Opportunism

About: Opportunism is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 2030 publications have been published within this topic receiving 97170 citations. The topic is also known as: opportunist.

The Benefits and Pitfalls of Social Capital: Empirical Evidence from Two Organizations in the United Kingdom†

Abstract: Recently, there has been a shift in the way management scholars view the firm, from traditional models that are based on ideas of opportunism and market failure to newer knowledge-based theories that argue for a more socialized perspective. One of the key components of these theories is the notion of social capital. Social capital is the set of resources that accrue to an individual or group by virtue of their social connections. As such, it is a resource that is jointly owned. Most recent research adopts a more-is-better approach to social capital, suggesting that individuals with larger quantity of ties derive more positive benefits. However in this paper, we argue that using social capital has both benefits and drawbacks for organizations, and that these positive and negative aspects of social capital occur simultaneously. To substantiate our claim, we use data collected from sets of interviews with senior and middle managers in two organizations in the United Kingdom. Our findings indicate that while social capital has many beneficial effects with respect to information access and retrieval, community building, and underlying group norms, there are also a number of less-beneficial aspects, which are under-explored in the current empirical literature. Furthermore, we suggest that organizations must develop an understanding of the bridging and bonding elements of social capital, as these are critical for its implementation. Implications of the research findings and future research directions are discussed.

The Network Position of Small Businesses: An Explanatory Model

Abstract: The economic arena is growing more and more complex by the day - competition is stiffening, market demand is changing constantly, and government intervention does not make things easier. Small businesses are constantly faced with this incontrovertible reality. No doubt new opportunities are created, but there are certainly risks involved too. Networking, with its emphasis on informality and opportunism, is seen as an ideal mechanism for thriving in these variable environmental conditions (Birley, Cromie, and Myers 1991). The popular image of the entrepreneur as an isolated figure who overcomes obstacles and fends off dangers alone is at best incomplete (Dollinger 1985). Networks, involving organized systems of relationships between entrepreneurs and the outside world, are particularly valuable to the small business sector. The fragility which accompanies small size can be offset by the supportive environment provided by resilient networks (Szarka 1990). The research literature covers a wide variety of theoretical perspectives on network activity. Although some empirical work on the potential of network analysis for organizational interventions by means of "blockmodelling" has been carried out (White, Boorman, and Breiger 1976; Nelson 1988), as yet little has been done to make network theory operational in a way practical enough to help organizations position themselves in networks or develop network strategies (Paasche, Pettersen, and Solem 1993; Lago 1995; Provan and Milward 1995). With this article, we try to fill the empirical gap by analyzing the causal relationship between entrepreneur- and enterprise-related factors and networks, with the intention of contributing to the understanding of the factors that promote network formation. An in-depth analysis of these explanatory factors is deemed to be necessary before there can be discussion of the transferability of attractive network models and of policy initiatives to that end (Szarka 1990). In this article, we will first present the conceptual model, which describes the important role of entrepreneur- and enterprise-related characteristics on the network scene and the choice of network variables. This is followed by a description of the hypotheses anti by the methodology. Then we analyze the empirical results of the impact of entrepreneur- and enterprise-related elements on network formation. Finally, the main research results and their policy implications for small business owners, supporting institutions, and researchers are discussed. Conceptual Model Although the literature describes anti explains networks in many different ways, there is agreement that networks consist of organized systems of relationships, and hence a network is generally defined as a specific type of relation linking a defined set of persons, objects, or events (Nelson 1988; Szarka 1990). In this article, we shall not concentrate on the reasons why small businesses develop and participate in networks (for example, transaction cost motives, resource dependence, trust, and strategic considerations), but instead on the possible influence of entrepreneur- and enterprise-related characteristics on networks. Entrepreneur-related factors are included because research suggests that the entrepreneurs, embedded in their businesses and in the external environment, are the actual composers of the network elements. Birley (1990) stresses the fact that every set of relationships is unique and is determined by the person creating the network. In addition, entrepreneurs do not readily delegate network activity to subordinates (Birley, Cromie, and Myers 1991). Other studies have shown that a number of features specific to the company, such as its financial situation, orientation towards growth, organization, and approach to the human factor, differ according to the size of the company and the industry sector (Donckels et al. 1987; Donckels and Hoebeke 1991a, 1991b; Gray 1993). …

The Meaning(s) of Trust. A Content Analysis on the Diverse Conceptualizations of Trust in Scholarly Research on Business Relationships

Abstract: Scholarly research largely converges on the argument that trust is of paramount importance to drive economic agents toward mutually satisfactory, fair, and ethically compliant behaviors. There is, however, little agreement on the meaning of trust, whose conceptualizations differ with respect to actors, relationships, behaviors, and contexts. At present, we know much better what trust does than what trust is. In this article, we present an extensive review and analysis of the most prominent articles on trust in market relationships. Using computer-aided content analysis and network analysis methods, we identify key, recurring dimensions that guided the conceptualization of trust in past research, and show how trust can be developed as a multifaceted and layered construct. Our results are an important contribution to a convergence of research toward a shared and common view of the meaning of trust. This process is important to ensure the body of trust research’s internal theoretical consistency, and to provide reliable and common principles for the management of business relationships – a context in which opportunism and imperfect information may induce economic actors to cheat and stray from fair and ethically compliant behaviors.