Social Capital and Organizational Performance: Exploring the Role of External Environment

Abstract:

In an effort to systematically review past research results, we conducted relative analysis examining the strength of the link between different social capital dimensions and organizational performance as well as potential moderators affecting this relationship. Analyses of past studies, we also found that this relationship depends on the social capital dimension considered, the institutional and industry contexts in which the organization operates. In this paper, we analysis the direct effect of social capital on organizational performance and deem that a main effect analysis providing an incomplete picture of performance implications of social capital. Internal resources and external environments are important to the development of a firm. Over all, our research contributes to a better understanding of social capital and organizational performance to explain variance in organizational performance.

• Periodical: Advanced Materials Research (Volume 664)
• Pages: 1151-1154
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.664.1151
• Online since: February 2013
• Authors: Cai Ling Xue
• Keywords: Organizational Performance, Social Capital

References

[1] Wiklund, J. & Shepherd, D. (2005). Entrepreneurial orientation and small business performance: A configurational approach [J]. Journal of Business Venturing, 20, 71–91.

DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2004.01.001

[2] Lumpkin, G., Dess, G.G., 1996. Clarifying the entrepreneurial orientation construct and linking it to performance [J]. Academy Management Review. 21 (1), 135–172.

DOI: 10.5465/amr.1996.9602161568

[3] Covin, J.G., Slevin, D.P., 1989. Strategic management of small firms in hostile and benign environments [J]. Strategic Management Journal , 10 (January), 75–87.

DOI: 10.1002/smj.4250100107

[4] Delios, A., & Beamish, P. W. 1999. Ownership strategy of Japanese firms: Transactional, institutional, and experience influences. Strategic Management Journal, 20: 915-933.

DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0266(199910)20:10<915::aid-smj51>3.0.co;2-0

[5] Erramilli, M. K., Agarwal, S., & Dev, C. S. 2002. Choice between non-equity entry modes: An organizational capability perspective. Journal of International Business Studies, 33(2): 223-242.

DOI: 10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8491014

[6] Gatignon, H., & Anderson, E. 1988. The multinational corporation's degree of control over foreign subsidiaries: An empirical test of a transaction cost explanation. Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, 4: 305-336.

DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.jleo.a036954

[7] Gomes-Casseres, B. 1989. Firm ownership preferences and host government restrictions: An integrated approach. Journal of International Business Studies, 21(1): 1-22.

DOI: 10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490324

[8] Hennart, J. F. 1991. The transaction cost theory of joint ventures: An empirical study of Japanese subsidiaries in theUnited States. Management Science, 37(4): 483-497.

DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.37.4.483