Entrepreneurial Networks Entrepreneurial Networks and Social Capital of and Social Capital of Academic ScientistsAcademic Scientists

Ms. Agrita Kiopa, Doctoral Student Dr. Julia Melkers, Associate ProfessorSchool of Public PolicyGeorgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia, USAPrepared for the S&T Research Symposium Chicago, IL, March 2009

Data analyzed in this presentation were collected under the auspices of the 2005-09 project, Women in Science and Engineering: Network Access, Participation, and Career Outcomes, a project funded by the National Science Foundation (Grant # REC-0529642).

Research Question:Research Question:

What type of networks provide more/better/right social capital?

Intuition: Entrepreneurial

Roots:Social capital literature:

◦ “investment in social relations with expected returns (Lin 2001)

Network literature:◦ Structural holes are source of social capital

(“early” Burt, 1992)◦ The content of social relationships is as

important in instrumental action as structure (Podolny and Baron, 1997)

◦ Right balance of open and close relationships in network (“late” Burt, 2001)

Our Data: Who are those ngnot(s)?

Entrepreneurial networks:Entrepreneurial networks:

Individual networks that are rich in the structural holes (Burt, 1992, 2000, 2004, 2005)

Individual networks that consist of strong ties with individuals outside of ones organization (Higgins and Kram, 2001)

General model: Creation and Use of the Social General model: Creation and Use of the Social Capital (Adapted from Lin, 2001)Capital (Adapted from Lin, 2001)

5

Individual Characteristics

Structural Position

Network Properties: Structure; Content; Resources

Mobilized Resources

Returns: *Instrumental (e.g. reputation) *Expressive (e.g. satisfaction)

Context

Inequality Instrumental action Outcomes

Hypotheses: Hypotheses: Effects of Network PropertiesEffects of Network Properties

H1: Individuals with networks rich with structural holes will mobilize more social capitalNetworks that are rich in the structural holes are source of social capital (Burt, 1992, 2000, 2004, 2005)

H2: Individuals with networks rich with multiplex relationships will mobilize more social capital

Strong ties are source of social capital (Ibarra, 1995, Krackhardt, 1992, Nelson, 1989, Lin et al, 1981, among others)

Hypotheses: Hypotheses: Effects of Network PropertiesEffects of Network Properties

H3: Individuals with networks rich with multiplex relationships with unconnected alters will mobilize more social capital

In other words

H3: Individuals with entrepreneurial networks will mobilize more social capital

Hypotheses: Hypotheses: Effects of Network PropertiesEffects of Network Properties

H3a: Men with entrepreneurial networks with will mobilize more social (van Emmerik, 2006)

Overlap of name generator networks•Assistant and Associate Profs only•Excluding Primary Mentors

N= 837

Close Collaborators in Same University

Close Collaborators Outside Respondent

University

Individuals from whom respondents seek career advice

N= 91

N= 66N= 776

N= 97

N= 297

N= 1353 N= 1790

N= 53 N= 117

N= 521

N= 6

N= 21N= 240

N= 2

Individuals from whom respondents seek advice re: deptmatters

Individuals with whom respondents seek advice about their research,

but have not collaborated.

Explanatory ModelExplanatory Model

Mobilized Resources=f (Gender, Position, Network Structure, Network Content, Embedded Resources)

10

Individual Characteristics

Structural Position

Network Properties: Structure; Content; Resources

Mobilized Resources

Returns: *Instrumental (e.g. reputation) *Expressive (e.g. satisfaction)

Context

VariablesVariables:Dependent - Mobilized Resources:

Mean Reviews (0-1)Mean Introductions (0-1)Mean Nominations (0-1)Mean Range of Career Support Resources (0-3)

Independent - Individual Characteristics & Network Properties: Male (0, 1)Network Efficiency (0-1) Mean Multiplexity (0-4)Multiplex Efficiency (0-1)Resources – Mean Seniority (0-1)

Control - Structural Position And resources: Associate Professor (0, 1)Full Professor (0, 1)Mean seniority (0-1)Mean equality of seniority (status homophily) (0-1)

Findings: Network Properties and Findings: Network Properties and Mobilized ResourcesMobilized Resources

Effect of Structural Holes - NOEffect of Multiplexity – MaybeEfficient Multiplexity - YES

Dependent variable Beta Sig. Beta Sig. Beta Sig. Beta Sig.

Independent variablesIndividual Properties and Position:

Male -0,03 0,51 0,00 0,91 -0,02 0,55 -0,05 0,19Associate Professor -0,06 0,20 0,06 0,19 0,10 0,03 0,00 0,97

Full Professor -0,12 0,02 0,08 0,12 0,22 0,00 -0,11 0,02Network Properties:

Effi ciency -0,06 0,28 0,01 0,87 -0,02 0,68 -0,06 0,19Multiplexity -0,30 0,33 -0,17 0,58 -0,59 0,06 0,00 1,00

Effi cient Multiplexity 0,47 0,12 0,21 0,49 0,75 0,01 0,43 0,12Status homophily 0,15 0,00 0,27 0,00 0,23 0,00 0,13 0,00

Seniority 0,16 0,00 0,25 0,00 0,20 0,00 0,07 0,09Adjusted R Square 0,09 0,07 0,10 0,25

N 602 602 602 602

Table 3 Linear Regression Results: Mobilized ResourcesNominations RangeIntroductionsReviews

Findings by position:

Assistant ProfessorsEfficient Multiplexity - YES,for Reviews and Range of Resources

Associate Professors Efficient Multiplexity - YES,for Nominations

Discussion:Discussion:Measure of efficient multiplexity can be

used to understand the entrepreneurial activities of academic scientists;

Different network structures and properties of relationship may be beneficial for mobilization of different resources;

Relationships within the individual research discussion networks differ by position;

14

Further Steps:Analysis of other types of relationships in our data;Conceptual expansion of entrepreneurial networks:

◦ “right” balance of “open” and “close” relationships (“late” Burt, 2001, Kadushin, 2002);

◦ “right” balance of “open talk network” and “closed collaboration networks”

Operationalization of entrepreneurial network as one that is rich with multiplex relationships outside of respondents university, country

Thank YOU!Thank YOU!Questions and Feedback Welcome!Questions and Feedback Welcome!