ISSN 2029-4581. ORGAN IZAIONS AND MAR KES IN EMERGING ECONOMIES, 2010, VOL. 1, No. 2(2)

ASSESSING SOCIAL CAPITAL

FO OGANISATIONAL PEFOMANCE:INITIAL EXPLORTOY INSIGHTSFOM GHANA

Dan Oori*Universiy o Ghana Business School, Ghana

Jocelyn SackeyUniversiy o Ghana Business School, Ghana

Absrac.Social Capial is a concep ha describes good qualiy social relaions ha can lead o muu-al bene. Te undamenal proposiion o social capial heory is ha neworks o relaionships granaccess o resources, especially inormaion benes no available o non-members o he nework. Tissudy assessed he uncions o social capial wihin Ghanaian organizaions, described he paternsand deerminans o social capial use wihin organizaions and explored how social capial conribu-es o rm perormance using a sample ame o rms lised in he Ghana Club 100. A quesionnaire

eld survey supplemened by personal inerviews was chosen as he mos appropriae design or hisinvesigaion. Employees were sampled across he organizaional hierarchy based on heir responsi-biliies held, posiions, ype o relaionship held wih ohers wihin he organisaion. Daa was alsocolleced on he demographic characerisics and organisaional dynamics. Te resuls showed hasocial capial is criical o knowledge sharing in he Ghanaian organizaion; ha i helps o ge hingsdone and helps in he atainmen o organisaional objecives. Te ndings also suggesed ha hreedeerminae variables o social capial: reciprociy, rus and insiuional ies, have he mos signican

posiive relaionship wih organisaional perormance. In view o ha, he sudy recommends harms ake a proacive approach owards promoing, building and mainaining viable social neworkswihin heir srucures in order o derive maximum bene om i.

Key words:social capial, organisaional perormance, Ghana

1. Inroducion

Te debae surrounding social capial was spearheaded by sociologiss and poliical sci-eniss like Bourdieu (1983; 1986) and Coleman (1988), who sirred academic debaeson he social conex o educaion. However, i was works by Punam (1993, 2000,2002) ha launched social capial as a popular ocus o research and policy discussion.

* Mailing address: Deparmen o Organizaion and Human Resource Managemen, Universiy o GhanaBusiness School, P. O. Box LG 78, Legon, Ghana. E-mail: [email protected],[email protected].


2/21

72

Te World Bank (1999) also len suppor o he populariy o he concep by singling iou as a useul organising idea. Tey argued ha social cohesion is criical or socieieso prosper economically and or developmen o be susainable. Social capial has alsoin recen imes capured he atenion o organizaion and managemen scholars whohave shown an increased ineres in he concep as a way o hinking abou organiza-

ional developmen.In general, social capial is he glue ha brings and holds communiies ogeher (Co-

hen & Prusak, 2001). I reers o neworked ies o goodwill, muual suppor, sharedlanguage, shared norms, social rus, and a sense o muual obligaion ha people canderive value rom. Subsequenly, social capial is in relaion o value gained rom beingconsiuen o a nework. By being a member o a group, people gain access o resourcesha non-members do no have. Tese resources range rom example, access o poenialcareer moves, and access o resources in enrepreneurial sar-up processes, o access o

cooperaive services in developmenal counries.Alhough he concep o social capial has a much longer exisence (c. Hanian,1916), discussions on he opic have acceleraed in he las wo decades. Many scholarsin dieren elds have urned heir atenion o he sudy o social capial. Te ermhas been used in a mulipliciy o ways. Some researchers have described i as he a-ribue which enables an individual o dig up advanages as a resul o his or her rela-ive saus or locaion in a group (e.g. Bur, 1997). Oher scholars have described i asan atribue o communiies (e.g. Punam, 1993a), naions (e.g. Fukuyama, 1995), andindusry neworks (e.g. Walker, Kogu & Shan, 1997). Nahapei and Ghoshal (1998)

also reerred o social capial as an organizaional phenomenon when hey describedmechanisms by which social capial can aciliae he inellecual capabiliy o rms.Tereore, social capial can be seen as he posiive value inheren in social relaionsand neworks. Indeed, Browning e al. (2000) noe ha he concep o social capialhas ypically been regarded as a resource rooed in social srucure ha may aid in hepursui o a wide variey o benecial oucomes. However, some researchers (Pores &Landol, 1996; Sandeur & Laumann, 1998), as cied by Browning e al. (2000) haveexpressed concerns abou he pervasive ocus on he benecial eecs o social capialand a endency o neglec is poenial downside. For insance, Flache (1996) opines

ha in a social dilemma, acors may someimes nd i atracive o uilise social rela-ions or personal ends ha are unrelaed o or even in conic wih collecive goals(p. 3), as cied by Browning e al. (2000).

Social capial: personal neworks as an asse

Social Capial heory is mainly based on he proposiion ha he neworks o relaion-ships wihin and wihou a group consiue a valuable resource or members o he group(Bourdieu, 1986, p.249). Tis resource, consrued as capial, is embedded wihin ne-

works o muual acquainance and recogniion (Nahapie & Ghoshal, 1998). Social Capi-al is hus an inheren value in human relaionships and connecions. Tis implies ha


3/21

73

Social Capial is a resource inpu ha aciliaes producion, bu is no consumed or usedup in producion (Coleman, 1994). I also implies ha Social Capial is an aspec o socialorganizaion and undamenally a propery o he group, communiy or sociey.

Te idea o Social Capial can be inuiively grasped by conceiving i as wha or-dinary language calls connecions: people are conneced o ohers based on rus in

some ohers. People are obliged o suppor ohers depending on exchange wih cerainohers. An individuals connecions are his or her asses. Tose asses in essence, con-siue social capial (Bur, 1997). From he human capial perspecive, inequaliy oincomes and dierences in he pace o promoions a he workplace can be explained by dierences in individual abiliy (Becker, 1975). Tis evidence is obviously validbecause human capial is surely criical o success. Bu i is equally valid ha humancapial is useless wihou he social capial o opporuniies (connecions) wih whicho apply i (Bur, 1997).

rus, undersanding, connecion and sense o membership are values ha accumu-

lae over ime rom acquainanceships and relaions insaniaed by individuals. Tesevalues become embedded in groups wihin and wihou he organizaion. For he pur-poses o his sudy, we adop he view ha social capial is a propery o social groupsand dene social capial in line wih Nahapie and Ghoshal (1998) who describe i ashe sum o he acual and poenial resources embedded wihin, available hrough andderived rom he relaionships possessed by a group. Te undamenal proposiion osocial capial heory is ha neworks o relaionships gran access o resources, espe-cially inormaion benes no available o non-members o he nework (Bur, 1997).Reurns o inelligence, educaion, and senioriy depend on a persons locaion in he

social srucure. Social capial encompasses processes and condiions among peopleand groups ha bring abou cooperaion owards accomplishing a goal o muual ben-e. Tis goal could in ac be he objecives o a rm.

Social capial and organisaional perormance

Te capial in social relaions lies in heir value in enhancing he oucome o acions,wheher o a rm or an individual (Coleman, 1998). In a sudy o small-scale manuac-uring enrepreneurs in Ghana, Barr (2000a) ound evidence ha Ghanaian enrepre-neurs value neworks. She ound suppor or her hypohesis ha conacs conribuedo echnical inormal ows among enerprises, and ha hese ows no only make aposiive conribuion o individual rm perormance bu generae spillovers o oherrms as well. In his presen sudy, we adop he deniion o rm perormance as beinghe abiliy o ge work done (Cohen & Prusak, 2001; Adler & Kwon, 1999) as well as ischaracerizaion by Nahapie & Ghoshal (1998) as successul work perormance.

Problem saemen and signifcance o he sudy

In an analysis o why Ghanaian enrepreneurs valued heir neworks, Barr (2000b) also

ound ha he neworks reduce search and conrac enorcemen coss hrough inor-maion sharing. However, he challenge has been ha in spie o evidence ha seems


4/21

74

o sugges social capial can enhance organizaional perormance, he phenomenon hasno been sucienly highlighed and sudied sysemaically in Ghana. Hence we assessin his sudy he relevance o social capial o Ghanaian organizaions using rms lisedin he Ghana Club 100. We assess he uncions o social capial wihin Ghanaian or-ganisaions, describe he paterns and deerminans o social capial use wihin organi-

zaions and how social capial conribues o rm perormance.Research on social capial is jus beginning o ourish. Bu sudies on he subjec in

Ghana are jus beginning. Tis research is signican in as much as i pioneers he bodyo lieraure on he subjec in he counry. Quie apar rom is academic relevance, i isimely in he wake o conemporary eors a harnessing a resource such as social capialwhich has been aken or graned over he years. Ghanaian human resource proession-als are now more han ever in need o some insigh ino wha role he resources embed-ded in a group can play in improving worker perormance and overall organizaionalgrowh. Policy makers will equally nd his sudy useul o he exen where i inorms

policies ha enhance he posiive exernaliies and diminish he negaive consequenceso he Social Capial embedded in he sociey.

Sudy objecives and hypoheses

Te rm is made up o individuals and groups who work collaboraively and esablishand mainain boh rus-based relaionships and neworks o conacs. Firms ha recog-nize and incorporae he concep o Social Capial as an inpu ino heir operaions willhave an advanage over heir compeiors who canno. Te reason is ha rms compee

in complex environmens ha are echnically demanding, inormaion inensive andrequire coordinaion among dieren acors and dieren sages o heir operaions. Iis assumed ha social capial can make a signican conribuion o rm perormanceby providing access o inormaion and reducing he coss o conracing and coordina-ion (Coleman, 1990). Failure o recognize and explicily incorporae he concep as aninpu may limi organizaional perormance.

Based on he above, he sudy is designed o mee hree main objecives: ToassessthefunctionsofSocialCapitalwithinGhanaianorganizations ToassessthecontributionofSocialCapitaltormperformance

TodescribepaernsanddeterminantsofSocialCapitalusewithinandacrossrms.

We also underpin he sudy objecives wih he ollowing saemens o proposiionsand hypoheses:

1. Organisaions wih high Social Capial will repor higher rm produciviy han or-ganisaions wih low social capial.

2. Social Capial has a signican posiive relaionship wih organizaional perorm-ance.

3. Deerminans o Social Capial (reciprociy, rus, insiuional ies, diversiy o con-

acs, densiy o personal conacs, social ies) have a posiive relaionship wih organi-saional perormance.


5/21

75

2. Concepual ramework

Social capial defned

Social Capial is a hree dimensional phenomenon which Adler and Kwon (2000) de-scribed o be he shared neworks, norms and belies o a group o individuals. Social

Capial is nosrum; is no wha you know, bu whom you know ha maters (Fine,2003). All orms o social relaions can build social capial, be hey inormal or ormalrelaions. Social Capial provides individuals wih resourceul (e.g. enhanced communi-caion, neworking and beter access o resources) relaionships ha go a long way o pre-dic organisaional perormance.

Te inormal srucures in an organizaion are he connecions among is peoplecovering boh work-relaed and non-work-relaed ineracions. Inormal relaions o in-dividual members may also go beyond he rm o cover proessional neworks, riendsand colleagues rom earlier jobs. A persons ormer conacs enail passive relaionsno currenly used, bu which can be mobilized or new aciviies. Te persons aciveconacs on he oher hand involve hose relaions currenly being used. Tus, reducedo he individual level, he direc Social Capial o a person is embedded in he se opeople wih whom ha person communicaes (Bourdieu, 1986; Bur, 1992; Coleman,1988). Te qualiy o his direc Social Capial may equally be inuenced by he per-sons ineracions wih oher people ouside his or her original se o conacs.

A he rm level, connecions beween people wihin he rm and wih ousideparies, which give he rm or is members access o new knowledge, may be said oconsiue he rms Social Capial (Bur, 2000; Adler & Kwon, 1999). Social Capialcan hen be seen as he degree o which he rm or is individual employees use suchmechanisms as neworks, rus, norms and values in he group, communiy or socieymembers o achieve organizaional goals. More organizaions are learning ha he so-cial ineracions and relaionships we have a work (Inernal Social Capial) and beyond(Exernal Social Capial) are par o he invisible glue ha makes i possible o ge workdone and achieve organisaional goals (Cohen & Prusak, 2001). Ohers, Adler & Kwon(1999) go a sep urher o explain how Inernal Social Capial helps o ge work done.Work is done hrough he srucure and conen o relaionships held by members o

he organisaion. Nahapie and Ghoshal (1998) also idenied he cogniive aspec oSocial Capial o be a conribuing acor o successul work perormance.Te cogniive aspec o Social Capial helps individuals in a group o share goals and

vision or he organisaion. In his sense, i is wha makes an organizaion more hanjus a collecion o individuals. An organizaion wih high Social Capial will hereorebe he company where he rusworhiness, undersanding, connecions and sense omembership o employees yield high reurns o organizaional perormance. O course,when suspicion, rivalry, chaos and rapid urnover reign, organizaions will be deemedo have low Social Capial (Cohen & Prusak, 2001). In he presence o rivalry, chaos

and misrus he qualiy o work done would suer. Bur (1992) has idenied ha oneway o eliminae low Social Capial would be o ighen srucural holes.


6/21

76

Empirical research has shown ha inormaion ineracions developing inside herms workorce improve he diusion o inormaion and oser he creaion o a socko knowledge which consiues an asse or uure producion processes. Saed dier-enly rom Beckers (1975) noion o specic human capial, such a sock is relaional innaure, and exiss only as long as i is shared among workers. We may ideniy wo main

channels hrough which Social Capial may aec produciviy. Firsly, Social Capialosers he diusion o knowledge and inormaion among workers, making possible heachievemen o cerain ends ha would no be atainable in is absence (Coleman, 1990,p.302). Secondly, social ineracions may aec workers eor and moivaion.

In heir amous sudy on organisaions, March and Simon (1958) argued ha, eveni managers are auhoriaive and he enerprises hierarchy is denie and well uncion-ing, employees are able o inuence ask achievemen in dieren ways, like delayingorders execuion and, more in general, carrying ou opporunisic behaviors. Manysudies show ha, i human ineracions wihin he workorce are rusworhy and re-

laxed, employees are more inclined o do heir bes a work, and will be more likely osancion shirking behaviors hrough peer monioring (Kandel & Lazear, 1992; Oser-loh & Frey, 2000; Huck, Kubler & Weibull, 2001; Rees, Zax & Herries, 2003; Carpen-er & Seki, 2004; Minkler, 2002).

Imporance o social capial

Lin (1999) adduces hree general explanaions as o why Social Capial will enhancehe oucomes o acions. Firs o all, he resources embedded in a group or neworksaciliae he ow o inormaion. Under normal condiions, social ies wihin he group

and beween he group and oher individuals as well as groups locaed in cerain srae-gic places and/or hierarchical posiions (and hus beter inormed) can provide an indi-vidual wih useul inormaion abou opporuniies and choices oherwise unavailable.Similarly, hese ies may aler a rm and is managemen o he availabiliy and inereso an oherwise unrecognized individual or opporuniy. Such inormaion could, orexample, reduce he ransacion cos involved or he rm in recruiing individuals wihrelaively beter skills, or echnical knowledge. For individuals, i could equally reducehe cos in erms o eor and money o nd beter rms which can use heir capial andprovide appropriae rewards.

Secondly, managers and oher proessionals wih criical decision-making roles suchas in hiring or promoion may be inuenced by hese ies. Due o heir sraegic naure,especially wih people in auhoriy or supervisory capaciies, some social relaions carrymore valued resources and greaer power in employee or managemen decision-makingin he rm. Tus, wheher wihin or ouside he rm, someone puting in a word car-ries a cerain weigh in he decisions ha concern he group, an employee or even herm isel (Lin, 1999).

Tirdly, he acknowledged relaionships beween he individual and his or her groupand hose beween he group and oher individuals and groups ouside he rm may be

conceived by he rm as cericaions o he individuals or groups social credenials, which reec he individual or groups accessibiliy o resources hrough social ne-


7/21

77

works and relaions Social Capial. Tese relaionships can reassure he rm ha heindividual or group can provide addiional resources beyond he individuals or groupspersonal capial, which may be useul o he rm. Social relaions may reinorce ideniyand recogniion. Being assured and recognized o ones worhiness as an individualand a member o a social group sharing similar ineress and resources may no only

provide emoional suppor bu also public acknowledgemen o ones claim o cerainresources. Tese reinorcemens are essenial or he mainenance o menal healh andenilemen o resources. Tus, inormaion, inuence, social credenials and reinorce-men may explain why Social Capial procures inacions enhancemens no accounedor by oher orms o capial such as physical or human capial. Anoher useulness oSocial Capial is ha i may engender beter conrols. I may conrol he behaviour omembers o he group and reduce negaive behaviour such as laeness, abseneeism andmoral hazards (Onyx & Bullen, 2000).

However, as has been noed earlier, some concern has been expressed abou he perva-

sive ocus on he benecial eecs o social capial and a endency o neglec is poenialdownside (Pores & Landol, 1996; Sandeur & Laumann, 1998). Indeed, Albano andBarbera (2010) cie Baker and Faulkner (2004), as saing ha he dark side o sociallyembedded ransacions is also common in nancial rauds, mainly because he rus en-gendered by personal relaions presens, by is very exisence, enhanced opporuniy ormaleasance (Granoveter, 1985, p. 491), afer Albano and Barbera (2010).

Social capial versus human capial

Invaluable conribuion o Social Capial o boh individual and organizaional success

has been acknowledged by several scholars. o ge employmen one needs Social Capi-al in addiion o human capial. Who ges o he op o corporae America or insancehas been explained by Social Capial (Bur, 1997). Social Capial is wha makes he coso rms o ormal coordinaion mechanisms such as conracs, hierarchies, bureaucraicrules, and he like manageable (Fukuyama, 1999). For example, mos conracs sup-pose a cerain amoun o goodwill ha prevens he paries rom aking advanage ounoreseen loopholes. In any case, i is ofen less ecien o incur he addiional rans-acion coss involved in monioring, negoiaing, liigaing or enorcing ormal agree-mens ha ry o speciy all coningencies (Fukuyama, 1999).

Generally, Social Capial ofen leads o greaer eciency han purely ormal coor-dinaion echniques. Highly cenralized, bureaucraized workplaces creae much ine-ciency as decisions are delayed and inormaion disored while moving up and downhierarchical chains o command. As a resul many rms are replacing heir hierarchicalorganograms wih much ater managemen srucures which push responsibiliy downhe ladder. Workers are encouraged or even auhorized o make decisions on heir own,raher han reerring hem up a managerial hierarchy. Tis bureaucraic naure o workofen leads o greaer ineciency. Bu hese gains are oally dependen on he SocialCapial o he workorce. I here is disrus beween workers and managers, or wide-

spread opporunism, hen he delegaion o auhoriy required in a ypically a sysemwill lead o insan paralysis. Tis is in eec wha happened o General Moors during


8/21

78

he srikes o 1996 and 1998, when a single dissiden local worker (angry over he ou-sourcing o brake pars) was able o shu down he companys enire Norh Americanoperaions (Fukuyama, 1999).

Social Capial has been ound o be paricularly criical o knowledge sharing inbusinesses (Florida, 1995). In he pas, yrannical companies could hrive despie heir

low Social Capial, paricularly i mos o he work was repeiive or mechanical (Fuku-yama, 1999). In odays as-paced business world, success depends on responsiveness,inveniveness, collaboraion and atenion. Tese are osered by he Social Capial hais inheren in groups wihin he organizaion and wihou (Cohen & Prusak, 2001).Like oher orms o capial hereore, Social Capial is producive, making possiblehe achievemen o cerain ends ha would no be atainable in is absence (Coleman,1990). Inormal inellecual propery exchanges or insance may no be possible wih-ou social capial (Annalee, 1994). Social Capial is clearly an asse ha can benehe organizaion (e.g. creaing value or shareholders) and is members (e.g. enhancing

employee skills (Gabbay & Leenders, 1999).In conras wih human capial which is a qualiy o individuals, Social Capial is

a qualiy creaed beween people (Coleman, 1990; Bur, 1992; Punam, 1993; Lin,1998). Social Capial predics ha reurns o inelligence, educaion, and senioriy de-pend in some par on a persons locaion in he social srucure (Bur, 1997). Whilehuman capial reers o individual abiliy, Social Capial reers o opporuniy. Someporion o he value a manager adds o a rm is his or her abiliy o coordinae oherpeople, i.e. ideniying opporuniies o add value wihin an organizaion and getinghe righ people ogeher o develop he opporuniies. Knowing who, when and how

o coordinae is a uncion o he managers nework o conacs wihin and beyond herm. Cerain personal relaionships in and ouside he rm can enhance he managersabiliy o ideniy and develop opporuniies. Managers wih more Social Capial geheir reurns o heir human capial because hey are posiioned o ideniy and developmore rewarding opporuniies (Bur, 1997).

Tere are increasing calls or businesses o promoe he developmen and maine-nance o Social Capial (Miles, Miles, Perrone & Edvinsson, 1998). Human Resourceproessionals need o grasp he crucial role o human dynamics and ineracions (SocialCapial) o he success o a rm (Cohen & Prusak, 2001). A good business sraegy

is no all i akes or an organizaion o succeed; Social Capial creaes and mainainsrobus organisaions. I is agains his backdrop ha his sudy seeks o address howimporan Social Capial is o he organizaions ha orm he Ghana Club 100, andconsequenly, nd ou he conribuions o Social Capial o heir perormance.

3. Mehodology

Research design

Te sudy adoped an exploraory mehodological approach in examining he uncions

o social capial, described he paterns and deerminans o social capial use and ex-ploring how social capial conribues o rm perormance in Ghana.


9/21

79

Sampling

Te random sampling echnique was used o selec companies lised in he Ghana Club100 or he survey which was conduced beween January and March 2010. A sraiedsampling mehod was used o selec source o he daa. Tis approach was used o ob-

ain a balanced daa rom key sakeholders wihin organizaions: managemen, seniorsa and junior sa members were surveyed. A previously piloed quesionnaire washen disribued o he respondens. Tis was supplemened by srucured inerviewswih key respondens rom various organisaional deparmens. A brie overview o heGhana Club 100 is provided below.

Ghana Club 100 (GC100) profle

Te GC100 is an annual compilaion o he op 100 companies in Ghana o give duerecogniion o successul enerprise building. I was launched in 1998 by he Ghana In-vesmen Promoion Cenre (GIPC), he governmen agency esablished under GIPC Ac 1994 (Ac 478) o encourage, promoe, monior, and aciliae invesmen in allsecors o he Ghanaian economy wih he excepion o mining, peroleum, ree zoneaciviies and he privaisaion o Governmen eniies.

Te GC100 ocuses on corporae excellence (boh governance and perormance) andencourages businesses in Ghana o demonsrae and lead he naions eors in he globalbusiness environmen. Companies making i ino he GC 100 are o serve as role modelsor he privae secor and provide a orum or corporae Ghana o inerac wih he gov-ernmen as well as inernaional insiuions and counerpars a a high level. o provide arepresenaive sample o he Ghanaian indusries, ranked companies are seleced rom heollowing key sraegic areas: agriculure and agri-business, nancial services, inormaionand communicaion echnology, and inrasrucure. Te res are educaion, healh, manu-acuring, peroleum and mining, services, media, and ourism.

Te objecives o he GC 100 are o: DevelopanopeninformationculturewithintheGhanaiancorporatesector

Provideincentivesforimprovedcorporateperformance

Developuniformcriteriaforevaluatingcorporateperformance

EstablishanannualandcurrentanalysisofGhanascorporatesector.Te Eligibiliy Crieria or he GC 100 lising include: Allentrantsmustbelimitedliabilitycompanies. Allentrantsmusthavecumulativenetprotsthatarepositiveforthemostre-

cen hree year period. Example, or he 2008 rankings, his will be 2006, 2007,2008.

ForCompanieswithGovernmentinterest,Governmentshareownershipshouldbe less han 50%, unless he company is lised on he Ghana Sock Exchange.

anking ParameersTe eligible companies or GC 100 are ranked on he ollowing parameers:


10/21

80

Size:isismeasuredusingthecompanysturnoverfortherankingyear.Turno-ver or he banks is measured by heir gross ineres income plus commissionsand ees, while urnover or insurance companies is measured by ne premiumearned plus invesmen income.

Protability:Auniversally acceptedmeasureofprotability is theReturnon

Equiy (ROE). Tis indicaes he reurn ha managemen has creaed or heshareholders o he company. Tis is measured by calculaing he 3year averageROE or he companies.

Growth:isgivesrecognitiontocompaniesthataregrowingatimpressiverates.Such companies are usually growing because o excellence in eecive manage-men, produc developmen, and markeing. Tis is measured using he 3-yearcompounded annual growh rae o urnover over he recen hree year period.

All ies in ranking are eliminaed using growh as a ie breaker (GC 100 Magazine,

2009).Sample size

Daa was sough rom companies lised in he Ghana Club 100. In all, 116 organisa-ions were sampled, wih respondens saus being a leas a supervisor level.

Sample Characerisics

esponden proile

Te responden prole presened in able 1 below shows ha he mean age o he or-ganizaions surveyed was 31, which in organisaional science erms, is old. Te meansa srengh is 37.32, which alls wihin he deniion o a medium sized organisa-ion. Te mean age o respondens was 38.5, relaively young in career erms; whils hemean number o years worked in he organizaion was 7 and he mean number o phoneconversaions held in a week was 20.

ABLE 1. esponden/Organisaional Profle

Variable Mean Sandard Deviaion

Age o Organizaion 31.0 2.6Sa srengh 37.3 4.7

Age o respondens 38.5 3.7Number o children 2.0 1.3Number o years in organisaion 7.0 0.6Number o organizaions worked or 2.0 1.5

Work maes in ouch wih 9.0 2.1Number o years in curren posiion 5.0 0.4Phone Conversaions 20.0 3.5

Source: Survey daa, 2010


11/21

81

Demographic characerisics

able 2 below shows ha males accouned or almos 77% o he survey respondens;65.5% o whom were married; and 65% o whom lived wih a spouse. Over 65% o re-spondens also held a universiy degree a rs degree or a posgraduae degree.

ABLE 2. Demographic Characteristics

Frequency Percen Frequency Percen Gender: Marial Saus:Male 89 76.7 Married 76 65.5Female 27 23.3 Separaed 3 2.6

Widow 1 9Live Wih Spouse: Divorce 1 9

Yes 75 64.7 Single 35 30.2No 9 7.8No Response 32 27.6

Educaional Level: School Age o Children:PhD. -- -- 0 1 9Masers 50 43.1 1 23 19.8Posgraduae Diploma 3 2.6 2 19 16.41s Degree 49 2.2 3 20 17.2

A Level 5 4.3 4 24 20.7O Level 2 1.7 5 7 6No Response 7 6 No Response 22 19

Source: Survey daa: 2010

Organisaional dynamicsTe privae secor made up over 55% o survey respondens as shown below in able 3.Te non-banking nancial services secor accouned or almos 15% o respondens,ollowed by he manuacuring and ranspor/general services secors.

ABLE 3. Organizaional Dynamics

Type o organizaion Frequency PercenPrivae 64 55.2Public 17 14.7Mulinaional 21 18.1

Non-governmenal 14 12.1oal 116 100.0Company secor o business Frequency PercenFinancial Banking 11 9.5Financial Services (Non-banking) 17 14.7Manuacuring 14 12.1Insurance 13 11.2Consrucion 13 11.2Healh/Pharmaceuicals 12 10.3ranspor/Gen. Services 14 12.1elecom/ I 11 9.5Social Markeing 11 9.5oal 116 100.0



12/21

82

Daa Collecion

Daa were colleced on a range o demographic and economic characerisics o he or-ganizaions such as labour, rm perormance and annual value, and abou rm impac.In-deph closed and open-ended inerview schedules were employed wih he sample

employees being quizzed abou relaions wih oher individuals and organizaions andhow hese conacs or he rus arising rom hem has been o bene o he organiza-ions or which hey work. Deailed social and demographic inormaion abou herespondens including educaion, work experience, paricipaion in dieren ypes ogroups, size and diversiy o neworks o conacs, were also solicied. Te srucure ohe quesionnaire is oulined below.

Srucure o he quesionnaire

Te quesionnaire employed or he sudy was divided ino wo main secions, A and B.

Secion A: Organisaional, Social and Demographic Characerisics o e-spondens.

Tis secion sough inormaion on organizaional deails such as ype (public, pri-vae, non-governmenal or mulinaional), secor o organizaion, sa srengh and ageo he organizaion.

Personal deails on he respondens including heir educaional background and po-siion in heir organizaions were also sough.

S e c i o n B : Tis secion was spli ino eigh secions which sough o obain daa

on he ollowing:I. Personal Conacs. Tis measured he respondens densiy o conacs and per-sonal relaions.

II. Aliaion o Groups and Diversiy o Personal Conacs. Tis measured he di-versiy o respondens personal conacs.

III, IV, V, & VI. Insiuional ies. Tese secions measured respondens conacs invarious insiuions such as he police orce and wihin governmen. I also sough in-ormaion on he manner in which hese personal conacs were uilized or he beneo he respondens organizaion.

VII & VIII. Firm Perormance. Tese secions sough he percepion o he respond-ens and he chie execuive ocers on he overall well-being o he organizaions as ameasure o organizaional perormance. Iems ranged rom heir level o saisacion wih he organizaions income, qualiy o new producs, relaions beween manage-men and employees, clien or cusomer saisacion, o abiliy o ge work done andachieve organisaional goals, and successul work perormance.

Iems on he quesionnaire were raed on a Liker scale o 1 o 5, wih 5 being hemos avourable or highes poin and 1 being he leas avourable or lowes poin in eachcase.


13/21

83

Analysis o daa

Te Saisical Package or Social Sciences Sofware (SPSS) was used o analyse hedaa. Te analysis was conduced in wo seps: rs qualiaive analysis was employedo deermine he uncions ha Social Capial perorms wihin he individual organiza-

ions (objecive 1). Te goals o his analysis were o documen he use o Social Capialby he organizaions; o clariy wha i means o use social relaions or economic pur-poses. Quaniaive mehods were also employed o esimae he conribuion o SocialCapial o rm perormance (objecive 2; hypoheses 1 and 2) using One-way ANOVAand Simple Muliple Regression analysis. Finally, he sandard muliple regression wasused o es or objecive 3.

Using muliple mehods is imporan because a limiaion o much o he quania-ive Social Capial lieraure is ha, while i idenies ineresing and saisically sig-nican relaionships beween variables, he causaliy and he policy implicaions are

ofen no clear (Wong, 2001). By inegraing qualiaive analysis o he uncions oSocial Capial wih quaniaive analysis o how Social Capial aecs rms srucureand perormance, we can beter inerpre resuls and arrive a conclusions wih clearimplicaions.

4. Discussion o empirical fndings

Tis secion o he paper discusses he ndings o he sudy.

Funcions o social capial

In our sudy, Objecive 1 sough o assess he uncions o social capial wihin Ghana-ian organizaions in erms o how hey use social relaions as an inpu in heir opera-ions. able 4 below presens he uncions ha respondens say social capial plays inheir organizaions. Tese responses were ranked, and help cliens undersand my com-

pany was ranked rs; ollowed by aciliae access o nancial, echnical and manage-men suppor in he second place, help mainain cliens in he hird, aciliae access oinpusin he ourh, wih obain inormaion abou markes, prices and producs in he

fh posiion, and resolve dispues in he work place coming in he sixh, all wih a scoreo a leas 50%. Tese resuls and he ranking o uncions clearly show ha in Ghana aselsewhere, social capial is criical in knowledge sharing (Florida, 1995); enhances in-ormaion ow (Lin, 1999); aciliaes producion (Coleman, 1994); helps o ge workdone and achieve organisaional goals (Cohen & Prusak, 2001), Adler & Kwon, 2002;Yechun, Hongming, Zhiliang & Chunke, 2007); as well as engender beter conrols andreduce negaive behaviours in organizaions (Onyx & Bullen, 2000).


14/21

84

ABLE 4. Funcions o Social Capial

Yes No No SureFre-

quency %Fre-

quency %Fre-

quency %

Ideniy and make conac wih cliens 61 52.6 27 23.3 28 24.1

Help mainain cliens 82 70.7 15 12.9 13 16.4

Help cliens undersand my company 89 76.7 14 12.1 13 11.2

Obain inormaion abou markes, pricesand producs

75 64.7 33 28.4 8 6.9

Faciliae access o nancial, echnicaland managemen suppor

87 75 21 18.1 8 6.9

Faciliae access o inpus 79 68.1 31 26.7 6 5.2

Resolve dispues rom he work place 69 59.5 30 25.9 17 14.7

Accessing marke inormaion 52 44.8 43 37.1 21 18.1

Funcions anking

Help cliens undersand my company 1s

Faciliae access o nancial, echnical and managemen suppor 2nd

Obain inormaion abou markes, prices and producs 3rd

Help mainain cliens 4h

Faciliae access o inpus 5h

Resolve dispues rom he work place 6h

Ideniy and make conac wih cliens 7hAccessing marke inormaion 8 h


Social capial and organisaional perormance

Te sudy also aimed a assessing he eecs o social capial on organizaional perorm-ance among he Ghana Club 100 organizaions, where organisaional perormance wasscored on acors like abiliy o ge work done and achieve organisaional goals, and

successul work perromance. In his regard, he One Way ANOVA was used o es hy-poheses 1 and 2: social capial has a signican eec on organizaional perormance,and organizaions wih high social capial will repor higher rm produciviy han or-ganizaions wih low social capial. Te resuls are presened in able 5 below.

able 5: Means and sandard deviaion o social capial scores

N Mean Std. Deviation

High Social Capial 39 45.4359 7.29021Medium Social Capial 37 48.7297 8.89335

Low Social Capial 37 51.1351 7.09915


15/21

85

One Way ANOVA Tes resuls o organizaions social capial scores

Sum o Squares d Mean Square F Sig.

Beween Groups 623.426 2 311.713 5.132 .007

Wihin Groups 6681.211 110 60.738

oal 7304.637 112Source: Survey daa: 2010

I can be surmised rom able 5 above ha social capial has a signican eec onorganizaional perormance, F(112) = 5.132,p< 01, which suppors hypoheses 1 and2; ha organizaions wih high social capial will perorm beter han organizaionswih low social capial. Tese ndings also help o achieve he sudy objecive 2; ha oassessing he conribuion o social capial o rm perormance as well as being in syncwih Cohen and Prusaks (2001) asserion ha high social capial yields high reurns o

organisaional perormance, as measured by he abiliy o individuals o ge work doneand achieve organisaional goals as well as successul work perormance (Nahapie &Ghoshal, 1998).

Deerminan variables o social capial and heir predicivepower on organizaional perormance

Te sudy also aimed a invesigaing he deerminans o social capial and how heyinuence organizaional perormance as se ou in sudy Objecive 3 and Hypohesis 3.

In his vein, he ollowing were esed: Reciprocityhasasignicantpositiverelationshipwithorganizationalperform-ance.

Trusthasasignicantpositiverelationshipwithorganizationalperformance.

Institutional ties has a signicantpositiverelationshipwith organizationper-ormance.

Diversityofcontactshasasignicantpositiverelationshipwithorganizational

perormance. Densityofpersonalcontactshasasignicantpositiverelationshipwithorganiza-

ional perormance. Social tieshas a signicant positiverelationshipwith organizationalperform-

ance.

Te sandard muliple regression resuls in able 6 below indicae ha he eniremodel is signican, [F (11) = 17.312, p< .01]. Te model explained 24.6% o he vari-ance, whereas he variables accouned or 81.6%.


16/21

86

ABLE 6. Social capial deerminan variables predicive power on organisaionalperormance

Variables -SquareChanged

--SquareSandardized

Bea() F.246 .816 17.312**

Reciprociy .681**rus .401*Insiuional ies .642**Diversiy o Conacs .116Densiy o Personal Conacs .175Social ies .109

Source: Survey daa: 2010 **Signican a .01; * Signican a .05

From he resuls presened in able 6, reciprociy, rus and insiuional ies are

shown o have a signican posiive relaionship wih organizaional perormance wihbea values o [ = .681, p < .01], [ = .402, p < .05] and [ = .641, p < .01], respec-ively. Hence, hese hree variables above are signican predicors o organizaionalperormance: i here is rus, reciprociy and insiuional ies, organisaional membersare beter able o ge work done, achieve organisaional goals and successul work per-ormance. On he oher hand, alhough hey sugges i, diversiy o personal conacs,densiy o personal conacs and social ies are no signican predicors o organiza-ional perormance. Consequenly, our Hypohesis 3 is ully suppored in only 50% ohe social capial deerminan variables esed.

Paterns o Social Capial use across he secors o he organizaion

Te sudy in addiion sough o address he impac o social capial across various or-ganisaional secors, as se ou in sudy objecive 3. Consequenly, he variables o socialcapial were assessed in each responden business secor, wih he sandard mulipleregression being used o es or he ollowing:

Reciprocityhasasignicantpositiverelationshipwithorganizationalperform-ance.

Trusthasasignicantpositiverelationshipwithorganizationalperformance. Institutionaltieshaveasignicantpositiverelationshipwithorganizationalper-ormance.

Diversityofcontactshasasignicantpositiverelationshipwithorganizationalperormance.

Densityofpersonalcontactshasasignicantpositiverelationshipwithorganiza-ional perormance.

Socialtieshaveasignicantpositiverelationshipwithorganizationalperform-ance.


17/21

87

ABLE 7. Paterns o social capial use across various organisaional secors

Financial

(No

n-Bank)

Financial

(Ba

nks)

Manufactur-

ing Insurance

Con

struction

Hea

lth/Phar-

mac

eutical

Transport/

Gen

.Services

Soc

ialMar-

keting

Telecom/IT

Reciprociy 0.68 -.734


18/21

88

ance wih bea values o [ = .506, p < .05] and [ = .774, p < .01], respecively. Socialies have a signican negaive relaionship wih organizaional perormance [ = - .659,p < .01], whils he res are no signican predicors o organizaional perormance.

Furhermore, in he healh/pharmaceuical secor, densiy o personal con-acs is shown o be a signican predicor o organizaional perormance, [ = .471,

p < .05]. On he oher hand, reciprociy and social ies have a signican negaive rela-ionship wih organizaional perormance wih bea values o [ = - .734, p < .01] and[ = - .285, p < .05], respecively, whils he oher variables do no have any signicanrelaionship wih organizaional perormance.

In he ranspor/general services secor, insiuional ies and diversiy o conacsare shown o have a signican posiive relaionship wih organizaional perormancewih bea values o [ = .316, p< .05] and [ = .630, p < .05], respecively. rus, onhe oher hand, has a signican negaive relaionship wih organizaional perormance,whils he res do no have any signican relaionship wih organizaional perorm-ance.

Addiionally, in he elecom/I indusry rus, insiuional ies, densiy o personalconacs, and social ies are all shown o have a signican posiive relaionship wihorganizaional perormance. Te bea values are [ = .413, p < .05], [ = .456, p < .01],[ = .380, p < .05] and [ = .340, p < .05], respecively.

Finally, able 7 shows ha in he social markeing secor, densiy o personal con-acs has a signican posiive relaionship wih organizaional perormance [ = .706,p < .01], whereas, social ies have a signican negaive relaionship wih organizaional

perormance [ = - .287, p < .05].

5. Conclusions

Te idea o social capial posulaes ha people are conneced o ohers based on rusin some ohers. Social capial isel has ofen been exploied by individuals and organi-zaions or heir bene. In his sudy, we have ound suppor or our hypohesis ha so-cial capial plays a key uncion wihin organizaions in Ghana, aciliaing producion,enhancing inormaion ow, and generally helping o achieve organisaional goals. In

addiion, we ound ha social capial has a signican relaionship wih organisaionalperormance such ha rms ha enjoy high social capial repor higher rm produciv-iy in ha organisaional members are beter able o ge work done and achieve organi-saional goals as well as successul work perormance. Te lieraure seems o suggesha rus and insiuional conacs (connecions) are properies o social capial, un-derlying he neworks o relaionships ha gran access o resources wihin and wihouhe organizaion (Nahapie & Ghoshal, 1998). In drilling down o he consiuen ele-mens o social capial, we also ound ha rus, reciprociy and insiuional ies end odisplay he mos signican posiive relaionship wih organisaional perormance.

Furhermore, our analysis o paterns o social capial use amongs he various or-ganisaional secors suggess ha rus and insiuional conacs are shown o have a


19/21

89

signican posiive relaionship wih organisaional perormance in ve (5) ou o eigh(8) business secors. Tis easily marks rus and insiuional conacs as he mos im-poran social capial properies or Ghanaian companies. I is worhy o noe, however,ha roughly a hird o he responden organizaions are in he nancial services indus-ry. Te companies in hese secors radiionally rely on rus inernally and exernally

o aciliae heir work as is he norm in nance. Tis may, perhaps, accoun or he reli-ance on rus as an imporan propery o social capial.

Te resuls in able 7 above mus, however, be inerpreed wihin he conex o hevarious individual organisaional secors having a ewer number o respondens (10-15) han ha or he oal survey (116). Tis consideraion may have modied some-wha he reliabiliy o he resuls o he muliple regressions. Tis nowihsanding, heresuls may serve as a useul indicaion o wha perains in he Ghanaian environmen.

Wih he oregoing in mind, are hese ndings enough o draw a conclusion on henaure, orm and ypology o social capial in Ghana? We posulae ha our ndingssugges ha in Ghana social capial has been shown o be a useul ool in organisaionallie, capable o propelling he rm o beter perormance. o ha end, he sudy recom-mends ha rms ake a proacive approach owards promoing, building and mainain-ing viable social neworks wihin heir srucures in order o derive maximum benerom i. Fuure research migh examine he exen o inuence exered by he deermi-nans o social capial on organisaional perormance as well as he uncions o socialcapial in he Ghanaian public secor.

eerencesAdler, P. & Kwon, S. (1999). Social capial: he good, he bad and he ugly. Processed, Marshall

School o Business. Universiy o Souhern Caliornia.Adler, P. S. & Kwon, S.-W. (2002). Social Capial: Prospec or a new concep.Academy o Man-

agemen eview, 27(17), 40.Albano, R. & Barbera, F. (2010). Social Capial, Welare Sae, and Poliical Legiimacy, Ameri-

can Behavioral Scienis, 53(5), 677690Annalee, L. (1994). Regional Advanage: Culure and compeiion in Silicon Valley and oue128.

Cambridge, MA: Harvard Universiy Press.Baker, W., & Faulkner, R. R. (2004). Social neworks and loss o capial. Social Neworks, 26,

91111.Barr, A. (2000b). Collecive Acion and Bilaeral Ineracion in Ghanaian Enrepreneurial Ne-

works. Working Paper No. 182. Helsinki, Sweden; World Insiue or Economic Developmen Re-search, Te Unied Naions Universiy.

Barr, A. (2000a). Social Capial and echnical Inormaion Flows in he Ghanaian Manuacur-ing Secor. Oxord Economic Papers, 52, 539559.

Becker, G. S. (1975). Human Capial. New York: Columbia Universiy Press.Bourdieu, P. (1983). Forms o capial. In Richards, J.C. (Ed.), Handbook o Teory and esearch

or he Sociology o Educaion. New York: Greenwood Press.Bourdieu, P. (1986). Te Forms o Capial. In Richardson, J. G. (Ed.), Handbook o Teory and

esearch or he Sociology o Educaion (pp. 24158; 249).Wespor, C.: Greenwood Press.


20/21

90

Browning, C. R., Diez, R. Feinberg, S. L. (2000). Negaive Social Capial and Urban Crime: ANegoiaed Coexisence Perspecive.November, URI Working Paper No. 00-07.

Bur, R. S. (2000). Srucural holes versus nework closure as social capial. In Lin, N., Cook, C. S.,& Bur, R. S. (Eds.), Social capial: heory and research. New York.

Bur, R. S. (1997). Te Coningen Value o Social Capial.Adminisraive Science Quarerly, 42,

33965.Bur, R.S. (1992). Srucural holes: he social srucure o compeiion. Cambridge, MA: HarvardUniversiy Press.

Carpener, J. & Seki, E. (2004). Do social preerences increase produciviy? Field experimen-al evidence rom shermen in oyama bay. Deparmen o Economics. Middlebury College. Working

Paper.Cohen, D. Pru&sak, L. (2001).In Good Company. How social capial makes organizaions work.

Boson, Ma.: Harvard Business School Press.Coleman, J. C. (1988). Social capial in he creaion o human capial.American Journal o Sociol-

ogy, 94, S95S120.Coleman, J. C. (1990, 1994). Foundaions o Social Teory. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Universiy

Press.Coleman, J. S. (1998). Social capial in he creaion o human capial.American Journal o Sociol-

ogy, 94, 95121.Ezioni, A. (1993). Te spiri o communiy: he reinvenion o American sociey. New York: ouch-

sone.Ezioni, A. (1995). Te spiri o communiy. London. Unied Kingdom: Fonana Press.Fine, B. (2003). Review Essay o: Chrisian Ggrooaer and Tierry van Baselaer. (Eds.). Te

role o social capial in Developmen: Empirical Assessmen.Journal o Agrarian Change, 3(4), 586603.

Flache, A. (1996). Te double edge o neworks.Amserdam. [Tesis].Florida, R. (1995). oward he learning region. Fuures, 27, 527535.Fukuyama, F. (1999). Te Grea Disrupion: Human naure and he reconsiuion o social order.

Te Alanic Monhly Company, Volume 283, No. 5; pages 5580 (May).Fukuyama, F. (1995). rus: Te Social Virues And Te Creaion O Prosperiy . New York: Free

Press.Gabbay, S. M. & Leenders, R. A. J. (1999). CSC: he srucure o compeiive advanage and

disadvanage. In Leenders, R. . A. S. & Gabbay, S. M. (Eds), Corporae Social Capial and liabiliy.Boson, M. A.: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Granoveter, M. (1985). Economic acion and social srucure: Te problem o embeddedness.American Journal o Sociology, 91(3), 481510.

Hanian, L. J. (1916). Te rural school communiy cener. Annals o he American Academy oPoliical and Social Science, 67, 130138.

Huck, S., Kubler, D. & Weibull, J. (2001). Social norms and opimal incenives in rms. Sock-holm School o Economics. Working Paper Series in Economics and Finance, 466.

Kandel, E. & Lazear, E. P. (1992). Peer pressure and parnerships. Journal o Poliical Science,100(4), 801817.

Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991). Siuaed learning: legiimae peripheral paricipaion. CambridgeUniversiy Press.

Lin, N. (1999). Building a nework heory o social capial connecions. 22(1): 2831. Available:htp://www.insna.org/PDF/Keynoe/1999.pd

March, J. G. & Simon, H. A. (1958). Organisaions. New York: Wiley.


21/21

91

Miles, G., Miles, R. E., Perrone, V., & Edvinsson, L. (1998). Some concepual and research barri-ers o he uilisaion o knowledge. Caliornia Managemen eview, 40(3), 281288.

Minkler, L. (2002). Managing Moral Moivaions. Universiy o Connecicu, Deparmen o Eco-nomics, Working PaperNo. 200306.

Nahapie, J. & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social Capial, Inellecual Capial and he organisaional ad-

vanage. Te Academy o Managemen eview, 23(2), 242.Onyx, J. & Bullen, P. (2000). Measuring social capial in ve communiies. Journal o AppliedBehavioural Science, 36(1), 2342.

Oserloh, M. & Frey, B. S. (2000). Moivaion, knowledge ranser and organisaional orms.Organisional Science, 11(5), 538550.

Pores, A. and Landol, P. (1996). Te Downside o Social Capial. American Prospec, 26, 1822.

Punam, R. D. (2000). Social capial: measuremen and consequences. Kennedy school o Govern-men. Harvard Universiy. Available: htp://www.oecd.org/daaoecd/25/6/1825848.pd

Punam, R. D. (1993).Making Democracy Work. Civic radiions in modern Ialy. Princeon, NJ:Princeon Universiy Press.

Punam, R. D. (ed.) (2002).Democracies in Flux: Te Evoluion o Social Capial in ConemporarySociey. New York: Oxord Universiy Press.

Rees, D. I., Zax, J. S., & Herries, J. (2003). Inerdependence in worker produciviy. Journal oApplied Economerics, 18(5), 585604.

Sandeur, R. & Laumann, E. O. (1998). A Paradigm or Social Capial. aionaliy and Sociey,10, 481501.

Te World Bank. (1999). Wha is Social Capial? Povery Ne htp://www.worldbank.org/pov-ery/scapial/whasc.hm

Walker, G., Kogu, B., & Shan, W. (1997). Social capial. Srucural holes and he ormaion o anindusrial nework. Organisaion Science, 8(2), 109.

Wenger, E. (1998). Communiies o Pracice: Learning, Meaning and Ideniy. Cambridge Univer-siy Press.

Wong Kwok-Fu, S. (2001). Wha are he missing ingrediens o he cake? Some reecions uponhe noion o social capial. Human resources and local developmen. Saf Group III seminar. htp://

www.ex.ac.uk/shipss/poliics/research/socialcapial/oher/wong.pd.Yechun, W., Hongming,X., Zhiliang, G., & Chunke,W. (2007). Social Capial and Organizaional

Perormance: Is Learning Orienaion a Missing Link?Inernaional Conerence on Wireless Communi-caions, Neworking and Mobile Compuing, WiCOM2007. Sep 2125, 2007, p. 54425445.

Furher ReadingBecker, G. (1974). A heory o social ineracion. Journal o Poliical Economy, 82(6), 1063

1093.Bourdieu, P. (1980). Le Capial Social: Noes Provisoires.Acs De La echerch en Sciences So-

ciales, 3, 23.Bur, R. S. (1998). Te Gender o Social Capial. aionaliy and Sociey, 10(1), 46, 1.Ezioni, A. (1988). Te Moral Dimension: oward A New Economics. New York: Free Press.Ezioni, A. (1996). Te Responsive Communiy: A Communiarian Perspecive. American So-

ciological eview, 61, 111.Ghana Club 100 Magazine (2009). Ghana Invesmen Promoion Cenre.

Punam, R. D. (1995). Bowling Alone: Americas Declining Social Capial.Journal o Democracy6:1, Jan, 6578. htp://muse.jhu.edu/demo/journal_o_democracy/v006/punam.hml

assesing social capital

Documents