Elsevier

Social Networks

Volume 28, Issue 1, January 2006, Pages 24-37
Social Networks

Gender differences in the creation of different types of social capital: A multilevel study

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2005.04.002Get rights and content

Abstract

This study examined gender differences in the creation of hard and soft social capital in a sample of 352 female and 486 male faculty members. Men were shown to be more effective in creating hard social capital, but, unexpectedly, women were not found to be the emotional specialists they often are thought to be. Moreover, multilevel analyses indicated that men were more effective in using emotional intensity of ties to create hard social capital, and they were also more effective using team-related resources to create both hard and soft social capital.

Section snippets

Gender differences in the creation of social capital

Social resources embedded in networks may provide various benefits, such as information, influence, and control. Social capital reflects the access to these resources (Burt, 1997, Lin et al., 1981, Seibert et al., 2001). A central focus of the social networks perspective is on the structure of social interactions and how this structure enhances or constrains access to valued resources (Lin et al., 1981, Sandefur and Laumann, 1998, Seibert et al., 2001). The social network of each person can be

Resources: individual linked strong ties and team-related resources

Within organizations, social capital resources are rather diverse and can be found within different structural locations. The present study will distinguish between social resources that can be characterized as strong ties and as team-related characteristics. Strong ties are properties of the personal network of employees; team resources are derived from the working context. The two next sections will elaborate how (1) strong ties and (2) team-related resources may affect the creation of both

Population and sample

This study was comprised of a sample of faculty members from a larger survey on careers of faculty members within the Netherlands. All faculty members received a questionnaire at their home address with a free return envelope. Anonymity was guaranteed and a letter of introduction from the board of the university supported the study. Finally, 1232 (40%) questionnaires were returned. Because of the length of the questionnaire and the additional lengthy inventory of social network variables,

Data analysis

Team-related resources are essentially measures at the aggregate level. According to Bliese and Jex (1999), the use of aggregated variables may shed light on relationships between such variables and employees outcomes that would be missed if one was restricted to individual level analyses. Assessing whether team-related resources are associated with the accumulation of both hard and soft social capital therefore necessitates multilevel analysis (Snijders and Bosker, 1999). F-values for group

Results

Table 1 presents mean scores, standard deviations, and correlation coefficients. Differences between male and female faculty members on the research variables reflect current differences between male and female faculty members (Gillespie et al., 2001, West and Smith, 1998). For example, female faculty members are lower in hierarchical rank (mean 2.06 versus 2.65), work fewer hours (mean 39.99 versus 45.04), and assess their own capabilities less favorable than male faculty members (mean 8.89

Discussion

Within the present sample of faculty members, men and women appeared to be both effective in using resources to create soft social capital. However, it was shown that male faculty members in this study were better able to create hard social capital than female faculty members. Unexpectedly, female faculty members were not better in the creation of soft social capital than male faculty members. Thus, at least in this professional context, women do not appear to be the emotional specialists they

References (51)

  • G. Lai et al.

    Network resources, contact resources, and status attainment

    Social Networks

    (1998)
  • J.A. Stoloff et al.

    Women's participation in the labor force: the role of social networks

    Social Networks

    (1999)
  • M.E. Addis et al.

    Men, masculinity, and the contexts of help seeking

    American Psychologist

    (2003)
  • C.J. Auster

    Masculinity and femininity in contemporary American society: a re-evaluation using the Bem sex-role inventory

    Sex Roles: a Journal of Research

    (2000)
  • A.B. Bakker et al.

    Validation of the Maslach burnout inventory—general survey: an Internet survey

    Anxiety, Stress and Coping

    (2002)
  • S.L. Bem

    The measurement of psychological androgyny

    Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology

    (1974)
  • P.D. Bliese et al.

    Incorporating multiple levels of analysis into occupational stress research

    Work and Stress

    (1999)
  • R.S. Burt

    The contingent value of social capital

    Administrative Science Quarterly

    (1997)
  • R.S. Burt

    The gender of social capital

    Rationality and Society

    (1998)
  • K.E. Campbell

    Gender differences in job-related networks

    Work and Occupations

    (1988)
  • G.R. Carroll et al.

    On the social networks of managers

    Academy of Management Journal

    (1996)
  • M. Cianni et al.

    Perceived racial, ethnic, and gender differences in access to developmental experiences

    Group and Organization Management

    (1995)
  • M.L. Forrett et al.

    Correlates of networking behavior for managerial and professional employees

    Group and Organization Management

    (2001)
  • C.J. Gersick et al.

    Learning from academia: the importance of relationships in professional life

    Academy of Management Journal

    (2000)
  • J.A. Gilbert et al.

    Role of informal integration in career advancement: investigations in plural and multicultural organizations and implications for diversity valuation

    Sex Roles

    (1998)
  • N.A. Gillespie et al.

    Occupational stress in universities: staff perceptions of the causes, consequences and moderators of stress

    Work and Stress

    (2001)
  • M.S. Granovetter

    The strength of weak ties

    American Journal of Sociology

    (1973)
  • E. Greenglass

    Work stress, coping and social support: implications for women's occupational well being

  • V.A. Haines et al.

    Network range and health

    Journal of Health and Social Behavior

    (1992)
  • G. Hofstede et al.

    Measuring organizational cultures: a qualitative and quantitative study across twenty cases

    Administrative Science Quarterly

    (1990)
  • H. Ibarra

    Personal networks of women and minorities in management: a conceptual framework

    Academy of Management Review

    (1993)
  • H. Ibarra

    Race, opportunity, and diversity of social circles in managerial networks

    Academy of Management Journal

    (1995)
  • R.M. Kanter

    Some effects of proportions on group life: skewed sex ratios and responses to token women

    American Journal of Sociology

    (1977)
  • N. Lin et al.

    Social resources and strength of ties: structural factors in occupational status attainment

    American Sociological Review

    (1981)
  • K.S. Lyness et al.

    Climbing the corporate ladder: do female and male executives follow the same route?

    Journal of Applied Psychology

    (2000)
  • Cited by (125)

    • Workplace ostracism: Impact on social capital, organizational trust, and service recovery performance

      2022, Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management
      Citation Excerpt :

      These results were expected as employees with higher tenure have more opportunities to interact with their colleagues. Also, females usually tend to be more socially connected than men (Umberson et al., 1996), although some studies have found no gender differences when it comes to soft capital (e.g., emotional support resources; Van Emmerik, 2006). Millennials (individuals born between 1980 and 1999 [Seppanen & Gualtieri, 2012]) presented lower organizational trust (β = −0.279, [-0.407, −0.147]) while compared to other generations.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text