Social capital: a review of its dimensions and promise for future family enterprise research
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is twofold. First, to review the notion of social capital and its dominant dimensions and appraise the ways in which social capital and these dimensions have been applied within family business research. Second, to develop a number of suggestions of ways in which the concept could be extended, from a symbolic perspective, to provide greater insight into the complexity and heterogeneity of family systems. Design/methodology/approach – This is a conceptual paper designed to stimulate new ways of thinking about social capital and the competitive advantage of family firms. Findings – This paper suggests that social capital has a symbolic dimension, which has been largely overlooked both within the field of family business and across social capital research more generally. Within the field of family business the authors connect this neglect to an over-emphasis on business theories. The authors offer ways in which incorporating a family theory – symbolic interactionism – could help to better understand family firms, social capital, and competitive advantage. Originality/value – This paper proposes an original approach to social capital. Guided by the notion of informed pluralism the paper integrates seemingly unrelated theories and identifies opportunities for new and innovative research. By espousing a symbolic interactionist approach the argument developed within this paper is valuable for helping to advance new ways of thinking about social capital and the competitive (dis)advantage of family firms.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".