Journal of Economic PerspectivesVolume 19, Number 1Winter 2005Pages 3350

The Impact of Social Structure on

Economic Outcomes
Mark Granovetter

ocial structure, especially in the form of social networks, affects economic

outcomes for three main reasons. First, social networks affect the flow and
the quality of information. Much information is subtle, nuanced and difficult to verify, so actors do not believe impersonal sources and instead rely on
people they know. Second, social networks are an important source of reward and
punishment, since these are often magnified in their impact when coming from
others personally known. Third, trust, by which I mean the confidence that others
will do the right thing despite a clear balance of incentives to the contrary,
emerges, if it does, in the context of a social network.
Economists have recently devoted considerable attention to the impact of
social structure and networks on the economy; for example, see the economists
chapters in Rauch and Casella (2001) (and the illuminating review essay of this
volume by Zuckerman, 2003), as well as Dutta and Jackson (2003) and CalvoArmengol (2004). However, I focus here on sociologists contributions. Sociologists
have developed core principles about the interactions of social structure, information, ability to punish or reward, and trust that frequently recur in their analyses of
political, economic and other institutions. I begin by reviewing some of these
principles. Building on these, I then discuss how social structures and social
networks can affect economic outcomes like hiring, price, productivity and
innovation.

Social Networks and Economic Outcomes: Core Principles

The following four core principles are important, but not meant to be exhaustive or, in any sense, an axiomatic treatment.

y Mark Granovetter is the Joan Butler Ford Professor, Department of Sociology, Stanford
University, Stanford, California. His e-mail address is [email protected].

34

Journal of Economic Perspectives

1) Norms and Network Density. Normsshared ideas about the proper way to
behaveare clearer, more firmly held and easier to enforce the more dense a social
network. (If a social network consists of n nodes, people, firms or other social
units, density is the proportion of the possible n(n 1)/ 2 connections among
these nodes that are actually present.)1 This argument is one of the oldest in social
psychology; for instance, see the classic account of Festinger, Schachter and Back
(1948). It rests on the fact that the denser a network, the more unique paths along
which information, ideas and influence can travel between any two nodes. Thus,
greater density makes ideas about proper behavior more likely to be encountered
repeatedly, discussed and fixed; it also renders deviance from resulting norms
harder to hide and, thus, more likely to be punished.
One implication of this perspective is that collective action that depends on
overcoming free-rider problems is more likely in groups whose social network is
dense and cohesive, since actors in such networks typically internalize norms that
discourage free riding and emphasize trust. Note that all else equal, larger groups
will have lower network density because people have cognitive, emotional, spatial
and temporal limits on how many social ties they can sustain. Thus, the larger the
group, the lower its ability to crystallize and enforce norms, including those against
free riding. The insight that free-rider behavior is especially unlikely within immediate families is a special case of this argument.
2) The Strength of Weak Ties. More novel information flows to individuals
through weak than through strong ties. Because our close friends tend to move in
the same circles that we do, the information they receive overlaps considerably with
what we already know. Acquaintances, by contrast, know people that we do not and,
thus, receive more novel information. This outcome arises in part because our
acquaintances are typically less similar to us than close friends, and in part because
they spend less time with us. Moving in different circles from ours, they connect us
to a wider world. They may therefore be better sources when we need to go beyond
what our own group knows, as in finding a new job or obtaining a scarce service.
This is so even though close friends may be more interested than acquaintances in
helping us; social structure can dominate motivation. This is one aspect of what I
have called the strength of weak ties (Granovetter, 1973, 1983).
This argument has macro level implications. If each persons close friends
know one another, they form a closely knit clique. Individuals are then connected
to other cliques through their weak rather than their strong ties. Thus, from an
aerial view of social networks, if cliques are connected to one another, it is mainly
by weak ties. This implies that such ties determine the extent of information
diffusion in large-scale social structures. One outcome is that in scientific fields,
new information and ideas are more efficiently diffused through weak ties
(Granovetter, 1983).
There are many more weak ties in social networks than strong ones, and most
such ties may carry information of little significance. But the important point here

For detailed technical exposition of social network analysis, see Wasserman and Faust (1994).

Mark Granovetter

35

is that such ties are much more likely than strong ones to play the role of
transmitting unique and nonredundant information across otherwise largely disconnected segments of social networks.2
3) The Importance of Structural Holes. Burt (1992) extended and reformulated
the weak ties argument by emphasizing that what is of central importance is not
the quality of any particular tie but rather the way different parts of networks are
bridged. He emphasizes the strategic advantage that may be enjoyed by individuals
with ties into multiple networks that are largely separated from one another.
Insofar as they constitute the only route through which information or other
resources may flow from one network sector to another, they can be said to exploit
structural holes in the network.
4) The Interpenetration of Economic and Non-Economic Action. Much social life
revolves around a non-economic focus. Therefore, when economic and noneconomic activity are intermixed, non-economic activity affects the costs and the
available techniques for economic activity. This mixing of activities is what I have
called social embeddedness of the economy (Granovetter, 1985)the extent to
which economic action is linked to or depends on action or institutions that are
non-economic in content, goals or processes. Among the kinds of embeddedness
that sociologists have discussed are embeddedness of economic action in social
networks, culture, politics and religion.3
One common example is that a culture of corruption may impose high
economic costs and require many off-the-books transactions to carry on normal
production of goods and services. Such negative aspects of social embeddedness
receive the lions share of attention, especially when characterized pejoratively as
rent seeking. Less often noted, but probably more important, are savings
achieved when actors pursue economic goals through non-economic institutions
and practices to whose costs they made little or no contribution. For example,
employers who recruit through social networks need notand probably could
notpay to create the trust and obligations that motivate friends and relatives to
help one another find employment. Such trust and obligations arise from the way
a societys institutions pattern kin and friendship ties, and any economic efficiency
gains resulting from them are a byproduct, typically unintended, of actions and
patterns enacted by individuals with noneconomic motivations.
The notion that people often deploy resources from outside the economy to
enjoy cost advantages in producing goods and services raises important questions,
usually sidestepped in social theory, about how the economy interacts with other
social institutions. Such deployment resembles arbitrage in using resources acquired cheaply in one setting for profit in another. As with classic arbitrage, it need
not create economic profits for any particular actor, since if all are able to make the

This argument plays a significant role in the recent interdisciplinary literature on complex networks.
See Barabasi (2002), Buchanan (2002) and Watts (2003).
3
The subfield of economic sociology is partly built on analysis of these types of embeddedness. For a
representative collection of classic and modern items, with notes and commentary, see Granovetter and
Swedberg (2001).

36

Journal of Economic Perspectives

same use of non-economic resources, none has any cost advantage over any other.
Yet overall efficiency may be improved by reducing everyones costs and freeing
some resources for other uses.
But whereas true arbitrage connects previously separated markets that may
then become indistinguishable, the use of extra-economic resources to increase
economic efficiency need not close the gap between the economy and other social
activity, because separate institutional sectors draw their energy from different
sources and consist of distinctly different activities. Many authors have argued that
economic activity penetrates and transforms other parts of social life. Thus, Karl
Marx asserted (for example, in chapter 1 of The Communist Manifesto) that family
and friendship ties would be fully subordinated under modern capitalism to the
cash nexus. But despite intimate connections between social networks and the
modern economy, the two have not merged or become identical. Indeed, norms
often develop that limit the merger of sectors. For example, when economic actors
buy and sell political influence, threatening to merge political and economic
institutions, this is condemned as corruption. Such condemnation invokes the
norm that political officials are responsible to their constituents rather than to the
highest bidder and that the goals and procedures of the polity are and should be
different and separate from those of the economy.
In what follows, in part with the help of these core principles, I will trace out
the impact of social structure on a series of important economic outcomes. I begin
with the allocation of labor.

Social Structure and Labor Markets

Economic models typically assume that workers and jobs are matched through
a search whose costs and benefits are equalized at the margin (Granovetter, 1995b,
pp. 141146). But in most real labor markets, social networks play a key role.
Prospective employers and employees prefer to learn about one another from
personal sources whose information they trust. This is an example of what has been
called social capital (Lin, 2001). It has obvious links to theories of asymmetric
information (for example, Montgomery, 1991), with the difference that unlike in
most such models, there is what one might call bilateral asymmetry both employer and employee have information about their own quality that the other
needs. In the classic lemons model of Akerlof (1970), by contrast, the seller of a
used car considers all buyers interchangeable and does not require subtle information about them.
Because all social interaction unavoidably transmits information, details about
employers, employees and jobs flow continuously through social networks that
people maintain in large part for non-economic reasons. Since individuals use
social contacts and networks already in place, and need not invest in constructing
them, the cost is less than that of more formal search intermediaries. Because
pre-existing networks are unevenly distributed across individuals, whatever social
processes led to these networks will create an uneven playing field in the labor

The Impact of Social Structure on Economic Outcomes

37

market without any actor necessarily having intended to do so (Granovetter, 1995b,

pp. 169 177).
Economic job search models can obscure how commonly individuals learn
about new jobs in social settings, without having expended resources earmarked for
job search, since survey respondents who deny searching for their present job are
often excluded from further analysis. The proportion of job finders who are
nonsearchers varies from 30 to 60 percent depending on the time and place
surveyed. In the few cases where nonsearchers were carefully scrutinized, the large
majority had found jobs through personal contacts (Granovetter, 1995b,
pp. 140 146).
Because novel information flows are more likely through weak ties than strong,
acquaintances developed over the span of an entire career play a special role,
though this varies across national and other settings (Granovetter, 1995b,
pp. 160 162; Montgomery, 1994; Bian, 1997). Whether the use of weak or other
ties in finding jobs significantly affects wages, wage growth, job satisfaction and
productivity has been debated but not resolved. Large aggregated data sets sometimes do not show clear effects (as in Mouw, 2003), but more focused and
specialized samples often do. Because so much of the hiring action in labor markets
occurs through social networks of very different kinds in a wide variety of circumstances, it would be surprising if outcomes were uniform. The resources held by
individuals networks, the intentions of employers and macroeconomic conditions
are only three of the important sources of variation in outcomes when networks
route people to jobs (Granovetter, 1995b, pp. 146 162).
The interdependence among careers and networks of different individuals
leads to interesting modeling possibilities. For example, characterize those who
constitute ones social network as balls in an urn. Let contacts with useful job
information be red balls and others white. A model of pure heterogeneity suggests
that urn composition is constant, and better connected individuals are those with
a larger proportion of red balls in their urn. But a state dependence model would
suggest that when a person finds a new job through her network, she makes new
connections, so that at the next draw, there would be a larger proportion of red
balls in her urn. What empirical data suggest really happens is more complex still:
that this proportion also depends on whether the people you know have themselves
changed their own urns proportions, by moving around from job to job and
improving their own networks, which makes them a better source of information.
So the composition of ones own urn depends on changes in the urns of those one
is connected to, requiring a more elaborate iterative model that takes account of
the networks overall structure (Granovetter, 1988, p. 194). The point is that when
mobility results from network connections, it changes network structure that then
feeds back into future mobility patterns. Thus, network structure can be partially
endogenized in labor market analysis.
One implication is that where rates of interfirm mobility are quite low, as in
Japan during the 1970s and 1980s, few workers will ever have worked with others
who are now at different firms. Then, if mobility to a new firm relies heavily on
certification to employers of ones ability by someone already in that firm, a lack of

38

Journal of Economic Perspectives

mobility between firms will be self-perpetuating, and conversely, when interfirm

mobility is high, that greater mobility may also reproduce itself, as in Silicon Valley
labor markets (Saxenian, 1994).

Social Structure and Prices

When people trade with others they know, the impact of knowing each other
on the price varies with their relationship, the cost of shifting to different partners
and the market situation. To understand how deviations from competitive equilibrium price may occur requires analysis of both the economics and the sociology of
the situation. The theoretical issue is often not one of economic and sociological
arguments conflicting, but rather of the weakness of both in understanding how
actors with simultaneous economic and non-economic motives will act. Since there
are many dimensions along which to classify cases, and insufficient space for a fully
systematic account, I offer a few illustrative examples.
The anthropologist Sahlins (1972) reviews literature on tribal economies
showing that it is typical to trade only with designated others in foreign groups, in
part for protection in distant settings. He suggests that such continuing relations
make prices sticky when supply and demand shift, and revisions that would clear
the market require breaking old relations and forming new ones. A shift of trading
partners is more or less difficult under different circumstances, and depends on the
economic and noneconomic costs of severing a long-time tie and the available
social alternatives. Thus, the economic flexibility of the system depends on the
social structure of the trade relation (p. 313) and cannot be predicted without
knowing that social structure.
Studies of peasant markets often suggest that clientelization, defined as
dealing exclusively with known buyers and sellers, raises prices above their competitive level (for example, Belshaw, 1965, p. 78; Davis, 1973). This result suggests
an information asymmetry advantage of sellers over buyers, which may result from
buyers having more trouble in gauging quality of goods than sellers do in gauging
creditworthiness of customers (Geertz, 1978). The balance of advantage in bilateral
information asymmetry should determine its impact on price.
Where it is more complex to assess creditworthiness, sellers may lower their
price to achieve the greater certainty that comes with more complex and subtle
information resulting from continuing relations. Thus Uzzis (1999) study of
midmarket banking shows that Chicago firms with personal contacts to bankers pay
lower interest rates on loans and that banks cultivate such contacts as a business
strategy. Ferrary (2003) presents comparable results from a broad study of French
banks. Other seller costs beside credit risk may be reduced by detailed personal
knowledge of clients. Thus, Uzzi and Lancaster (2003) show that all else equal,
prices are lower for corporate clients with continuing ties to law firms because the
trust developed over time, and norms of reciprocity, allow the firm and its client to
reach agreement on potentially contentious issues such as what to charge for
knowledge developed for previous clients and applied to the present case. To say

Mark Granovetter

39

that banks and law firms avoid adverse selection (compare Waldman, 2003,
pp. 136 137) and the costs of complex contracting through continuing personal
contacts is broadly consistent with standard economic arguments, but shows that
such arguments may apply only because actors leverage social relations for economic purposes. It is often not straightforward or feasible to do so, and then actors
with the insight or capacity to manage such relations will accrue advantages.
Few systematic data exist on buyer-seller attachments, but economist Arthur
Okun (1981, p. 148) observed that most markets with repeated purchases are
customer markets rather than auction markets, since customers avoid shopping
costs by sticking with their supplier. In such markets, prices rarely, if ever, equal
marginal costs. . .and generally exceed them by a significant margin. Arguing that
customers pay to economize on search costs is consistent with a range of relationships between customer and supplier, from strong ties of personal friendship to
more impersonal situations where customers pay premiums to well-known firms for
their products, in return for hoped-for guarantees of quality (Klein and Leffler,
1981).
Exactly where buyer-seller relations fall in this range may result in part from
how easy it is to assess quality of goods through brand names or other impersonal
standards. Thus, the 1996 General Social Survey shows that for goods where
assessment is difficult, such as used cars, legal advice and home repairs, one-quarter
to one-half of purchases in the United States are made through personal networks.
Survey respondents reported greater satisfaction with such purchases, and believed
that people receive better prices from personally known sellers (DiMaggio and
Louch, 1998). Since no direct data were collected on prices paid, we cannot be sure
their judgment is correct. If sellers do in fact offer friends and relatives lower prices
than they could get from strangers, this could be one measure of the cost of
obligations they feel in these personal relationships. Elsewhere, I have observed
that some businesses in developing countries may face significantly higher operating costs as the result of such obligations (Granovetter, 1995a).
The discussion thus far concerns only particular buyers and sellers. But largerscale collusion may affect price, and success or failure in such collusion may also
depend on personal relationships. Cartels, for example, may raise prices above
their competitive level, but are liable to defection. To succeed, they must penalize
defectors. One possible penalty is loss of social status in the group, but this penalty
is effective only if a member cares about such status. Cartels may fail when members
socially distant from the dominant group defect. Although some historians have
attributed the demise of American cartels to the sanctions of the Sherman Act in
1890 (Chandler, 1977, chapters 4 5), in practice such cartels had great difficulty in
the United States even before the Sherman Act had much effect (in roughly 1910).
Lamoreaux (1985, p. 188) suggests that the great merger wave from 18951904 in
part responded to the failure of cartels to restrain prices. I suggest that the failure
of many cartels in the later decades of the nineteenth century occurred in part
because of defection by renegade speculators like Jay Gould who were outside the
social and moral compass of other cartel members. Little is known of the social
organization of cartels, but some evidence suggests that countries whose cartels

40

Journal of Economic Perspectives

were more successful, such as Germany, had more socially homogeneous cartel
membership (Maschke, 1969).
An interesting bit of evidence comes from Podolny and Scott-Morton (1999),
who studied British shipping cartels from 1879 to 1929. They find that when
considering how to deal with industry newcomers, participants assessed whether
they would fit well into the moral community that sustained going rates and
practices. They took social status as a good proxy for this probability, assuming that
those with high status matching their own were more likely to comply. Consequently, high-status entrants were substantially less likely to face a price war initiated by existing cartel members. Even in the absence of formal cartels, social
friendship among competitors may impact price and performance. Ingram and
Roberts (2000) studied hotels in Sydney, Australia, and found that friendships
among managers had a clear positive net impact on performance and made it
easier to resist price wars. They also found that these effects were stronger, the
more cohesive the network of friends among hotel managers.
These considerations do not dispute the usual arguments about cartels, but
suggest that these arguments may underdetermine outcomes. Formal or informal
cartels use a mixture of market and nonmarket punishments and incentives to
enforce member cooperation, because members have both economic and noneconomic (for example, friendship and status) goals that they pursue simultaneously. Where important nonmarket forces that affect the success of cartels (or
other forms of economic cooperation) operate through social networks we need
explicit study of these social foundations to help explain outcomes. These cases
illustrate that norms are more easily enforced in dense social networks and also that
pre-existing social institutions impose costs and benefits on economic processes
that build on them.
That people trade with known others may fragment markets and inhibit
formation of a single equilibrium price. Carruthers (1996) studied equity trades in
London during 1712 and found that while many trades were impersonal, this was
not so for shares of the politically charged East India Company, where Whigs and
Tories often preferred trading only with fellow party members to keep shares from
opponents. The majority traded preferentially, but active professional traders did
not and, thus, could profit from discrepancies by arbitrage. This research is broadly
consistent with noise trader models as an alternative to the efficient markets
hypothesis (Shleifer and Summers, 1990), but it points to systematic and rational
but non-economic (here political) reasons for traders to deviate from the standard
model.
Personalized trading may fragment markets, however, even when goals are
purely economic. Baker (1984) studied stock options trading on the floor of a
major securities exchange. Prices did not stabilize as numbers of traders increased
(as standard theory predicts); instead, Baker observed that options traded by more
participants exhibited substantially greater price volatility. The reason was that,
seeking trust and social control, each trader dealt with a limited number of known
counterparts. That number is limited by bounds on cognition and physical space
and was not larger for widely traded options. Thus, when the number of traders on

The Impact of Social Structure on Economic Outcomes

41

the floor was significantly larger than the number of trading relationships individuals could sustain, communication became difficult and at times, the group broke
into cliques. Prices in very large trading groups were more volatile than in small
ones, because of the communication problems cited, and proliferation of cliques
resulted in additional overall volatility. A more purely economic explanation for the
association between size of crowd and volatility is that greater price volatility
presents more opportunities for trading profits, which attracts more traders.
Bakers data and statistical model show that both causal directions operate in his
setting. As in many situations, social and economic forces feed into one another.

Social Structure, Productivity and Compliance

Social relations are also closely linked to productivity. Economic models
attribute productivity to personal traits, modifiable by learning. But ones position
in a social group can also be a central influence on productivity, for several reasons.
One is that many tasks cannot be accomplished without serious cooperation from
others; another is that many tasks are too complex and subtle to be done by the
book (which is why the rulebook slowdown is a potent labor weapon) and
require the exercise of tacit knowledge appropriable only through interaction
with knowledgeable others. This makes deviance risky. It has been well known since
the 1930s that groups of workers arrive at quotas for what is an appropriate
amount to produce and that rate-busters risk being ostracized (Homans, 1950).
Groups can severely penalize unwelcome newcomers by failing to convey to them
the vital subtleties of work practices normally learned through interaction (Dalton,
1959, pp. 128 129), and workers with low group status will appear less skillful for
lack of assistance from others. On the other hand, in some settings, assistance can
be gotten in exchange for status deference, so that those willing to kowtow to
experienced workers may improve their performance (Blau, 1963). This is the dark
side of mentoring.
Because good relations with others are key, those entering a firm through
personal contacts have a head start in appearing and being more productive and
avoiding errors that might set back outsiders. Thus, many studies show that quit
rates are lower for those who enter through social networks, even net of ability or
quality of worker (for example, Fernandez, Castilla and Moore, 2000). Because of
measurement difficulties, there are few studies of productivity in relation to entry
route, but see Castilla (2002) for evidence that even in the routinized work of call
centers, there are clear effects of this kind.
Group norms and cultures also shape skill and productivity. Where groups
attach great value to skill, it can become an eagerly sought-after status currency.
Sabel (1982, p. 84) suggests that in the tightly knit social world of craftsmen, social
mobility is far less valued than technical prowess. . . .Titles are not important,
savoir faire is. Burawoy (1979, p. 64) notes that in the Chicago machine-shop where
he worked, skill with the machines was the key to group status: Until I was able to
strut around the floor like an experienced operator, as if I had all the time in the

42

Journal of Economic Perspectives

world and could still make out [produce the quota], few but the greenest would
condescend to engage me in conversation. Burawoy, a Marxist, laments that this
status system leads workers to cooperate with management in the production of
greater surplus value; employers might instead view this as a fortunate leveraging
of social arrangements they did not invest in creating. But for work groups to arrive
at such cultural agreement requires some social network cohesion and consequent
normative consensus. Variations in such settings are little studied, but first principles suggest that high turnover or social fragmentation in work groups would cut
against such consensus. Thus, employers would have reason to recruit through
social networks, insofar as they feel confident the prevailing culture supports their
own goals.4
In the case that Burawoy (1979) describes, employers do not seem aware of
their good fortune, but employers are often more perceptive. Indeed, their relations to workers rarely approximate the daily struggle that Marxism predicts.
Granovetter and Tilly (1988, p. 202) comment that many workers have opportunities to embezzle, steal, shirk, sabotage and otherwise diminish an enterprises
profitability. Some of them take these opportunities. But most do not. . . .Why?
Systems of control make a difference.
Some systems of control resemble those featured in principal-agent models of
the work relationshipthat is, direct surveillance and/or some form of payment by
results or piecework. However, there are also a range of alternatives, not commonly
included in economic analysis, that work through social groups and create compliance in less intrusive ways. A very important example is what we called loyalty
systemsattempts to elicit cooperation from workers deriving not only from
incentives but also from identification with the firm or with some set of individuals
that encourages high standards and productivity. Loyalty systems can build on
commitment to a profession. Then, professional ethics and monitoring provide
some guarantee that a professional employee will perform reliably (Granovetter
and Tilly, 1988, p. 202). Recruiting from within homogeneous social categories can
be an employer strategy to derive benefit from the loyalty and social control that
already exists within such categories and networks, once these come to operate
within the firm. Loyalty systems benefit from the intense socialization, prior
screening of their members, membership in groups outside the firm that guarantee
and monitor the workers behavior, and extensive off-the-job social relations. Thus
employers have considerable incentives to homogenize new members of the loyalty
system and to recruit them within the same existing social networks (p. 203).
Loyalty and resulting compliance is, broadly speaking, a political issue. Max
Weber noted the inordinate expense of conducting civil administration through
coercion alone. Instead, he notes the importance of systems where citizens consider
orders from civil administrators to be legitimatethey comply with an order or a

4
Some economic literature suggests that under certain conditions, heterogeneity rather than homogeneity increases productivity in work groups. See, for example, Hamilton, Nickerson and Owan (2003).
Since the heterogeneity referred to in this literature is in individual productivity, this need not be
correlated with the social homogeneity that I discuss here, and both effects could operate together.

Mark Granovetter

43

law not only because it is aligned with their incentives, but also because they
consider it appropriate to do so. (See, for example, the exposition of Webers ideas
in Bendix, 1979, chapter 9.) Loyalty systems instill in employees similar feelings of
legitimacy.
In Freelands (2001) analysis of General Motors from the 1920s to the 1970s,
which draws on extensive archival resources, he emphasizes that compliance of
division managers with orders from headquarters was consummate rather than
perfunctory only when they saw them as legitimate. He writes (p. 31): [T]he more
extensive the firms division of labor, the more problematic it is to secure consent
from subordinates. Increasingly, top executives must justify their decisions in order
to secure the consent of subordinates who possess high levels of expertise. . . .The
simplest way. . .is to allow subordinates to exercise voice in planning and policy
formulation, even if they are not formally responsible for doing so. The vital task
of maintaining order, he continues (p. 33), cannot be understood primarily as an
exercise in economizing, for the same arrangements that lead to technical efficiency also disrupt social order in the firm. . . .Governance. . .is an inherently
political process in which top executives must be willing to forge a compromise
between actors in the firm in order to preserve cooperation and promote consummate performance. Freeland stresses that the issue was not one of disagreement
over policies, since division heads resisted even policies acceptable in principle, if
they had no part in creating them. Full membership in the social organization of
decisions was a prerequisite for perceiving them as legitimate.
For these reasons, the corporate governance question of how the structure of
firms will affect productivity and profit cannot be reduced to the argument that
division managers should stay out of central management, given their likely opportunism on behalf of their own units, while central management should not meddle
in division operating procedures, in which they would have little competency or
knowledge, as proposed in Chandler (1962, 1977) and Williamson (1975). Indeed,
Freeland (2001) finds that General Motors was most profitable in periods when
division heads were fully included in central planning and least when they were
excluded. Thus, the firm cannot be viewed simply as a formal organization, but also
must be understood as having the essential elements of any social community.
Continuing long-term ties do not always unambiguously improve the productivity and profit of individuals and organizations. Uzzi (1996), for example, studied
relations between apparel manufacturers and their subcontractors in the New York
City garment district. He distinguished between arms length impersonal ties and
embedded ties, in which repeated interaction had led to trust and mutual
understanding. He found that relations of trust are not always superior: for example, subcontractors with networks of ties to manufacturers that were uniformthat
is, predominantly embedded ties or predominantly impersonal ties had a higher
rate of failure than those with a mixture of the two types (pp. 692 693). He argues
that embedded ties offer considerable advantages in stable situations, but in
periods of change, lock firms into relationships and may inhibit adaptation. Arms
length ties lack the benefits of trusting interaction but permit more flexibility when

44

Journal of Economic Perspectives

change is needed. Thus, some optimal balance exists among types of ties, and firms
achieving that balance are more likely to survive over varying market conditions.
Mizruchi and Stearns (2001) tell a related cautionary tale about the virtues and
drawbacks of trust. They studied a leading multinational commercial bank at three
locations in the United States, focusing on the use of internal networks in closing
deals with corporate clients. Bank officers sought out others in the bank for
information (about the clients or about the details of a certain type of deal) and for
approval. Under conditions of uncertainty about the nature of the deal or the
client, these bankers were more likely to consult their strong tiesthose in the
bank whom they knew well and trustedfor both information and approval. But
surprisingly, this strategy appeared counterproductive in leading to deal closure.
The reason seems to be that while ones trusted and close colleagues may readily
approve deals, which is a necessary condition for deals to close, they are too
ingrown a group to provide a wide range of constructive input that will enable a
complex deal to be improved in such a way as to meet the needs of the client.
Mizruchi and Stearns comment that uncertainty creates conditions that trigger a
desire for the familiar, and bankers respond to this by turning to those with whom
they are close. Yet it is this very action that makes it more difficult for the banker
to be successful. Not only does this illustrate the simultaneous weakness of strong
ties and the strength of weak ties, but it also shows how our social instincts can run
counter to our best interests (p. 667). By contrast, accessing a sparse network by
going through weak ties for formal approval is superior in that it generates a
diversity of views and potential criticisms that compel the banker to create a higher
quality product (p. 667), which is then more attractive to the customer.

Social Structure and Innovation

Many studies, comprehensively reviewed in Rogers (2003), show the powerful
impact of social structure and networks on the extent and source of innovation and
its diffusion. Here, I focus on innovations especially relevant to markets.
One example is innovation in what is considered a marketable commodity.
Contrary to Marxist assumptions, the market does not commodify every aspect of
human life. But items proscribed at one point in time can later become routine
commodities. Zelizer (1978) traces the case of life insurance, which early
nineteenth-century Americans saw as sacrilege, or at best gambling, but which by
the late 1800s had established itself as a breadwinners obligation. She notes that
the insurance industry, to achieve this transformation, made use of religious
language and secured the support of clergy who urged on their flocks the necessity
of providing for family after death, making this a sacred duty. This personal
connection seemed indispensable in attaching ritual and symbolic significance to
this otherwise rather bloodless commodity.
Because participants in such discussions were no longer living, Zelizer (1978)
relied on pamphlets, diaries and other documentary evidence to understand the
normative changes that transformed insurance from profane gambling to sacred

The Impact of Social Structure on Economic Outcomes

45

obligation. MacKenzie and Millo (2003) studied the more recent emergence of
financial derivatives as a legitimate product. Through interviews, they reconstructed in detail the social network process by which the perception of options
changed from that of dubious gamble to respected financial instrument. They note
that while in 1970, financial derivatives were so unimportant that no reliable figures
could be found for market size, by 2000, the notional value of such contracts
worldwide was in excess of $100 trillion.
They traced the origins of the Chicago Board of Options Exchange, interviewing the leading participants and options theorists. The CBOE had its origins in the
Chicago Board of Trade (CBT), which had traded commodity futures since the
mid-nineteenth century. Stock options and futures had also been traded in the
nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, but lost legitimacy after the 1929 crash
and the Great Depression. When members of CBT approached the Securities and
Exchange Commission in the late 1960s about a market for options trading, they
met considerable hostility, based on the idea that financial options were mere
gambling. But members of the CBT mounted an intensive lobbying campaign,
assisted by new economic theory emerging in the 1960s on the valuation of options
and other derivatives. MacKenzie and Millo (2003) trace this lobbying activity,
arguing that it was difficult, time consuming and not in the self-interest of those
who organized and led it. Some will suspect that those who lobbied in this way
profited from the innovation, so that simple economic incentives would be sufficient to explain their activity. But Mackenzie and Millo provide evidence that the
key individuals in the effort incurred large unremunerated expenses, and substantial opportunity costs from foregone trading profits, with no obvious prospect of
ever recovering these (pp. 115116). In explaining this activity, they emphasize that
the Chicago exchanges were highly personalized settings, with clear demarcation
between insiders and outsiders, where intensive interaction among insiders led to
social control and the potential for collective action that transcended economic
incentives. Thus, socially cohesive and prominent insiders, allied with economic
theorists and mainstream political figures, achieved the institutionalization of this
economic innovation.
But not all innovations arise from the social inner circle. Indeed, the socially
marginal may at times be best placed to break away from established practice
(Granovetter, 1973, pp. 1366 1368), as they are not involved in dense, cohesive
social networks of strong ties that create a high level of consensus on such practice.
Thus, studies indicate that the lower an innovations champion in a corporate
hierarchy, the more radical the innovation (Day, 1994).
A striking case is that of junk bonds. Around 1970, young trader Michael
Milken became fascinated by the profit potential of low-rated bonds. At first, his
employer, Drexel Firestone, reluctantly tolerated his activity. But when Milken
succeeded dramatically, Drexel increased his capital and autonomy. He built a
substantial clientele while his firm was the only one willing to make markets in such
bonds (Abolafia, 1996). When traditional firms became interested, Milken antagonized them by refusing to share initial offerings with a syndicate (p. 158). He

46

Journal of Economic Perspectives

made junk bonds into a cause, asserting that they provided capital otherwise denied
by the financial establishment to mid-sized companies outside the corporate elite.
Resistance to Milken resulted from the 1980s use of junk bonds for hostile
takeovers that enabled small companies, led by non-elite raiders such as Saul
Steinberg and T. Boone Pickens, to launch takeover attempts against large and
prominent corporations. Target firms mobilized their considerable political allies.
In 1985, the Federal Reserve curbed the use of junk bonds in acquisitions, and by
1987, 37 states had passed legislation restricting takeover activity. With the role of
junk bonds in takeovers curbed, other uses could flourish, and the junk bond
market has become a fixed-income staple. But Milken himself was prosecuted
vigorously and barred from the securities business for life. His marginal location in
key social networks made this outcome more likely. The larger point is that
junk-bond-driven takeovers threatened elite social networks that mobilized political
support in ways that social outsiders could not overcome.
More generally, innovation means breaking away from established routines.
Schumpeter defined entrepreneurship as the creation of new opportunities by
pulling together previously unconnected resources for a new economic purpose.
One reason resources may be unconnected is that they reside in separated networks
of individuals or transactions. Thus, the actor who sits astride structural holes in
networks (as described in Burt, 1992) is well placed to innovate. The Norwegian
anthropologist Fredrik Barth (1967) paid special attention to situations where
goods traded against one another only in restricted circuits of exchange. He
defined entrepreneurship as the ability to derive profit from breaching such
previously separated spheres of exchange. The Fur of the Sudan, for example,
considered wage labor shameful, and in this group, labor and money traded in
separate spheres. Certain products, such as millet and beer, did not trade for
money, but were produced only for exchange in communal labor, such as mutual
help with house building. In a separate circuit, food, tools and other commodities
were exchanged for money. Barth reports the arrival of outsider Arab merchants
who, not bound by the norms specifying the separation of spheres, paid local
workers with beer, to grow tomatoes, a cash crop. Unaware of the cash value of beer
or labor, the workers produced a crop worth far more than the beer with which they
were paid, making the traders wealthy (see also Granovetter, 2002, pp. 44 46).
Deployment of resources outside of their usual spheres may often be a source
of profit, and new institutional forms can facilitate such deployment. The origins of
venture capital in Silicon Valley is an example. Before the 1960s, high technology
was funded by financiers largely decoupled from the industrys social or professional networks, who were not fully conversant with the technical detail. But the
usual financial tools could not evaluate innovations during a time of rapid technical
change. A new model emerged: engineers and marketing specialists from industry,
who had accrued enormous profits, used these to become a new breed of financier:
the venture capitalist. Their technical knowledge and extensive personal networks allowed them to assess new ideas more adeptly than traditional bankers.
Given their skills, they were also more inclined to sit on boards of directors, and
take active management roles, supporting the substantial equity positions their

Mark Granovetter

47

firms took in startups (Kaplan, 1999, chapters 6 7). Taking their financial resources from the industrial and family spheres where they were accumulated, and
deploying them in the newly created institutional setting of venture capital, made
the early innovators fabulously wealthy. Their early success helped them draw a
huge new inflow of funds from such limited partners as pension funds and wealthy
individuals, who stood well apart from technical circles, just as early nineteenthcentury business families founded New England banks to fund expansion of
industries by drawing in non-family funds (Lamoreaux, 1994).
Can we explain this outcome by a standard efficiency argument, in which
environmental changes made new financial practices more profitable? The problem for such an account is that these practices did not emerge uniformly where
profits were available. Saxenian (1994, pp. 64 65 and elsewhere) argues that
because of differences in culture and social networks between Silicon Valley and
the high-technology industry region in the Boston area, finance in the latter region
retained its traditional dominance by individuals without technical backgrounds,
who could not move quickly to spot and finance new trends, putting the region at
considerable long-term disadvantage. To the extent her argument is correct, Boston and other regions will have difficulty emulating the Silicon Valley model, even
in the long run. Further empirical study will provide interesting clarification of this
clash between economic logic and social constraint.

Conclusion
Social structure affects many important economic outcomes other than those
addressed here, such as choice of alliance partners (for example, Gulati and
Gargiulo, 1999), decisions to acquire other firms and strategies used to do so
(Haunschild, 1994), the diffusion of corporate governance techniques (Davis and
Greve, 1999) and the persistence of large family and ethnically oriented business
groups in advanced economies (Granovetter, 2004), among others. In this paper,
I have chosen a few examples to illustrate strategies, approaches and principles.
While economic models can be simpler if the interaction of the economy with
non-economic aspects of social life remains inside a black box, this strategy abstracts from many social phenomena that strongly affect costs and available techniques for economic action. Excluding such phenomena is risky if prediction is the
goal. When the black box is opened, it is often with the goal of making networks,
norms, institutions, history and culture fully endogenous to economic models,
implicitly assuming that otherwise no systematic argument can be made. But
pursuing this daunting agenda makes poor use of economists comparative advantage. The disciplines that neighbor economics have made considerable progress in
unpacking the dynamics of social phenomena, and a more efficient strategy would
be to engage in interdisciplinary cooperation of the sort that trade theory commends to nations. My goal here has been to suggest some such linkages, which
remain largely unexplored, and pose one of the greatest intellectual challenges to
the social sciences.

48

Journal of Economic Perspectives

y I am grateful for the extensive comments of Timothy Taylor, Michael Waldman and Andrei
Shleifer, which significantly improved this paper.

References
Abolafia, Mitchel. 1996. Making Markets: Opportunism and Restraint on Wall Street. Cambridge,
Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Akerlof, George. 1970. The Market for Lemons: Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism. Quarterly Journal of Economics. 84:3,
pp. 488 500.
Baker, Wayne. 1984. The Social Structure of
a National Securities Market. American Journal of
Sociology. January, 89, pp. 775 811.
Barabasi, Albert-Laszlo. 2002. Linked: The New
Science of Networks. New York: Perseus Books.
Belshaw, Cyril S. 1965. Traditional Exchange
and Modern Markets. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.:
Prentice-Hall.
Bendix, Reinhard. 1979. Max Weber: An Intellectual Portrait. Berkeley, Calif.: University of California Press.
Bian, Yanjie. 1997. Bringing Strong Ties Back
In: Indirect Ties, Network Bridges, and Job
Searches in China. American Sociological Review.
June, 62, pp. 366 85.
Blau, Peter. 1963. The Dynamics of Bureaucracy.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Buchanan, Mark. 2002. Nexus: Small Worlds and
the Groundbreaking Science of Networks. New York:
W.W. Norton.
Burawoy, Michael. 1979. Manufacturing Consent: Changes in the Labor Process Under Monopoly
Capitalism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Burt, Ronald. 1992. Structural Holes: The Social
Structure of Competition. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Calvo-Armengol, Antoni. 2004. Job Contact
Networks. Journal of Economic Theory. 115:1,
pp. 191206.
Carruthers, Bruce. 1996. City of Capital: Politics
and Markets in the English Financial Revolution.
Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
Castilla, Emilio J. 2002. Social Networks and
Employee Performance. Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Sociology, Stanford University.
Chandler, Alfred D. 1977. The Visible Hand:
The Managerial Revolution in American Business.
Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

Dalton, Melville. 1959. Men Who Manage. New

York: Wiley.
Davis, Gerald and Henrich Greve. 1999. Corporate Elite Networks and Governance Changes
in the 1980s. American Journal of Sociology. 103,
pp. 137.
Davis, William G. 1973. Social Relations in a
Philippine Market: Self-Interest and Subjectivity.
Berkeley, Calif.: University of California Press.
Day, Diana. 1994. Raising Radicals: Different
Processes for Championing Innovative Corporate Ventures. Organization Science. 5:2,
pp. 148 72.
DiMaggio, Paul and Hugh Louch. 1998. Socially Embedded Consumer Transactions: For
What Kinds of Purchases do People Most Often
Use Networks? American Sociological Review. 63:5,
pp. 619 37.
Dutta, Bhaskar and Matthew O. Jackson. 2003.
Networks and Groups: Models of Strategic Formation.
Berlin: Springer Verlag.
Fernandez, Roberto M., Emilio J. Castilla and
Paul Moore. 2000. Social Capital at Work: Networks and Employment at a Phone Center.
American Journal of Sociology. 105:5, pp. 1288 356.
Ferrary, Michel. 2003. Trust and Social Capital in the Regulation of Lending Activities. Journal of Socioeconomics. 31:6, pp. 67399.
Festinger, Leon, Stanley Schachter and Kurt
Back. 1948. Social Pressures in Informal Groups.
Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Freeland, Robert. 2001. The Struggle for Control
of the Modern Corporation: Organizational Change at
General Motors, 1924 1970. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Geertz, Clifford. 1978. The Bazaar Economy:
Information and Search in Peasant Marketing.
American Economic Review. 68:2, pp. 28 32.
Granovetter, Mark. 1973. The Strength of
Weak Ties. American Journal of Sociology. 78:6,
pp. 1360 380.
Granovetter, Mark. 1983. The Strength of
Weak Ties: A Network Theory Revisited. Sociological Theory. 1, pp. 20133.

The Impact of Social Structure on Economic Outcomes

Granovetter, Mark. 1985. Economic Action

and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology. 91:3,
pp. 481510.
Granovetter, Mark. 1988. The Sociological
and Economic Approaches to Labor Market
Analysis: A Social Structural View, in Industries,
Firms and Jobs: Sociological and Economic Approaches. George Farkas and Paula England, eds.
New York: Plenum Press, pp. 233 63.
Granovetter, Mark. 1995a. The Economic Sociology of Firms and Entrepreneurs, in The Economic Sociology of Immigration. Alejandro Portes,
ed. New York: Russell Sage Foundation,
pp. 128 65.
Granovetter, Mark. 1995b. Getting a Job: A
Study of Contacts and Careers. Chicago: University
of Chicago Press.
Granovetter, Mark. 2002. A Theoretical
Agenda for Economic Sociology, in The New
Economic Sociology: Developments in an Emerging
Field. Mauro F. Guillen, Randall Collins, Paula
England and Marshall Meyer, eds. New York:
Russell Sage Foundation, pp. 3559.
Granovetter, Mark. 2005. Business Groups
and Social Organization, in Handbook of Economic Sociology, 2nd Edition. Neil and Richard
Swedberg Smelser, eds. New York and Princeton: Russell Sage Foundation and Princeton
University Press, forthcoming.
Granovetter, Mark and Richard Swedberg.
2001. The Sociology of Economic Life, 2nd Edition.
Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press.
Granovetter, Mark and Charles Tilly. 1988.
Inequality and Labor Processes, in Handbook of
Sociology. Neil Smelser, ed. Newbury Park, Calif.:
Sage Publications, pp. 175221.
Gulati, Ranjay and Martin Gargiulo. 1999.
Where do Interorganizational Networks Come
From? American Journal of Sociology. 104:5,
pp. 1439 493.
Hamilton, Barton H., Jack Nickerson and
Hideo Owan. 2003. Team Incentives and
Worker Heterogeneity: An Empirical Analysis of
the Impact of Teams on Productivity and Participation. Journal of Political Economy. 111:3,
pp. 46597.
Haunschild, Pamela. 1994. How Much is
That Company Worth?: Interorganizational Relationships, Uncertainty and Acquisition Premiums. Administrative Science Quarterly. September,
39, pp. 391 411.
Homans, George. 1950. The Human Group.
New York: Harcourt.
Ingram, Paul and Peter Roberts. 2000.
Friendships Among Competitors in the Sydney
Hotel Industry. American Journal of Sociology.
106:2, pp. 387 423.

49

Kaplan, David. 1999. The Silicon Boys. New

York: William Morrow.
Klein, Benjamin and Keith Leffler. 1981. The
Role of Market Forces in Assuring Contractual
Performance. Journal of Political Economy. 89:4,
pp. 615 40.
Lamoreaux, Naomi. 1985. The Great Merger
Movement in American Business, 18951904. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Lamoreaux, Naomi. 1994. Insider Lending.
New York: Cambridge University Press.
Lin, Nan. 2001. Social Capital: A Theory of Social
Structure and Action. New York: Cambridge University Press.
MacKenzie, Donald and Yuval Millo. 2003.
Constructing a Market, Performing a Theory:
The Historical Sociology of a Financial Derivatives Exchange. American Journal of Sociology.
109:1, pp. 107 45.
Maschke, Erich. 1969. Outline of the History
of German Cartels from 1873 to 1914, in Essays
in European Economic History. F. Crouzet, W. H.
Chaloner and N. M. Stern, eds. London: Edward
Arnold, pp. 226 58.
Mizruchi, Mark and Linda Stearns. 2001. Getting Deals Done: The Use of Social Networks in
Bank Decision-Making. American Sociological Review. 66:5, pp. 64771.
Montgomery, James D. 1991. Social Networks
and Labor Market Outcomes: Toward an Economic Analysis. American Economic Review. December, 81, pp. 1408 418.
Montgomery, James D. 1994. Weak Ties, Employment and Inequality: An Equilibrium Analysis. American Journal of Sociology. 99:5, pp. 1212
236.
Mouw, Theodore. 2003. Social Capital and
Finding a Job: Do Contacts Matter? American
Sociological Review. 68:6, pp. 868 98.
Podolny, Joel M. and Fiona M. Scott-Morton.
1999. Social Status, Entry and Predation: The
Case of British Shipping Cartels 1879 1929.
Journal of Industrial Economics. 47:1, pp. 41 67.
Rauch, James E. and Alessandra Casella. 2001.
Networks and Markets. New York: Russell Sage.
Rogers, Everett. 2003. The Diffusion of Innovations, 5th Edition. New York: Free Press.
Sabel, Charles F. 1982. Work and Politics : The
Division of Labor in Industry. Cambridge, UK:
Cambridge University Press.
Sahlins, Marshall David. 1972. Stone Age Economics. Chicago: Aldine-Atherton.
Saxenian, Annalee. 1994. Regional Advantage:
Culture and Competition in Silicon Valley and Route
128. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University
Press.

50

Journal of Economic Perspectives

Shleifer, Andrei and Lawrence Summers.

1990. The Noise Trader Approach to Finance.
Journal of Economic Perspectives. 4:2, pp. 19 33.
Uzzi, Brian. 1996. The Sources and Consequences of Embeddedness for the Economic
Performance of Organizations: The Network Effect. American Sociological Review. 61:4, pp. 674
98.
Uzzi, Brian. 1999. Embeddedness in the Making of Financial Capital: How Social Relations
and Networks Benefit Firms Seeking Financing.
American Sociological Review. August, 64, pp. 481
505.
Uzzi, Brian and Ryon Lancaster. 2003. Structural Embeddedness and the Price of Legal Services in the Large Law Firm Market. Preprint:

Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern

University.
Waldman, Michael. 2003. Durable Goods
Theory for Real World Markets. Journal of Economic Perspectives. 17:1, pp. 13154.
Wasserman, Stanley and Katherine Faust.
1994. Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Watts, Duncan. 2003. Six Degrees: The Science of
a Connected Age. New York: W. W. Norton.
Zelizer, Viviana. 1978. Human Values and
the Market: The Case of Life Insurance and
Death in 19th-Century America. American Journal of Sociology. 84:3, pp. 591 610.
Zuckerman, Ezra. 2003. On Networks and Markets by Rauch and Casella, eds. Journal of Economic Literature. 41:2, pp. 545 65.

This article has been cited by:

1. Sophie MtzelNetzwerkperspektiven in der Wirtschaftssoziologie 473-499. [CrossRef]
2. Gertraude Mikl-HorkeKlassische Positionen der konomie und Soziologie und ihre Bedeutung fr
die Wirtschaftssoziologie 33-60. [CrossRef]
3. Agnieszka Kowalska-StyczeThe Impact of Structure Network Parameters on Consumers Behavior:
A Cellular Automata Model 237-247. [CrossRef]
4. Yossef Arie, Gustavo S. Mesch. 2016. Spatial distance and mobile business social network density.
Information, Communication & Society 19:11, 1572-1586. [CrossRef]
5. Yasuyuki Todo, Petr Matous, Hiroyasu Inoue. 2016. The strength of long ties and the weakness of
strong ties: Knowledge diffusion through supply chain networks. Research Policy 45:9, 1890-1906.
[CrossRef]
6. Birgit Karlsson. 2016. Cartels and norms in the Swedish steel industry 19231953. Business History
58:7, 1077-1094. [CrossRef]
7. Thanh Huynh. 2016. Early-stage fundraising of university spin-offs: a study through demand-site
perspectives. Venture Capital 18:4, 345-367. [CrossRef]
8. Valter Afonso Vieira, Winsley Bonifcio-da-Silva. 2016. An analysis of the relationship between
embedded ties and supplier innovation in the cooperative sector. Revista de Administrao 51:4,
386-396. [CrossRef]
9. Yi-De Liu. 2016. The impacts of cultural event on networking: Liverpools cultural sector in the
aftermath of 2008. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 1-10. [CrossRef]
10. Yu-Lun Liu, Kathleen A. Keeling, K. Nadia Papamichail. 2016. An exploratory study of jobseekers
decision-making styles, recruitment information sources and organisational attractiveness. Personnel
Review 45:6, 1403-1427. [CrossRef]
11. Olga M.C. van der Valk, Birgit I. De Vos. 2016. Family ties, preconceived images and trust: How
local community defines market collaboration in the Dutch fish chain. Marine Policy 71, 175-183.
[CrossRef]
12. Peter Lewin. 2016. Plan-coordination: Who needs it?. The Review of Austrian Economics 29:3,
299-313. [CrossRef]
13. Maggie Chuoyan Dong, Min Ju, Yulin Fang. 2016. Role hazard between supply chain partners in an
institutionally fragmented market. Journal of Operations Management 46, 5-18. [CrossRef]
14. Yiheyis Maru, Ashley Sparrow, Richard Stirzaker, Jocelyn Davies. 2016. Integrated agricultural
research for development (IAR4D) from a theory of change perspective. Agricultural Systems .
[CrossRef]
15. Joan Crespo, Jrme Vicente, Frdric Amblard. 2016. Micro-behaviors and structural properties of
knowledge networks: toward a one size fits one cluster policy. Economics of Innovation and New
Technology 25:6, 533-552. [CrossRef]
16. Martin Dietrich, Matti Znotka, Hannah Guthor, Florian Hilfinger. 2016. Instrumental and Noninstrumental Factors of Social Innovation Adoption. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary
and Nonprofit Organizations 27:4, 1950-1978. [CrossRef]
17. Anne P.M. Velenturf. 2016. Promoting industrial symbiosis: empirical observations of low-carbon
innovations in the Humber region, UK. Journal of Cleaner Production 128, 116-130. [CrossRef]
18. Phuc To, Sango Mahanty, Wolfram Dressler. 2016. Moral economies and markets: Insider cassava
trading in Kon Tum, Vietnam. Asia Pacific Viewpoint 57:2, 168-179. [CrossRef]

19. Sascha O. Becker, Steven Pfaff, Jared Rubin. 2016. Causes and Consequences of the Protestant
Reformation. Explorations in Economic History . [CrossRef]
20. Anne P.M. Velenturf, Paul D. Jensen. 2016. Promoting Industrial Symbiosis: Using the Concept
of Proximity to Explore Social Network Development. Journal of Industrial Ecology 20:4, 700-709.
[CrossRef]
21. Simone Donati, Salvatore Zappal, Vicente Gonzlez-Rom. 2016. The influence of friendship and
communication network density on individual innovative behaviours: a multilevel study. European
Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology 25:4, 583-596. [CrossRef]
22. Maria Elo, Sivaram Vemuri. 2016. Organizing mobility: a case study of Bukharian Jewish diaspora.
Diaspora Studies 9:2, 179-193. [CrossRef]
23. Dejun Tony Kong. 2016. Exploring democracy and ethnic diversity as sociopolitical moderators for
the relationship between age and generalized trust. Personality and Individual Differences 96, 28-30.
[CrossRef]
24. Pau Baizn, Amparo Gonzlez-Ferrer. 2016. What drives Senegalese migration to Europe? The role
of economic restructuring, labor demand, and the multiplier effect of networks. Demographic Research
35, 339-380. [CrossRef]
25. Tisorn Songsermsawas, Kathy Baylis, Ashwini Chhatre, Hope Michelson. 2016. Can Peers Improve
Agricultural Revenue?. World Development 83, 163-178. [CrossRef]
26. Virginia Fernndez-Prez, Victor J. Garca-Morales, Dainelis Cabeza Pulls. 2016. Entrepreneurial
decision-making, external social networks and strategic flexibility: The role of CEOs' cognition.
European Management Journal 34:3, 296-309. [CrossRef]
27. William S. Bainbridge, Mihail C. Roco. 2016. Science and technology convergence: with emphasis
for nanotechnology-inspired convergence. Journal of Nanoparticle Research 18:7. . [CrossRef]
28. Zhepeng Li, Xiao Fang, Xue Bai, Olivia R. Liu Sheng. 2016. Utility-Based Link Recommendation
for Online Social Networks. Management Science . [CrossRef]
29. Cameron K. Murray, Paul Frijters. 2016. Clean money, dirty system: Connected landowners capture
beneficial land rezoning. Journal of Urban Economics 93, 99-114. [CrossRef]
30. Mathias Kupi, Michel Tenikue, Olivier J. Walther. 2016. Social networks and small business
performance in West African border regions. Oxford Development Studies 44:2, 202-219. [CrossRef]
31. Richard V. Adkisson, Robert L. Steiner. 2016. Matching Economic Development Policy to the Local
Context: Must We?. Journal of Economic Issues 50:2, 620-629. [CrossRef]
32. Domingo Garcia-Perez-de-Lema, Antonia Madrid-Guijarro, Dominique Philippe Martin. 2016.
Influence of universityfirm governance on SMEs innovation and performance levels. Technological
Forecasting and Social Change . [CrossRef]
33. Yuyan Guan, Lixin (Nancy) Su, Donghui Wu, Zhifeng Yang. 2016. Do school ties between auditors
and client executives influence audit outcomes?. Journal of Accounting and Economics 61:2-3, 506-525.
[CrossRef]
34. Laxmikant Manroop, Julia Richardson. 2016. Job Search: A Multidisciplinary Review and Research
Agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews 18:2, 206-227. [CrossRef]
35. Prince Abbey, Philip R. Tomlinson, J. Robert Branston. 2016. Perceptions of governance and social
capital in Ghana's cocoa industry. Journal of Rural Studies 44, 153-163. [CrossRef]
36. Arvind Ashta, Chandralekha Ghosh, Samapti Guha, Frank Lentz. 2016. Knowledge in Microsocial
Milieus: the Case of Microfinance Practices Among Women in India. Journal of the Knowledge Economy
. [CrossRef]
37. Helin Melkas, Tuomo Uotila, Tomi Tura. 2016. Policies of related variety in practice: the case
Innovation Session Method. European Planning Studies 24:3, 489-510. [CrossRef]

38. Omid Namvar Gharehshiran, William Hoiles, Vikram Krishnamurthy. 2016. Detection of
Homophilic Communities and Coordination of Interacting Meta-Agents: A Game-Theoretic
Viewpoint. IEEE Transactions on Signal and Information Processing over Networks 2:1, 84-101.
[CrossRef]
39. Weixing Cai, Cheng (Colin) Zeng, Edward Lee, Neslihan Ozkan. 2016. Do business groups affect
corporate cash holdings? Evidence from a transition economy. China Journal of Accounting Research
9:1, 1-24. [CrossRef]
40. Maria Carmela Schisani, Francesca Caiazzo. 2016. Networks of power and networks of capital: evidence
from a peripheral area of the first globalisation. The energy sector in Naples: from gas to electricity
(18621919). Business History 58:2, 207-243. [CrossRef]
41. Josh Bendickson, Jeff Muldoon, Eric Liguori, Phillip E Davis. 2016. Agency theory: the times, they
are a-changin. Management Decision 54:1, 174-193. [CrossRef]
42. Washika Haak-Saheem, Tamer K. Darwish, Amjad D. Al-Nasser. 2016. HRM and knowledgetransfer: a micro analysis in a Middle Eastern emerging market. The International Journal of Human
Resource Management 1-30. [CrossRef]
43. Dejun Tony Kong. 2016. A gene-dependent climatoeconomic model of generalized trust. Journal of
World Business 51:2, 226-236. [CrossRef]
44. Ruth Clarke, Ramdas Chandra, Marcilio Machado. 2016. SMEs and social capital: exploring the
Brazilian context. European Business Review 28:1, 2-20. [CrossRef]
45. Julian Y. Gruin. 2016. The social order of Chinese capitalism: socio-economic uncertainty, communist
party rule and economic development, 19902000. Economy and Society 45:1, 24-50. [CrossRef]
46. Bastian Mnkediek, Hilde A.J. Bras. 2016. The Interplay of Family Systems, Social Networks and
Fertility in Europe Cohorts Born Between 1920 and 1960. Economic History of Developing Regions
31:1, 136-166. [CrossRef]
47. Markus Grillitsch, Josephine V. Rekers. 2016. Revisiting the role of selection for the evolution of
industries. Industry and Innovation 23:1, 112-129. [CrossRef]
48. Jiajun Qiao, Jay Lee, Xinyue Ye. 2016. Spatiotemporal Evolution of Specialized Villages and Rural
Development: A Case Study of Henan Province, China. Annals of the American Association of
Geographers 106:1, 57-75. [CrossRef]
49. Tao Lin, Fangzhou Guo, Yingcai Wu, Biao Zhu, Fan Zhang, Huamin Qu, Wei ChenTieVis: Visual
Analytics of Evolution of Interpersonal Ties 412-424. [CrossRef]
50. Evans Korang Adjei, Rikard H. Eriksson, Urban Lindgren. 2016. Social proximity and firm
performance: the importance of family member ties in workplaces. Regional Studies, Regional Science
3:1, 304. [CrossRef]
51. Kaisa Koskela-Huotari, Jaakko Siltaloppi, Stephen L. VargoDesigning Institutional Complexity to
Enable Innovation in Service Ecosystems 1596-1605. [CrossRef]
52. Andrej Angelovski, Jordi Brandts, Carles Sola. 2016. Hiring and escalation bias in subjective
performance evaluations: A laboratory experiment. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 121,
114-129. [CrossRef]
53. Pvel Reyes MercadoResearch Foundations: Retrospects and Prospects 11-23. [CrossRef]
54. Paola Zappa, Garry Robins. 2016. Organizational learning across multi-level networks. Social Networks
44, 295-306. [CrossRef]
55. Pvel Reyes MercadoResearch Model 25-37. [CrossRef]
56. Mario Angst, Christian Hirschi. 2016. Network Dynamics in Natural Resource Governance: A Case
Study of Swiss Landscape Management. Policy Studies Journal n/a-n/a. [CrossRef]

57. Xiangru Chen, Lina Zhou, Difang Wan. 2016. Group social capital and lending outcomes in the
financial credit market: An empirical study of online peer-to-peer lending. Electronic Commerce
Research and Applications 15, 1-13. [CrossRef]
58. Gianluca Elia, Alessandro MargheritaA Collective Intelligence Platform for Developing Technology
Entrepreneurship Ecosystems 195-220. [CrossRef]
59. Tomi Dahlberg, Ari HelinThe Emperor with No Clothes Inter-organizational ICT Cooperation
Within Municipal Regions 179-192. [CrossRef]
60. Jemal H. Abawajy, Mohd Izuan Hafez Ninggal, Tutut Herawan. 2016. Privacy Preserving Social
Network Data Publication. IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials 18:3, 1974-1997. [CrossRef]
61. N. Fuchs-Schndeln, T.A. HassanNatural Experiments in Macroeconomics . [CrossRef]
62. Rachel A. Carson, Zoe Hamel, Kelly Giarrocco, Rebecca Baylor, Leah Greden Mathews. 2015. Buying
in: the influence of interactions at farmers markets. Agriculture and Human Values . [CrossRef]
63. George Okello Candiya Bongomin, Joseph Mpeera Ntayi, John C. Munene, Isaac Nkote Nabeta. 2015.
Financial Inclusion in Rural Uganda: Testing Interaction Effect of Financial Literacy and Networks.
Journal of African Business 1-23. [CrossRef]
64. Yossef Arie, Gustavo S. MeschInterethnic Ties via Mobile Communications in Homogeneous and
Ethnically Mixed Cities: A Structural Diversification Approach 175-203. [CrossRef]
65. Lauren B. Wagner. 2015. "Tourist Price" and Diasporic Visitors: Negotiating the Value of Descent.
Valuation Studies 3:2, 119-148. [CrossRef]
66. Luljeta Hajderllari. 2015. Social networks of Danish farmer investors in CEEC. International Journal
of Social Economics 42:12, 1196-1213. [CrossRef]
67. Lauren Marie Menger, Lorann Stallones, Jennifer Eileen Cross, Kimberly Lynn Henry, Peter Yu
Chen. 2015. Strengthening suicide prevention networks: Interorganizational collaboration and tie
strength. Psychosocial Intervention 24:3, 155-165. [CrossRef]
68. Bassel Tarbush, Alexander Teytelboym. 2015. Social groups and social network formation. Games
and Economic Behavior . [CrossRef]
69. Maurice H. Yearwood, Amy Cuddy, Nishtha Lamba, Wu Youyou, Ilmo van der Lowe, Paul K. Piff,
Charles Gronin, Pete Fleming, Emiliana Simon-Thomas, Dacher Keltner, Aleksandr Spectre. 2015.
On wealth and the diversity of friendships: High social class people around the world have fewer
international friends. Personality and Individual Differences 87, 224-229. [CrossRef]
70. La Lima. 2015. Who Recruits and How? The Economic Expertise of Youth Integration Professionals.
Sociologie du Travail 57, e23-e41. [CrossRef]
71. Giovanni O. Serafini, Leslie T. Szamosi. 2015. Five star hotels of a Multinational Enterprise in
countries of the transitional periphery: A case study in human resources management. International
Business Review 24:6, 972-983. [CrossRef]
72. Frances J. Griffith, Liz Seymour, Mathew Goldberg. 2015. Reframing art therapy to meet psychosocial
and financial needs in homelessness. The Arts in Psychotherapy 46, 33-40. [CrossRef]
73. Yuri Mansury, J.K. Shin. 2015. Size, connectivity, and tipping in spatial networks: Theory and
empirics. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems 54, 428-437. [CrossRef]
74. S.M. Mizanur Rahman, Audrey L. Mayer. 2015. How social ties influence metal resource flows in the
Bangladesh ship recycling industry. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 104, 254-264. [CrossRef]
75. Isabel Fernandez-Mateo, Marko Coh. 2015. Coming with Baggage: Past Rejections and the Evolution
of Market Relationships. Organization Science 26:5, 1381-1399. [CrossRef]
76. Andreas Tuti, Harald Wiese. 2015. Reconstructing Granovetter's network theory. Social Networks
43, 136-148. [CrossRef]

77. Maria All, Maria L. Loureiro, Eva Iglesias. 2015. Farmers' Preferences and Social Capital Regarding
Agri-environmental Schemes to Protect Birds. Journal of Agricultural Economics 66:3, 672-689.
[CrossRef]
78. Monica Stephens, Ate Poorthuis. 2015. Follow thy neighbor: Connecting the social and the spatial
networks on Twitter. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems 53, 87-95. [CrossRef]
79. Jos Anchorena, Fernando Anjos. 2015. Social ties and economic development. Journal of
Macroeconomics 45, 63-84. [CrossRef]
80. P. Mitkidis, D. Xygalatas, N. Buttrick, M. Porubanova, P. Lienard. 2015. The Impact of Authority
on Cooperation: A Cross-Cultural Examination of Systemic Trust. Adaptive Human Behavior and
Physiology 1:3, 341-357. [CrossRef]
81. Charles E. Stevens, Erin E. Makarius, Debmalya Mukherjee. 2015. It Takes Two to Tango: Signaling
Behavioral Intent in Service Multinationals' Foreign Entry Strategies. Journal of International
Management 21:3, 235-248. [CrossRef]
82. Pablo Ospina Peralta, Patric Hollenstein. 2015. Territorial Coalitions and Rural Dynamics in Ecuador.
Why History Matters. World Development 73, 85-95. [CrossRef]
83. Sean B. OHagan, Murray D. Rice. 2015. The geography of Canadian interlocking directorates: how
do they relate to brain circulation?. Urban Geography 36:6, 823-843. [CrossRef]
84. Aaron Sim, Sophia N. Yaliraki, Mauricio Barahona, Michael P. H. Stumpf. 2015. Great cities look
small. Journal of The Royal Society Interface 12:109, 20150315. [CrossRef]
85. Sebastian Gatica. 2015. Understanding the phenomenon of Chilean social enterprises under the lens
of Kerlins approach. Social Enterprise Journal 11:2, 202-226. [CrossRef]
86. Klarita Grxhani, Ferry Koster. 2015. Making the right move. Investigating employers recruitment
strategies. Personnel Review 44:5, 781-800. [CrossRef]
87. Artur Steiner, Jane Atterton. 2015. Exploring the contribution of rural enterprises to local resilience.
Journal of Rural Studies 40, 30-45. [CrossRef]
88. Sabrina C. Thornton, Stephan C. Henneberg, Peter Naud. 2015. An empirical investigation of
network-oriented behaviors in business-to-business markets. Industrial Marketing Management 49,
167-180. [CrossRef]
89. Joyojeet Pal, Meera Lakshmanan. 2015. Mobile devices and weak ties: a study of vision impairments
and workplace access in Bangalore. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology 10:4, 323-331.
[CrossRef]
90. Somnath Lahiri, Saptarshi Purkayastha. 2015. Impact of industry sector on corporate diversification
and firm performance: Evidence from Indian business groups. Canadian Journal of Administrative
Sciences / Revue Canadienne des Sciences de l'Administration n/a-n/a. [CrossRef]
91. Richard Ferguson, Helena Hansson. 2015. Measuring Embeddedness and Its Effect on New Venture
Creation-A Study of Farm Diversification. Managerial and Decision Economics 36:5, 314-325.
[CrossRef]
92. Federico Bianchi, Flaminio Squazzoni. 2015. Agent-based models in sociology. Wiley Interdisciplinary
Reviews: Computational Statistics 7:4, 284-306. [CrossRef]
93. Anna Kremel, Darush Yazdanfar. 2015. Business advisory services and risk among start-ups and young
companies: a gender perspective. International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship 7:2, 168-190.
[CrossRef]
94. Miguel Bosa. 2015. Water Institutions and Management in Cape Verde. Water 7:6, 2641-2655.
[CrossRef]

95. SAMUEL DAWA, REBECCA NAMATOVU. 2015. SOCIAL NETWORKS AND GROWTH
OF FEMALE-OWNED VENTURES: A SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA PERSPECTIVE. Journal of
Developmental Entrepreneurship 20:02, 1550009. [CrossRef]
96. Matevz Raskovic. 2015. Economic sociology and the ARA interaction model. Journal of Business &
Industrial Marketing 30:5, 472-485. [CrossRef]
97. Mika Kallioinen. 2015. Cartel success and institutions. The Finnish Cotton Cartel, 19031939.
Business History 1-16. [CrossRef]
98. Andrea Pavlikov, Ajit Dayanandan. 2015. Social networks and emigration in Slovakia. Migration
and Development 1-12. [CrossRef]
99. Sema Bayraktar. 2015. New regulations: challenge or opportunity for Turkish SMEs?. Qualitative
Research in Financial Markets 7:2, 173-190. [CrossRef]
100. Yanlong Zhang. 2015. The contingent value of social resources: Entrepreneurs' use of debt-financing
sources in Western China. Journal of Business Venturing 30:3, 390-406. [CrossRef]
101. D. B. Tindall, Georgia Piggot. 2015. Influence of social ties to environmentalists on public climate
change perceptions. Nature Climate Change . [CrossRef]
102. Ian G. Baird, Pao Vue. 2015. The Ties that Bind: The Role of Hmong Social Networks in Developing
Small-scale Rubber Cultivation in Laos. Mobilities 1-19. [CrossRef]
103. Michele Raitano, Francesco Vona. 2015. Measuring the link between intergenerational occupational
mobility and earnings: evidence from eight European countries. The Journal of Economic Inequality
13:1, 83-102. [CrossRef]
104. Carlotta von Bock und Polach, Conrad Kunze, Oliver Maa, Philipp Grundmann. 2015. Bioenergy
as a socio-technical system: The nexus of rules, social capital and cooperation in the development of
bioenergy villages in Germany. Energy Research & Social Science 6, 128-135. [CrossRef]
105. Yunsen Chen. 2015. : . China Accounting and Finance Review 17:1. .
[CrossRef]
106. Rafel Cresp-Cladera, Bartolom Pascual-Fuster. 2015. Executive directors pay, networks and
operating performance: The influence of ownership structure. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy
34:2, 175-203. [CrossRef]
107. References 219-224. [CrossRef]
108. Introduction 1-21. [CrossRef]
109. The Economic Meaning of Social Capital 23-52. [CrossRef]
110. The Leading Social Capital Scholars 53-95. [CrossRef]
111. Managing Social Capital The Network Dimension 117-148. [CrossRef]
112. Managing Social Capital The Relational Dimension 149-185. [CrossRef]
113. References 245-256. [CrossRef]
114. David P. Kennedy, Grace L. Jackson, Harold D. Green, Thomas N. Bradbury, Benjamin R. Karney.
2015. The Analysis of Duocentric Social Networks: APrimer. Journal of Marriage and Family 77:1,
295-311. [CrossRef]
115. Michele Barnes-Mauthe, Steven Allen Gray, Shawn Arita, John Lynham, PingSun Leung. 2015.
What Determines Social Capital in a SocialEcological System? Insights from a Network Perspective.
Environmental Management 55:2, 392-410. [CrossRef]
116. Jack CadeauxThe Effects of Stability, Diversity, and Density on Relationship Flexibility in an
International Retail Supply Network: A Proposed Theory and Research Hypotheses 307-320.
[CrossRef]

117. Simon Niklas Hellmich. 2015. What is Socioeconomics? An Overview of Theories, Methods, and
Themes in the Field. Forum for Social Economics 1-23. [CrossRef]
118. Yan Shan, Karen Whitehill King. 2015. The Effects of Interpersonal Tie Strength and Subjective
Norms on Consumers' Brand-Related eWOM Referral Intentions. Journal of Interactive Advertising
15:1, 16-27. [CrossRef]
119. Bastian Mnkediek, Paul Rotering, Hilde Bras. 2015. Regional Differences in the Intergenerational
Transmission of Family Size in Europe. Population, Space and Place n/a-n/a. [CrossRef]
120. Lisa M. Ellram, Susan L. Golicic. 2015. Adopting Environmental Transportation Practices.
Transportation Journal 54:1, 55-88. [CrossRef]
121. Nicholas DornFinancial Markets and Regulatory Accountability: Between Technocratic Autonomy
and Democratic Direction 209-234. [CrossRef]
122. Leif Brandes, Marc Brechot, Egon Franck. 2015. Managers external social ties at work: Blessing or
curse for the firm?. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 109, 203-216. [CrossRef]
123. Jens Hogreve, Mirjam Velleuer. 2015. Industrial Service Networks erfolgreich steuern. Schmalenbachs
Zeitschrift fr betriebswirtschaftliche Forschung 69:S1, 35-59. [CrossRef]
124. Markus Grillitsch, Magnus Nilsson. 2015. Innovation in peripheral regions: Do collaborations
compensate for a lack of local knowledge spillovers?. The Annals of Regional Science 54:1, 299-321.
[CrossRef]
125. 143. [CrossRef]
126. Lorena Pasquini, Gina Ziervogel, Richard M. Cowling, Clifford Shearing. 2015. What enables local
governments to mainstream climate change adaptation? Lessons learned from two municipal case
studies in the Western Cape, South Africa. Climate and Development 7:1, 60-70. [CrossRef]
127. Finn Wynstra, Martin Spring, Tobias Schoenherr. 2015. Service triads: A research agenda for buyer
suppliercustomer triads in business services. Journal of Operations Management 35, 1. [CrossRef]
128. Jeannette A. Mena, Brian R. Chabowski. 2015. The role of organizational learning in stakeholder
marketing. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 43:4, 429. [CrossRef]
129. Suzanne E. Beech. 2014. International student mobility: the role of social networks. Social & Cultural
Geography 1-19. [CrossRef]
130. Mika J. Kortelainen, Janika Kytt, Tarja LaakkonenFive Elements Leading to Better Learning
Environments: Case Yrityslabra 219-241. [CrossRef]
131. Ying-Yu Chen, Yi-Long Jaw. 2014. How do business groups small world networks effect
diversification, innovation, and internationalization?. Asia Pacific Journal of Management 31:4,
1019-1044. [CrossRef]
132. Naomi Heijmans, Jan van Lieshout, Michel Wensing. 2014. Social networks of health care providers
and patients in cardiovascular risk management: a study protocol. BMC Health Services Research 14:1. .
[CrossRef]
133. Emily Chamlee-Wright, Virgil Henry Storr. 2014. Commercial Relationships and Spaces after
Disaster. Society 51:6, 656-664. [CrossRef]
134. Yaqoub Alabdullah, Stephen P. FerrisBridging the Cultural Divide: The Role of Foreign Directors in
Cross-Border Mergers 35-79. [CrossRef]
135. Elisabetta Marafioti, Laura Mariani, Mattia Martini. 2014. Exploring the Effect of Network
Governance Models on Health-Care Systems Performance. International Journal of Public
Administration 37:13, 987-998. [CrossRef]
136. Matthew O. Jackson. 2014. Networks in the Understanding of Economic Behaviors. Journal of
Economic Perspectives 28:4, 3-22. [Abstract] [View PDF article] [PDF with links]

137. Maria Kamargianni, Moshe Ben-Akiva, Amalia Polydoropoulou. 2014. Incorporating social
interaction into hybrid choice models. Transportation 41:6, 1263-1285. [CrossRef]
138. Giada Di Stefano, Andrew A. King, Gianmario Verona. 2014. Kitchen confidential? Norms for the
use of transferred knowledge in gourmet cuisine. Strategic Management Journal 35:11, 1645-1670.
[CrossRef]
139. Alan Pilkington, Thomas C. Lawton. 2014. Divided by a Common Language? Transnational Insights
into Epistemological and Methodological Approaches to Strategic Management Research in EnglishSpeaking Countries. Long Range Planning 47:5, 299-311. [CrossRef]
140. Urs P. Jger, Andreas Schrer. 2014. Integrated Organizational Identity: A Definition of Hybrid
Organizations and a Research Agenda. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit
Organizations 25:5, 1281-1306. [CrossRef]
141. Samira Obeid, Victoria Gitelman, Orna Baron-Epel. 2014. The relationship between social capital
and traffic law violations: Israeli Arabs as a case study. Accident Analysis & Prevention 71, 273-285.
[CrossRef]
142. David M Dror, Lucy A Firth. 2014. The Demand for (Micro) Health Insurance in the Informal
Sector. The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance Issues and Practice 39:4, 693-711. [CrossRef]
143. Yun Liu. 2014. Outside options and CEO turnover: The network effect. Journal of Corporate Finance
28, 201-217. [CrossRef]
144. Abdelkader Djeflat, Yevgeny Kuznetsov. 2014. Innovation Policy Reforms, Emerging Role Models and
Bridge Institutions: Evidence from North African Economies. African Journal of Science, Technology,
Innovation and Development 6:5, 467-479. [CrossRef]
145. Ekaterina Turkina, Evgeny Postnikov. 2014. From Business to Politics: Cross-Border Inter-Firm
Networks and Policy Spillovers in the EU's Eastern Neighbourhood. JCMS: Journal of Common
Market Studies 52:5, 1120-1141. [CrossRef]
146. Yulia Tyshchuk, William A. Wallace, Hao Li, Heng Ji, Sue E. KaseThe Nature of Communications
and Emerging Communities on Twitter Following the 2013 Syria Sarin Gas Attacks 41-47. [CrossRef]
147. Manuel Abrantes. 2014. I Know It Sounds Nasty and Stereotyped: Searching for the Competent
Domestic Worker. Gender, Work & Organization 21:5, 427-442. [CrossRef]
148. Adam Lipowski, Dorota Lipowska, Antonio Luis Ferreira. 2014. Emergence of social structures via
preferential selection. Physical Review E 90:3. . [CrossRef]
149. Mary Thuo, Alexandra A. Bell, Boris E. Bravo-Ureta, Miche A. Lachaud, David K. Okello, Evelyn
Nasambu Okoko, Nelson L. Kidula, Carl M. Deom, Naveen Puppala. 2014. Effects of social network
factors on information acquisition and adoption of improved groundnut varieties: the case of Uganda
and Kenya. Agriculture and Human Values 31:3, 339-353. [CrossRef]
150. Luca Storti. 2014. Being an entrepreneur: emergence and structuring of two immigrant entrepreneur
groups. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development 26:7-8, 521-545. [CrossRef]
151. Damiano Fiorillo, Nunzia Nappo. 2014. Job satisfaction in Italy: individual characteristics and social
relations. International Journal of Social Economics 41:8, 683-704. [CrossRef]
152. Christian Pescher, Martin Spann. 2014. Relevance of actors in bridging positions for product-related
information diffusion. Journal of Business Research 67:8, 1630-1637. [CrossRef]
153. David Calnitsky. 2014. Economic sociology as disequilibrium economics: a contribution to the critique
of the new economic sociology. The Sociological Review 62:3, 565-592. [CrossRef]
154. Martino Maggetti. 2014. The rewards of cooperation: The effects of membership in European
regulatory networks. European Journal of Political Research 53:3, 480-499. [CrossRef]

155. Mari Ratinen, Peter D. Lund. 2014. Growth strategies of incumbent utilities as contextually
embedded: Examples from Denmark, Germany, Finland and Spain. Technology in Society 38, 81-92.
[CrossRef]
156. Matev Rakovi. 2014. Misunderstanding embeddedness: a response to Ferraris rethinking multiple
embeddedness. Multinational Business Review 22:2, 139-154. [CrossRef]
157. Flaminio Squazzoni. 2014. A social science-inspired complexity policy: Beyond the mantra of
incentivization. Complexity 19:6, 5-13. [CrossRef]
158. Rens Twijnstra, Dorothea Hilhorst, Kristof Titeca. 2014. Trade networks and the practical norms of
taxation at a border crossing between South Sudan and Northern Uganda. Journal of Eastern African
Studies 8:3, 382-399. [CrossRef]
159. Duarte N. Leite, Sandra T. Silva, Oscar Afonso. 2014. INSTITUTIONS, ECONOMICS AND THE
DEVELOPMENT QUEST. Journal of Economic Surveys 28:3, 491-515. [CrossRef]
160. Dong-Young Kim. 2014. Understanding supplier structural embeddedness: A social network
perspective. Journal of Operations Management 32:5, 219-231. [CrossRef]
161. Anne Jourdain. 2014. Lorigine sociale de la vigilance entrepreneuriale. Quand les artisans dart se font
entrepreneurs. Sociologie du Travail 56:3, 279-297. [CrossRef]
162. Kristen C. Nelson, Rachel F. Brummel, Nicholas Jordan, Steven Manson. 2014. Social networks in
complex human and natural systems: the case of rotational grazing, weak ties, and eastern US dairy
landscapes. Agriculture and Human Values 31:2, 245-259. [CrossRef]
163. Pavan Soni, Rishikesha T. Krishnan. 2014. Frugal innovation: aligning theory, practice, and public
policy. Journal of Indian Business Research 6:1, 29-47. [CrossRef]
164. Joana Almodovar, Aurora A.C. Teixeira. 2014. Assessing the Importance of Local Supporting
Organizations in the Automotive Industry: A Hybrid Dynamic Framework of Innovation Networks.
European Planning Studies 22:4, 841-865. [CrossRef]
165. Daniel Edmiston. 2014. The Age of Austerity: Contesting the Ethical Basis and Financial
Sustainability of Welfare Reform in Europe. Journal of Contemporary European Studies 22:2, 118-131.
[CrossRef]
166. Luigi Moretti. 2014. Local Financial Development, Socio-Institutional Environment, and Firm
Productivity: Evidence from Italy. European Journal of Political Economy . [CrossRef]
167. . 2014. The Impacts of Embeddedness between Investment Banks in M&A on M&A Fees. Journal
of Strategic Management 17:1, 93-112. [CrossRef]
168. Sofia Alexandra Cruz, Manuel Abrantes. 2014. Service interaction and dignity in cleaning work: how
important is the organizational context?. Employee Relations 36:3, 294-311. [CrossRef]
169. Carlos Andrs Uribe. 2014. The Dark Side of Social Capital Re-examined from a Policy Analysis
Perspective: Networks of Trust and Corruption. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and
Practice 16:2, 175-189. [CrossRef]
170. TEEMU SANTONEN, PAAVO RITALA. 2014. SOCIAL NETWORK ANALYSIS OF THE
ISPIM INNOVATION MANAGEMENT COMMUNITY IN 20092011. International Journal of
Innovation Management 1450010. [CrossRef]
171. Judy A. Siguaw, Jule B. Gassenheimer, Gary L. Hunter. 2014. Consumer co-creation and the impact
on intermediaries. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management 44:1/2, 6-22.
[CrossRef]
172. Chad W. Autry, Brent D. Williams, Susan Golicic. 2014. Relational and Process Multiplexity in
Vertical Supply Chain Triads: An Exploration in the U.S. Restaurant Industry. Journal of Business
Logistics 35:1, 52-70. [CrossRef]

173. Samrat Hazra, John Fletcher, Keith Wilkes. 2014. An evaluation of power relationships among
stakeholders in the tourism industry networks of Agra, India. Current Issues in Tourism 1-17.
[CrossRef]
174. George O. White, Thomas A. Hemphill, Janice R.W. Joplin, Laurence A. Marsh. 2014. Wholly
owned foreign subsidiary relation-based strategies in volatile environments. International Business
Review 23:1, 303-312. [CrossRef]
175. Yunsen Chen. 2014. Directors social networks and firm efficiency: A structural embeddedness
perspective. China Journal of Accounting Studies 2:1, 53-73. [CrossRef]
176. Giuliana Costa, Benjamin EwertCities of Migration: The Challenges of Social Inclusion 134-159.
[CrossRef]
177. Kevin McKague, Muhammad SiddiqueeGender 135-149. [CrossRef]
178. Sophie Mignon, Sihem Ben Mahmoud-Jouini. 2014. Linteraction du capital social et de la gestion
des ressources humaines dans les entreprises familiales prennes. Management international 18:3, 82.
[CrossRef]
179. Lindsay Mangham-Jefferies, Kara Hanson, Wilfred Mbacham, Obinna Onwujekwe, Virginia
Wiseman. 2014. What determines providers stated preference for the treatment of uncomplicated
malaria?. Social Science & Medicine . [CrossRef]
180. Floridea Di Ciommo, Julio Comendador, Mara Eugenia Lpez-Lambas, Elisabetta Cherchi, Juan
de Dios Ortzar. 2014. Exploring the role of social capital influence variables on travel behaviour.
Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 68, 46. [CrossRef]
181. Angela Ayios, Ronald Jeurissen, Paul Manning, Laura J. Spence. 2014. Social capital: a review from
an ethics perspective. Business Ethics: A European Review 23:1, 108-124. [CrossRef]
182. Carolina ReidThe Promises and Pitfalls of Homeownership 123-149. [CrossRef]
183. Nada Khachlouf, Bertrand V. Qulin, Richard Soparnot. 2013. Network ties and absorptive capacity
for learning and decision-making. Journal of Decision Systems 1-20. [CrossRef]
184. Nathaniel Boso, Vicky M. Story, John W. Cadogan, Milena Micevski, Selma Kadi-Maglajli.
2013. Firm Innovativeness and Export Performance: Environmental, Networking, and Structural
Contingencies. Journal of International Marketing 21:4, 62-87. [CrossRef]
185. Jule B. Gassenheimer, Judy A. Siguaw, Gary L. Hunter. 2013. Exploring motivations and the capacity
for business crowdsourcing. AMS Review 3:4, 205-216. [CrossRef]
186. Mahendra Kumar Yadav, M. KumarDetermining influential users in blogosphere - A survey 470-475.
[CrossRef]
187. Jennifer L. Brown, Katharine D. Drake. 2013. Network ties among low-tax firms. The Accounting
Review 131104123318001. [CrossRef]
188. Lionel Frost, Margaret Lightbody, Abdel K. Halabi. 2013. Expanding Social Inclusion in Community
Sports Organizations: Evidence from Rural Australian Football Clubs. Journal of Sport Management
27:6, 453-466. [CrossRef]
189. Alejandro Artopoulos, Daniel Friel, Juan Carlos Hallak. 2013. Export emergence of differentiated
goods from developing countries: Export pioneers and business practices in Argentina. Journal of
Development Economics 105, 19-35. [CrossRef]
190. Emelj Tuna, Jerker Nilsson. 2013. Institutional mismatch in a transition economy. The collapse
of Swedmilk Macedonia. Journal of Agribusiness in Developing and Emerging Economies 3:2, 84-100.
[CrossRef]
191. Sabrina C. Thornton, Stephan C. Henneberg, Peter Naud. 2013. Understanding types of
organizational networking behaviors in the UK manufacturing sector. Industrial Marketing
Management 42:7, 1154-1166. [CrossRef]

192. Youcef Baghdadi. 2013. Enterprise Social Interaction Patterns: Enabler of Enterprise Transformation.
Journal of Enterprise Transformation 3:4, 307-329. [CrossRef]
193. Chris McDonald, Andrea Kirk-Brown, Lionel Frost, Pieter Van Dijk, Al Rainnie. 2013. Partnerships
and integrated responses to rural decline: The role of collective efficacy and political capital in
Northwest Tasmania, Australia. Journal of Rural Studies 32, 346-356. [CrossRef]
194. Klarita Grxhani, Jordi Brandts, Arthur Schram. 2013. The emergence of employer information
networks in an experimental labor market. Social Networks 35:4, 541-560. [CrossRef]
195. Jean-Marc Callois. 2013. Social interaction and economic organization: Toward an integrative
microeconomic model. Economics Letters 121:1, 98-100. [CrossRef]
196. Kangkang Yu, Jack Cadeaux, Hua Song. 2013. Distribution Channel Network and Relational
Performance: The Intervening Mechanism of Adaptive Distribution Flexibility. Decision Sciences 44:5,
915-950. [CrossRef]
197. Ilan Alon, Orly Yeheskel, Miri Lerner, Wenxian Zhang. 2013. Internationalization of Chinese
Entrepreneurial Firms. Thunderbird International Business Review 55:5, 495-512. [CrossRef]
198. Chang Woo-Young, . 2013. The Political Effect of Social Network Campaign:Tweeter Big Data
Analysis of the 19th National Election. Korean Political Science Review 47:4, 93-112. [CrossRef]
199. Jos A. Belso-Martinez, Francesc Xavier Molina-Morales. 2013. Non-Linear Relationships of Internal
and External Resources on a Firm's Innovation: The Case of the Spanish Vinalop Footwear Cluster.
Growth and Change 44:3, 494-521. [CrossRef]
200. Saskia Ellenbeck,, Peter Schmidt,, Antonella Battaglini,, Johan Lilliestam. 2013. Der Strommarkt
als soziale Institution Eine erweiterte Perspektive auf die deutsche Diskussion um
Kapazittsmechanismen. Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung 82:3, 171-182. [CrossRef]
201. Elmar D. Konrad. 2013. Cultural Entrepreneurship: The Impact of Social Networking on Success.
Creativity and Innovation Management 22:3, 307-319. [CrossRef]
202. Arturs Kalnins,, Francine Lafontaine. 2013. Too Far Away? The Effect of Distance to Headquarters
on Business Establishment Performance. American Economic Journal: Microeconomics 5:3, 157-179.
[Abstract] [View PDF article] [PDF with links]
203. Mary Thuo, Alexandra A. Bell, Boris E. Bravo-Ureta, David K. Okello, Evelyn Nasambu Okoko,
Nelson L. Kidula, C. Michael Deom, Naveen Puppala. 2013. Social Network Structures among
Groundnut Farmers. The Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension 19:4, 339-359. [CrossRef]
204. Marjolein J.W. Harmsen - van Hout, P. Jean-Jacques Herings, Benedict G.C. Dellaert. 2013.
Communication network formation with link specificity and value transferability. European Journal
of Operational Research 229:1, 199-211. [CrossRef]
205. Christiane Gebhardt. 2013. The making of plasma medicine. Strategy driven clusters and the emerging
roles of cluster management and government supervision. The Journal of Technology Transfer 38:4,
401-414. [CrossRef]
206. Wendy L. Tate, Lisa M. Ellram, Ismail Golgeci. 2013. Diffusion of environmental business practices:
A network approach. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management . [CrossRef]
207. Diego Lanzi. 2013. Frames and social games. The Journal of Socio-Economics 45, 227-233. [CrossRef]
208. Jos Lus Abrantes, Cludia Seabra, Cristiana Raquel Lages, Chanaka Jayawardhena. 2013. Drivers
of ingroup and outofgroup electronic wordofmouth (eWOM). European Journal of Marketing
47:7, 1067-1088. [CrossRef]
209. Shoshanah Inwood, Jill K. Clark, Molly Bean. 2013. The Differing Values of Multigeneration and
First-Generation Farmers: Their Influence on the Structure of Agriculture at the Rural-Urban
Interface. Rural Sociology n/a-n/a. [CrossRef]

210. Erik Jippes, Marjolein C. Achterkamp, Jan Pols, Paul L.P. Brand, Jo M.L. van Engelen. 2013.
Diffusing (let it happen) or disseminating (make it happen) innovations in health care. Journal of
Engineering and Technology Management 30:3, 246-263. [CrossRef]
211. Adriana P.A. van Beek, Cordula Wagner, Dinnus H.M. Frijters, Miel W. Ribbe, Peter P. Groenewegen.
2013. The ties that bind? Social networks of nursing staff and staff's behaviour towards residents with
dementia. Social Networks 35:3, 347-356. [CrossRef]
212. Dirk Michael Boehe, Luciano Barin Cruz. 2013. Gender and Microfinance Performance: Why Does
the Institutional Context Matter?. World Development 47, 121-135. [CrossRef]
213. Wei Pan, Gourab Ghoshal, Coco Krumme, Manuel Cebrian, Alex Pentland. 2013. Urban
characteristics attributable to density-driven tie formation. Nature Communications 4. . [CrossRef]
214. Rajdeep Grewal, Alok Kumar, Girish Mallapragada, Amit Saini. 2013. Marketing Channels in Foreign
Markets: Control Mechanisms and the Moderating Role of Multinational Corporation Headquarters
Subsidiary Relationship. Journal of Marketing Research 50:3, 378-398. [CrossRef]
215. Viswanath Venkatesh, Tracy Ann Sykes. 2013. Digital Divide Initiative Success in Developing
Countries: A Longitudinal Field Study in a Village in India. Information Systems Research 24:2,
239-260. [CrossRef]
216. Helmut P. Gaisbauer, Gottfried Schweiger, Clemens Sedmak. 2013. Ethical Obligations of Wealthy
People: Progressive Taxation and the Financial Crisis. Ethics and Social Welfare 7:2, 141-154.
[CrossRef]
217. Sana Bent Aboulkacem Guetat, Salem Ben Dhaou DakhliA framework for integration of knowledge
and innovation processes 1-11. [CrossRef]
218. Johannes Glckler. 2013. Knowledge, Networks and Space: Connectivity and the Problem of NonInteractive Learning. Regional Studies 47:6, 880-894. [CrossRef]
219. Allen N. Berger, Thomas Kick, Michael Koetter, Klaus Schaeck. 2013. Does it pay to have friends?
Social ties and executive appointments in banking. Journal of Banking & Finance 37:6, 2087-2105.
[CrossRef]
220. Laura de Dominicis, Raymond J.G.M. Florax, Henri L.F. de Groot. 2013. Regional clusters of
innovative activity in Europe: are social capital and geographical proximity key determinants?. Applied
Economics 45:17, 2325-2335. [CrossRef]
221. Ruth Bridgstock. 2013. Professional Capabilities for Twenty-First Century Creative Careers: Lessons
from Outstandingly Successful Australian Artists and Designers. International Journal of Art & Design
Education 32:2, 176-189. [CrossRef]
222. Filippo Barbera, Sara Fassero. 2013. The place-based nature of technological innovation: the case of
Sophia Antipolis. The Journal of Technology Transfer 38:3, 216-234. [CrossRef]
223. Michael Porter, Mark Spriggs. 2013. Informal Private Equity Investment Networks: The Role of the
Nexus Angel. The Journal of Private Equity 130515023021004. [CrossRef]
224. Jens Beckert. 2013. Imagined futures: fictional expectations in the economy. Theory and Society 42:3,
219-240. [CrossRef]
225. Nathaniel Boso, Vicky M. Story, John W. Cadogan. 2013. Entrepreneurial orientation, market
orientation, network ties, and performance: Study of entrepreneurial firms in a developing economy.
Journal of Business Venturing . [CrossRef]
226. Thomas Riise Johansen, Kim Pettersson. 2013. The Impact of Board Interlocks on Auditor Choice
and Audit Fees. Corporate Governance: An International Review 21:3, 287-310. [CrossRef]
227. Michael Porter, Mark Spriggs. 2013. Informal Private Equity Investment Networks: The Role of the
Nexus Angel. The Journal of Private Equity 16:3, 48-56. [CrossRef]

228. V. Latora, V. Nicosia, P. Panzarasa. 2013. Social Cohesion, Structural Holes, and a Tale of Two
Measures. Journal of Statistical Physics 151:3-4, 745-764. [CrossRef]
229. Anne Pssil, Tuija Oikarinen, Satu Parjanen, Vesa Harmaakorpi. 2013. Interpretative dimension of
userdriven service innovation. Baltic Journal of Management 8:2, 166-182. [CrossRef]
230. Markus Freiburg, Dietmar Grichnik. 2013. Institutional Reinvestments in Private Equity Funds as a
Double-Edged Sword: The Role of the Status Quo Bias. Journal of Behavioral Finance 14:2, 134-148.
[CrossRef]
231. Jeehong Kim, Wonchang Hur. 2013. Diffusion of competing innovations in influence networks.
Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination 8:1, 109-124. [CrossRef]
232. Zhiming Cheng, Haining Wang. 2013. Do neighbourhoods have effects on wages? A study of migrant
workers in urban China. Habitat International 38, 222-231. [CrossRef]
233. Ralf Mller, Johannes Glckler, Monique Aubry, Jingting Shao. 2013. Project Management
Knowledge Flows in Networks of Project Managers and Project Management Offices: A Case Study
in the Pharmaceutical Industry. Project Management Journal 44:2, 4-19. [CrossRef]
234. Michael Ehret. 2013. Emergence of business markets A critical realist foundation. Industrial
Marketing Management 42:3, 316-323. [CrossRef]
235. Jing'an Tang. 2013. Joint Venture Formation and Internationalization: A Japanese MNEs' Perspective.
Journal of Asia-Pacific Business 14:2, 107-129. [CrossRef]
236. Fiori A. Zafeiropoulou, Dimitrios N. Koufopoulos. 2013. The Influence of Relational Embeddedness
on the Formation and Performance of Social Franchising. Journal of Marketing Channels 20:1-2, 73-98.
[CrossRef]
237. Bingyuan Hsiung. 2013. Guanxi: Personal connections in Chinese society. Journal of Bioeconomics
15:1, 17-40. [CrossRef]
238. Sandro Busso. 2013. Economia e lavoro della conoscenza. Tra l'incertezza delle definizioni e la rilevanza
nel discorso pubblico. SOCIOLOGIA DEL LAVORO :129, 100-117. [CrossRef]
239. Xiaohua Zeng, Liyuan Wei. 2013. Social Ties and User Content Generation: Evidence from Flickr.
Information Systems Research 24:1, 71-87. [CrossRef]
240. Kamil J. Mizgier, Matthias P. Jttner, Stephan M. Wagner. 2013. Bottleneck identification in supply
chain networks. International Journal of Production Research 51:5, 1477-1490. [CrossRef]
241. Bibliography 225-266. [CrossRef]
242. Bert Spector. 2013. The social embeddedness of business model enactment. Journal of Strategy and
Management 6:1, 27-39. [CrossRef]
243. Bertrand Pauget, Andreas Wald. 2013. Relational competence in complex temporary organizations:
The case of a French hospital construction project network. International Journal of Project
Management 31:2, 200-211. [CrossRef]
244. Noel Gaston, Douglas R. Nelson. 2013. BRIDGING TRADE THEORY AND LABOUR
ECONOMETRICS: THE EFFECTS OF INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION*. Journal of
Economic Surveys 27:1, 98-139. [CrossRef]
245. Chrisanthi Avgerou, Boyi Li. 2013. Relational and institutional embeddedness of Web-enabled
entrepreneurial networks: case studies of netrepreneurs in China. Information Systems Journal no-no.
[CrossRef]
246. Theodore Lianos, Anastasia Pseiridis. 2013. On-The-Job Skills and Earnings of Returned Migrants.
International Migration 51:1, 78-91. [CrossRef]

247. Virginia FernndezPrez, Antonio Jos VerdJver, Jose BenitezAmado. 2013. Managerial social
networks and strategic flexibility: the role of strategic orientation. Personnel Review 42:2, 134-153.
[CrossRef]
248. Allen T. Alexander, Dominique Philippe Martin. 2013. Intermediaries for open innovation: A
competence-based comparison of knowledge transfer offices practices. Technological Forecasting and
Social Change 80:1, 38-49. [CrossRef]
249. Erez A. Marantz, Alexandra Kalev, Noah Lewin-EpsteinIsraeli-Palestinian Women in the Retail
Industry: Social Boundaries and Job Search Techniques 131-152. [CrossRef]
250. Christina berg. 2013. Competence integration in creative processes. Industrial Marketing
Management 42:1, 113-124. [CrossRef]
251. Albert N. Kimbu, Michael Z. Ngoasong. 2013. CENTRALISED DECENTRALISATION OF
TOURISM DEVELOPMENT: A Network Perspective. Annals of Tourism Research 40, 235-259.
[CrossRef]
252. Mingfeng Lin, Nagpurnanand R. Prabhala, Siva Viswanathan. 2013. Judging Borrowers by the
Company They Keep: Friendship Networks and Information Asymmetry in Online Peer-to-Peer
Lending. Management Science 59:1, 17-35. [CrossRef]
253. Michael J. MurrayThe Making of a Good Society: Lowes Instrumental Method and the Pursuit of
Full Employment 169-185. [CrossRef]
254. Paul Shaffer. 2013. Ten Years of Q-Squared: Implications for Understanding and Explaining
Poverty. World Development . [CrossRef]
255. Shan-Ying Chu. 2013. Internet, Economic Growth and Recession. Modern Economy 04:03, 209-213.
[CrossRef]
256. Dmitry Khanin. 2013. How to reduce turnover intentions in the family business: Managing centripetal
and centrifugal forces. Business Horizons 56:1, 63-73. [CrossRef]
257. Christine Moser, Julie M. Birkholz, Dirk Deichmann, Iina Hellsten, Shenghui WangExploring
Ideation: Knowledge Development in Science through the Lens of Semantic and Social Networks
235-243. [CrossRef]
258. Donald Tomaskovic-DeveyWhat Might a Labor Market Look Like? 45-80. [CrossRef]
259. Kate Barclay, Jeff KinchLocal Capitalisms and Sustainability in Coastal Fisheries: Cases from Papua
New Guinea and Solomon Islands 107-138. [CrossRef]
260. Adrian Pabst, Roberto Scazzieri. 2012. The political economy of civil society. Constitutional Political
Economy 23:4, 337-356. [CrossRef]
261. Werner Bnte, Ute Filipiak. 2012. Financial literacy, information flows, and caste affiliation: Empirical
evidence from India. Journal of Banking & Finance 36:12, 3399-3414. [CrossRef]
262. Fabio CHADDAD. 2012. ADVANCING THE THEORY OF THE COOPERATIVE
ORGANIZATION: THE COOPERATIVE AS A TRUE HYBRID. Annals of Public and Cooperative
Economics 83:4, 445-461. [CrossRef]
263. Simon Caton, Christoph Dukat, Tilo Grenz, Christian Haas, Michaela Pfadenhauer, Christof
WeinhardtFoundations of Trust: Contextualising Trust in Social Clouds 424-429. [CrossRef]
264. Yanlong Zhang, Nan Lin, Ting Li. 2012. Markets or networks: Households choice of financial
intermediary in Western China. Social Networks 34:4, 670-681. [CrossRef]
265. Matt J. Mariola. 2012. Farmers, trust, and the market solution to water pollution: The role of social
embeddedness in water quality trading. Journal of Rural Studies 28:4, 577-589. [CrossRef]
266. Jonathan Luckhurst. 2012. The G20 and ad hoc Embedded Liberalism: Economic Governance amid
Crisis and Dissensus. Politics & Policy 40:5, 740-782. [CrossRef]

267. Johannes Zschache. 2012. Producing public goods in networks: Some effects of social comparison
and endogenous network change. Social Networks 34:4, 539-548. [CrossRef]
268. Xiaoquan Zhang, Chong Wang. 2012. Network Positions and Contributions to Online Public Goods:
The Case of Chinese Wikipedia. Journal of Management Information Systems 29:2, 11-40. [CrossRef]
269. Virginia FernndezPrez, Victor Jess GarcaMorales, scar Fernando BustinzaSnchez. 2012. The
effects of CEOs' social networks on organizational performance through knowledge and strategic
flexibility. Personnel Review 41:6, 777-812. [CrossRef]
270. EKATERINA TURKINA, EVGENY POSTNIKOV. 2012. Cross-border Inter-firm Networks in the
European Union's Eastern Neighbourhood: Integration via Organizational Learning*. JCMS: Journal
of Common Market Studies 50:4, 632-652. [CrossRef]
271. Celine Miani, Markos Zachariadis, Eivor Oborn, Michael BarrettKnowledge and Collaboration in
Multihub Networks 11-28. [CrossRef]
272. ROGER SPRANZ, ALEXANDER LENGER, NILS GOLDSCHMIDT. 2012. The relation
between institutional and cultural factors in economic development: the case of Indonesia. Journal of
Institutional Economics 1-30. [CrossRef]
273. Marzia Mortati, Leon Cruickshank. 2012. NETS: a design tool for activating social networks.
International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research 18:4, 509-523. [CrossRef]
274. Birger Maekelburger, Christian Schwens, Ruediger Kabst. 2012. Asset specificity and foreign market
entry mode choice of small and medium-sized enterprises: The moderating influence of knowledge
safeguards and institutional safeguards. Journal of International Business Studies 43:5, 458-476.
[CrossRef]
275. Alberto Sa Vinhas, Jan B. Heide, Sandy D. Jap. 2012. Consistency Judgments, Embeddedness,
and Relationship Outcomes in Interorganizational Networks. Management Science 58:5, 996-1011.
[CrossRef]
276. Griet Steel. 2012. Local encounters with globetrotters. Annals of Tourism Research 39:2, 601-619.
[CrossRef]
277. Kevin Chan, Sibel AdaliAn agent based model for trust and information sharing in networked systems
88-95. [CrossRef]
278. Toni Mora, Joan Gil. 2012. PEER EFFECTS IN ADOLESCENT BMI: EVIDENCE FROM
SPAIN. Health Economics n/a-n/a. [CrossRef]
279. Manuel Fernndez Esquinas. 2012. Hacia un programa de investigacin en Sociologa de la Innovacin.
Arbor 188:753, 5-18. [CrossRef]
280. Sbastien Brion, Vincent Chauvet, Barthlmy Chollet, Caroline Mothe. 2012. Project leaders as
boundary spanners: Relational antecedents and performance outcomes. International Journal of Project
Management . [CrossRef]
281. ric Montpetit. 2012. Does Holding Beliefs with Conviction Prevent Policy Actors from Adopting a
Compromising Attitude?. Political Studies no-no. [CrossRef]
282. David Neves, Andries du Toit. 2012. MONEY AND SOCIALITY IN SOUTH AFRICA'S
INFORMAL ECONOMY. Africa 82:01, 131-149. [CrossRef]
283. Peter H. Egger, Maximilian von Ehrlich, Douglas R. Nelson. 2012. Migration and Trade. The World
Economy 35:2, 216-241. [CrossRef]
284. Markus Freiburg, Dietmar Grichnik. 2012. Institutional investments in private equity funds: social
ties and the reduction of information asymmetry. Venture Capital 1-26. [CrossRef]
285. Andrew Crane, Trish Ruebottom. 2012. Stakeholder Theory and Social Identity: Rethinking
Stakeholder Identification. Journal of Business Ethics . [CrossRef]

286. Constance Le Tian, Bertrand Venard. 2012. Pour une approche contingente de la gouvernance.
Management international 16:2, 25. [CrossRef]
287. Eva Negele 89-109. [CrossRef]
288. Martin Abraham, Christina Meyer. 2012. Bedingungen des Erfahrungsaustausches in wirtschaftlichen
Transaktionen: Das Beispiel der Reputation von Weiterbildungsanbietern / Conditions of Information
Transfer in Economic Transactions. The Example of Reputation among Providers of Vocational
Training. Zeitschrift fr Soziologie 41:3. . [CrossRef]
289. Stephen Chen. 2012. Creating sustainable international social ventures. Thunderbird International
Business Review 54:1, 131-142. [CrossRef]
290. Michael PlattnerInternationalization of Business Networks: How Do Managers with Divergent
Cultural Norms Contribute? 322-346. [CrossRef]
291. Dawn M. Dobni. 2012. Leisure as Marketing: The Nature and Experience of Business Leisure.
Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management 21:1, 40-60. [CrossRef]
292. Virginia Fernndez-Prez, Mara del Mar Fuentes-Fuentes, Ana Bojica. 2012. Strategic flexibility and
change: The impact of social networks. Journal of Management & Organization 18:1, 2-15. [CrossRef]
293. Anastasios G. Karamanos. 2012. Leveraging micro- and macro-structures of embeddedness in alliance
networks for exploratory innovation in biotechnology. R&D Management 42:1, 71-89. [CrossRef]
294. CHRISTOPHER J. COYNE, JAYME LEMKE. 2012. Lessons from The Cultural and Political
Economy of Recovery. American Journal of Economics and Sociology 71:1, 215-228. [CrossRef]
295. Chong Wang, Xiaoquan ZhangNetwork Centrality and Contributions to Online Public Good--The
Case of Chinese Wikipedia 4515-4524. [CrossRef]
296. Emmanuel Zenou, Isabelle Allemand, Bndicte BrullebautChapter 8 At the Origins of Female
Directors' Networks: A Study of the French Case 177-192. [CrossRef]
297. Mia Reinholt, Torben Pedersen, Nicolai J. Foss. 2011. Why a Central Network Position Isn't Enough:
The Role of Motivation and Ability for Knowledge Sharing in Employee Networks. The Academy of
Management Journal 54:6, 1277-1297. [CrossRef]
298. Alessandro Paletto, Fabrizio Ferretti, Isabella De Meo. 2011. The role of social networks in forest
landscape planning. Forest Policy and Economics . [CrossRef]
299. Virginia Fernndez-Prez, Mara del Mar Fuentes-Fuentes, Ana Bojica. 2011. Strategic flexibility and
change: The impact of social networks. Journal of Management & Organization 2-15. [CrossRef]
300. Merja Lhdesmki, Timo Suutari. 2011. Keeping at Arms Length or Searching for Social Proximity?
Corporate Social Responsibility as a Reciprocal Process Between Small Businesses and the Local
Community. Journal of Business Ethics . [CrossRef]
301. SAKO MUSTERD, SJOERD DE VOS, MARJOLIJN DAS, JAN LATTEN. 2011.
NEIGHBOURHOOD COMPOSITION AND ECONOMIC PROSPECTS: A LONGITUDINAL
STUDY IN THE NETHERLANDS. Tijdschrift voor economische en sociale geografie no-no.
[CrossRef]
302. Jelmer Schalk. 2011. Interorganisational Relations and Goal Consensus: An Exploratory Study in
Two Local Dutch Service Delivery Networks. Local Government Studies 1-25. [CrossRef]
303. P.J. Lamberson, Scott E. Page. 2011. The effect of feedback consistency on success in markets with
positive feedbacks. Economics Letters . [CrossRef]
304. FIDAN ANA KURTULUS. 2011. What Types of Diversity Benefit Workers? Empirical Evidence
on the Effects of Co-worker Dissimilarity on the Performance of Employees. Industrial Relations: A
Journal of Economy and Society 50:4, 678-712. [CrossRef]

305. WOLFRAM H. DRESSLER, MICHAEL FABINYI. 2011. Farmer Gone Fish'n? Swidden Decline
and the Rise of Grouper Fishing on Palawan Island, the Philippines. Journal of Agrarian Change 11:4,
536-555. [CrossRef]
306. Yimei Hu, Olav Jull Srensen. 2011. Innovation in virtual networks: evidence from the Chinese online
game industry. Journal of Knowledge-based Innovation in China 3:3, 198-215. [CrossRef]
307. Lutz Preuss. 2011. On the contribution of public procurement to entrepreneurship and small business
policy. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development 1-28. [CrossRef]
308. D. Lanzi. 2011. Capabilities and social cohesion. Cambridge Journal of Economics . [CrossRef]
309. Gonzalo Ordonez-Matamoros, Susan E. Cozzens, Margarita Garcia-LuqueNorth-South and SouthSouth research collaboration: What differences does it make for developing countries? - the case of
Colombia 1-10. [CrossRef]
310. Chunchieh Wang, Muhsuan Huang, Darzen Chen. 2011. Evolution of technology dependence
among leading semiconductor companies. Industrial Management & Data Systems 111:7, 1136-1152.
[CrossRef]
311. Melanie Windolph, Klaus Moeller. 2011. Open-book accounting: Reason for failure of inter-firm
cooperation?. Management Accounting Research . [CrossRef]
312. Mina Baliamoune-Lutz. 2011. Trust-based social capital, institutions, and development. The Journal
of Socio-Economics 40:4, 335-346. [CrossRef]
313. Doren Chadee, Revti Raman, Snejina Michailova. 2011. Sources of Competitiveness of Offshore IT
Service Providers in India: Towards a Conceptual Framework. Competition & Change 15:3, 196-220.
[CrossRef]
314. Luciano Ciravegna. 2011. FDI, Social Ties and Technological Learning in New Silicon Valley Clones.
Evidence from the Costa Rican ICT Cluster. Journal of Development Studies 1-21. [CrossRef]
315. Brinja Meiseberg, Thomas Ehrmann. 2011. The impact of communicative efficiency on franchisee
performance. Zeitschrift fr Betriebswirtschaft 81:S4, 81-103. [CrossRef]
316. Danny Miller. 2011. Miller (1983) Revisited: A Reflection on EO Research and Some Suggestions
for the Future. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice no-no. [CrossRef]
317. Chris Bidner. 2011. Book review. Journal of Economic Psychology 32:3, 529-530. [CrossRef]
318. Satu Parjanen, Helin Melkas, Tuomo Uotila. 2011. Distances, Knowledge Brokerage and Absorptive
Capacity in Enhancing Regional Innovativeness: A Qualitative Case Study of Lahti Region, Finland.
European Planning Studies 19:6, 921-948. [CrossRef]
319. David R. Meyer. 2011. Small-world job mobility integrates Hong Kong with global financial centers.
Asian Geographer 28:1, 51-63. [CrossRef]
320. Diego Lanzi. 2011. Frames as choice superstructures. The Journal of Socio-Economics 40:2, 115-123.
[CrossRef]
321. Philip R. Tomlinson. 2011. Strong ties, Substantive Embeddedness and Innovation: Exploring
Differences in the Innovative Performance of Small and Medium-sized Firms in UK Manufacturing.
Knowledge and Process Management 18:2, 95-108. [CrossRef]
322. Perola berg, Sven Oskarsson, Torsten Svensson. 2011. Similarity vs. homogeneity: contextual effects
in explaining trust. European Political Science Review 1-25. [CrossRef]
323. FRANCESCA CARNEVALI. 2011. Social capital and trade associations in America, c. 1860-1914:
a microhistory approach1. The Economic History Review no-no. [CrossRef]
324. Alok Kumar, Jan B Heide, Kenneth H Wathne. 2011. Performance Implications of Mismatched
Governance Regimes Across External and Internal Relationships. Journal of Marketing 75:2, 1-17.
[CrossRef]

325. Rita Yi Man Li, Sun Wah Poon. 2011. USING WEB 2.0 TO SHARE KNOWLEDGE OF
CONSTRUCTION SAFETY: THE FABLE OF ECONOMIC ANIMALS. Economic Affairs 31:1,
73-79. [CrossRef]
326. Katja Hutter, Julia Hautz, Johann Fller, Julia Mueller, Kurt Matzler. 2011. Communitition: The
Tension between Competition and Collaboration in Community-Based Design Contests. Creativity
and Innovation Management 20:1, 3-21. [CrossRef]
327. Kaj Storbacka, Suvi Nenonen. 2011. Markets as configurations. European Journal of Marketing 45:1/2,
241-258. [CrossRef]
328. Andrea Mario Lavezzi, Nicola Meccheri. 2011. TRANSITIONS OUT OF UNEMPLOYMENT:
THE ROLE OF SOCIAL NETWORKS' TOPOLOGY AND FIRMS' RECRUITMENT
STRATEGIES. Metroeconomica 62:1, 24-52. [CrossRef]
329. Martha A. Martinez, Howard E. Aldrich. 2011. Networking strategies for entrepreneurs: balancing
cohesion and diversity. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research 17:1, 7-38.
[CrossRef]
330. Guilherme D. Pires, John Stanton, Patricia Stanton. 2011. Revisiting the substantiality criterion: From
ethnic marketing to market segmentation. Journal of Business Research . [CrossRef]
331. Friederike Welter. 2011. Contextualizing Entrepreneurship-Conceptual Challenges and Ways
Forward. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 35:1, 165-184. [CrossRef]
332. BEVERLEY MULLINGS. 2011. Diaspora strategies, skilled migrants and human capital
enhancement in Jamaica. Global Networks 11:1, 24-42. [CrossRef]
333. Jungwon Min. 2011. Dynamics of Unclosed Triangles: Disappearance of Structural Holes in Alliance
Networks. Japanese Journal of Administrative Science 24:1, 17-36. [CrossRef]
334. Joel Sawat Selway. 2011. Cross-Cuttingness, Cleavage Structures and Civil War Onset. British Journal
of Political Science 41:01, 111-138. [CrossRef]
335. MICHAEL A. HITT. 2011. RELEVANCE OF STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT THEORY AND
RESEARCH FOR SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT. Journal of Supply Chain Management 47:1,
9-13. [CrossRef]
336. Athena Piterou, Fred Steward. 2011. Emerging innovation networks and the print-on-paper
sociotechnical regime. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 10, 104-122. [CrossRef]
337. Lutz Trettin, Friederike Welter. 2011. Challenges for spatially oriented entrepreneurship research.
Entrepreneurship & Regional Development 1-28. [CrossRef]
338. Andreas Wald. 2011. Sozialkapital als theoretische Fundierung relationaler Forschungsanstze.
Zeitschrift fr Betriebswirtschaft 81:1, 99-126. [CrossRef]
339. Lea Hennala, Satu Parjanen, Tuomo Uotila. 2011. Challenges of multi-actor involvement in the public
sector front-end innovation processes: Constructing an open innovation model for developing wellbeing services. European Journal of Innovation Management 14:3, 364-387. [CrossRef]
340. Shinichi Doi, Keiji Yamada. 2010. Symbiotic technology for creating social innovation 30years in the
future. AI & SOCIETY . [CrossRef]
341. Thorsten Borring Olesen, Jan Pedersen. 2010. On the side of the angels: altruism in Danish
development aid 19602005. European Review of History: Revue europeenne d'histoire 17:6, 881-903.
[CrossRef]
342. Matthew Bidwell, Isabel Fernandez-Mateo. 2010. Relationship Duration and Returns to Brokerage in
the Staffing Sector. Organization Science 21:6, 1141-1158. [CrossRef]
343. Abhijit Ramalingam, Michael T. Rauh. 2010. The Firm as a Socialization Device. Management Science
56:12, 2191-2206. [CrossRef]

344. Michel Ferrary. 2010. Specialized organizations and ambidextrous clusters in the open innovation
paradigm. European Management Journal . [CrossRef]
345. Sung-Wook Kwon, Richard C. Feiock. 2010. Overcoming the Barriers to Cooperation:
Intergovernmental Service Agreements. Public Administration Review 70:6, 876-884. [CrossRef]
346. Byung-Hak Leem, HanKuk Hong, . 2010. Using Social Network Analysis to Measure
Relationships Between Management Activity Factors of Six Sigma. The e-Business Studies 11:4,
187-206. [CrossRef]
347. Guojun Ji, Jia WangStructure of Supply Chains Embedding in the Cluster of SMEs for Organic
Industry 1-4. [CrossRef]
348. R. A. Balgah, G. Buchenrieder. 2010. The Dynamics of Informal Responses to Covariate Shocks.
Journal of Natural Resources Policy Research 2:4, 357-370. [CrossRef]
349. Martine Spence, Jouhaina Ben Boubaker Gherib, Viviane Ondoua Biwol. 2010. Sustainable
Entrepreneurship: Is Entrepreneurial will Enough? A NorthSouth Comparison. Journal of Business
Ethics . [CrossRef]
350. Cristina Cruz, Rachida Justo, Julio O. De Castro. 2010. Does family employment enhance MSEs
performance?. Journal of Business Venturing . [CrossRef]
351. Michel Ferrary. 2010. Syndication of Venture Capital Investment: The Art of Resource Pooling.
Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 34:5, 885-907. [CrossRef]
352. Thierry Pnard, Nicolas Poussing. 2010. Internet Use and Social Capital: The Strength of Virtual
Ties. Journal of Economic Issues 44:3, 569-595. [CrossRef]
353. L.J. Gutirrez Gutirrez, V. Fernndez Prez. 2010. Managerial networks and strategic flexibility: a
QM perspective. Industrial Management & Data Systems 110:8, 1192-1214. [CrossRef]
354. Leonidas A. Zampetakis, George Kanelakis. 2010. Opportunity entrepreneurship in the rural sector:
evidence from Greece. Journal of Research in Marketing and Entrepreneurship 12:2, 122-142. [CrossRef]
355. Vincent Labatut, Jean-Michel BalasqueBusiness-Oriented Analysis of a Social Network of University
Students: Informative Value of Individual and Relational Data Compared through Group Detection
25-32. [CrossRef]
356. Hector Gonzalo Ordez-Matamoros, Susan E. Cozzens, Margarita Garcia. 2010. International CoAuthorship and Research Team Performance in Colombia. Review of Policy Research 27:4, 415-431.
[CrossRef]
357. John Weeks, Arthur Getis, Allan Hill, Samuel Agyei-Mensah, David Rain. 2010. Neighborhoods
and Fertility in Accra, Ghana: An AMOEBA-Based Approach. Annals of the Association of American
Geographers 100:3, 558-578. [CrossRef]
358. Thomas Ehrmann, Brinja Meiseberg. 2010. Benefits of Inner Strength for Franchise System
Expansion. Journal of Marketing Channels 17:3, 191-218. [CrossRef]
359. Michael J. Murray. 2010. From Economic Freedom to Economic and Social Poverty: Institutional
Approaches to the Business Enterprise, Structural Change, and the Role for Government. Journal of
Economic Issues 44:2, 421-428. [CrossRef]
360. Mark T. Rivera, Sara B. Soderstrom, Brian Uzzi. 2010. Dynamics of Dyads in Social Networks:
Assortative, Relational, and Proximity Mechanisms. Annual Review of Sociology 36:1, 91-115.
[CrossRef]
361. Corinne Bendersky, Kathleen L. McGinn. 2010. PerspectiveOpen to Negotiation:
Phenomenological Assumptions and Knowledge Dissemination. Organization Science 21:3, 781-797.
[CrossRef]

362. Mark Deimel, Ludwig Theuvsen, Christof Ebbeskotte. 2010. Regional networking as a competitive
advantage? Empirical results from German pig production. Food Economics - Acta Agriculturae
Scandinavica, Section C 7:2, 163-179. [CrossRef]
363. Gillian Kemp. 2010. It's not what you know but who you know that's important: the influence of
social networks on communities. International Journal of Consumer Studies 34:3, 326-332. [CrossRef]
364. Jos Alcides Gobbo Jr., Annika Olsson. 2010. The transformation between exploration and
exploitation applied to inventors of packaging innovations. Technovation 30:5-6, 322-331. [CrossRef]
365. Erik Jippes, Marjolein C. Achterkamp, Paul L.P. Brand, Derk Jan Kiewiet, Jan Pols, Jo M.L. van
Engelen. 2010. Disseminating educational innovations in health care practice: Training versus social
networks. Social Science & Medicine 70:10, 1509-1517. [CrossRef]
366. Tony Thistoll, David Pauleen. 2010. Commercialising innovation internationally: A case study of
social network and relationship management. Journal of International Entrepreneurship 8:1, 36-54.
[CrossRef]
367. J. Zuwarimwe, J. Kirsten. 2010. The role of social networks in development of small-scale enterprises
in the Chimanimani district of Zimbabwe. Agrekon 49:1, 17-38. [CrossRef]
368. Diego Lanzi. 2010. Embedded choices. Theory and Decision 68:3, 263-280. [CrossRef]
369. Mette Mnsted, Finn Hansson. 2010. Creating Space for Research: The Charismatic Entrepreneur
as Research Director. Creativity and Innovation Management 19:1, 47-56. [CrossRef]
370. Stefan Kesting. 2010. John Kenneth Galbraith: a radical economist?. International Journal of Social
Economics 37:3, 179-196. [CrossRef]
371. Gerard Marty, Raphale Preget. 2010. A Socio-Economic Analysis of French Public Timber Sales.
Journal of Sustainable Forestry 29:1, 15-49. [CrossRef]
372. Michael Fritsch, Martina Kauffeld-Monz. 2010. The impact of network structure on knowledge
transfer: an application of social network analysis in the context of regional innovation networks. The
Annals of Regional Science 44:1, 21-38. [CrossRef]
373. Urs P. JgerResource Tension Areas 101-113. [CrossRef]
374. Jeffrey Goldstein, James K. Hazy, Benyamin B. LichtensteinExperiments in Novelty 101-123.
[CrossRef]
375. Bart Victor, Woodrow LucasIs It Ever Better to Lend Than to Give? A Social Embeddedness View
of Alternative Approaches to Poverty Alleviation 273-294. [CrossRef]
376. R Michaelides, M. Tickle, S.C. MortonOnline Communities of Practice for innovation and knowledge
transfer: A case study in the U.K. 922-927. [CrossRef]
377. Marco Bellandi, Annalisa Caloffi. 2010. An Analysis of Regional Policies Promoting Networks for
Innovation. European Planning Studies 18:1, 67-82. [CrossRef]
378. Martin Kilduff, Daniel Brass. 2010. Organizational Social Network Research: Core Ideas and Key
Debates. The Academy of Management Annals 4, 317-357. [CrossRef]
379. John W. ClarryInnovation and the Patenting of Knowledge in Japanese Corporations 177-198.
[CrossRef]
380. Paul ManningThe dark side of social capital: Lessons from the Madoff case 207-228. [CrossRef]
381. Domnec Mel. 2009. The Practice of Networking: An Ethical Approach. Journal of Business Ethics
90:S4, 487-503. [CrossRef]
382. Nil zalar-Toulouse, Amina Bji-Bcheur, Patrick E. Murphy. 2009. Fair Trade in France:
From Individual Innovators to Contemporary Networks. Journal of Business Ethics 90:S4, 589-606.
[CrossRef]

383. Anria Sophia van Zyl. 2009. The impact of Social Networking 2.0 on organisations. The Electronic
Library 27:6, 906-918. [CrossRef]
384. Bernardo Trejos, Lan-Hung Nora Chiang. 2009. Local economic linkages to community-based
tourism in rural Costa Rica. Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography 30:3, 373-387. [CrossRef]
385. Alan J. Richardson, Eksa Kilfoyle. 2009. Accounting in markets, hierarchies and networks: The role
of accounting in the transnational governance of postal transactions. Accounting, Organizations and
Society 34:8, 939-956. [CrossRef]
386. Isabelle Le Breton-Miller, Danny Miller. 2009. Agency vs. Stewardship in Public Family Firms:
A Social Embeddedness Reconciliation. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 33:6, 1169-1191.
[CrossRef]
387. L. Lynda Harling Stalker. 2009. Selfemployed craft production is embedded work. Journal of
Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy 3:4, 415-425. [CrossRef]
388. G. Ordonez-Matamoros, S.E. Cozzens, M. Garcia-LuqueInternational co-authorship and research
team performance in Colombia 1-9. [CrossRef]
389. Maten Bel. 2009. Comptences et dynamiques territoriales : quelles interactions ?. Gographie,
conomie, socit 11:3, 213-232. [CrossRef]
390. Wei Li, Wei LiA Review of Literature on Knowledge Information Service for Regional Innovation
System 1-4. [CrossRef]
391. Yong Yang, M. Hosein Fallah, Jiang HeInnovation Network and Performance of Technology Clusters:
Evidence from Communication Equipment Manufacturing 1-5. [CrossRef]
392. Ira Matuschke, Matin Qaim. 2009. The impact of social networks on hybrid seed adoption in India.
Agricultural Economics 40:5, 493-505. [CrossRef]
393. Robyn Eversole. 2009. Five rivers and where they meet (crossdisciplinary reflections on development,
policy and place). Journal of Place Management and Development 2:2, 95-108. [CrossRef]
394. Doren Chadee, Revti Raman. 2009. International outsourcing of information technology services:
review and future directions. International Marketing Review 26:4/5, 411-438. [CrossRef]
395. Byoung-Hyoun Hwang, Seoyoung Kim. 2009. It pays to have friends. Journal of Financial Economics
93:1, 138-158. [CrossRef]
396. Celia Lessa Kerstenetzky, Larissa Santos. 2009. Poverty as Deprivation of Freedom: The Case of
Vidigal Shantytown in Rio de Janeiro. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities 10:2, 189-211.
[CrossRef]
397. Michel Ferrary, Mark Granovetter. 2009. The role of venture capital firms in Silicon Valley's complex
innovation network. Economy and Society 38:2, 326-359. [CrossRef]
398. Christian Lechner, Christophe Leyronas. 2009. Small-Business Group Formation as an
Entrepreneurial Development Model. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 33:3, 645-667. [CrossRef]
399. Jens Beckert. 2009. The social order of markets. Theory and Society 38:3, 245-269. [CrossRef]
400. Theodore Lianos, Anastasia Pseiridis. 2009. On the occupational choices of return migrants.
Entrepreneurship & Regional Development 21:2, 155-181. [CrossRef]
401. Angelina R. Sutin, Paul T. Costa, Richard Miech, William W. Eaton. 2009. Personality and career
success: Concurrent and longitudinal relations. European Journal of Personality 23:2, 71-84. [CrossRef]
402. Abraham Carmeli, Benny Azeroual. 2009. How relational capital and knowledge combination
capability enhance the performance of work units in a high technology industry. Strategic
Entrepreneurship Journal 3:1, 85-103. [CrossRef]

403. NANCY ETTLINGER. 2009. Surmounting City Silences: Knowledge Creation and the Design of
Urban Democracy in the Everyday Economy. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research
33:1, 217-230. [CrossRef]
404. Anja Iseke. 2009. Humankapital und Sozialkapital: Gibt es einen Matthus-Effekt
bezglich der Sozialkapitalbildung von Nachwuchsfhrungskrften?. Schmalenbachs Zeitschrift fr
betriebswirtschaftliche Forschung 61:2, 186-211. [CrossRef]
405. StigErik Jakobsen, Hallgeir Gammelster, Arnt Flysand. 2009. The spatial embeddedness of
professional football clubs in Norway. Soccer & Society 10:2, 261-279. [CrossRef]
406. Nina RillaThe International Dimension of Innovation Process: Evidence of Finnish Innovation Data
167-191. [CrossRef]
407. Valerie King, Louis Yu, Yan ZhuangGuanxi in the Chinese Web 9-17. [CrossRef]
408. Roberta Rehner Iversen, Annie Laurie Armstrong. 2008. Hurricane Katrina and New Orleans: What
Might a Sociological Embeddedness Perspective Offer Disaster Research and Planning?. Analyses of
Social Issues and Public Policy 8:1, 183-209. [CrossRef]
409. Jay Y. Wu. 2008. A General Behavior Model and New Definitions of Organizational Cultures. The
Journal of Socio-Economics 37:6, 2535-2545. [CrossRef]
410. Ann M. Carlos, Karen Maguire, Larry Neal. 2008. A knavish people: London Jewry and the stock
market during the South Sea Bubble. Business History 50:6, 728-748. [CrossRef]
411. Tuomo Uotila, Toni Ahlqvist. 2008. Linking Technology Foresight and Regional Innovation
Activities: Network Facilitating Innovation Policy in Lahti Region, Finland. European Planning Studies
16:10, 1423-1443. [CrossRef]
412. Ramendra Singh. 2008. Relational embeddedness, tertius iungens orientation and relationship quality
in emerging markets. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics 20:4, 479-492. [CrossRef]
413. Jorge Turmo Arnal, scar Vara Crespo, ngel Rodrguez Garca-Brazales. 2008. La integracin de
los mercados en la sociedad: el caso de la transicin econmica rusa. Cuadernos de Economa 31:87,
31-60. [CrossRef]
414. Emily Chamlee-Wright, Justus A. Myers. 2008. Discovery and social learning in non-priced
environments: An Austrian view of social network theory. The Review of Austrian Economics 21:2-3,
151-166. [CrossRef]
415. MONA FAWAZ. 2008. An Unusual Clique of City-Makers: Social Networks in the Production
of a Neighborhood in Beirut (1950-75). International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 32:3,
565-585. [CrossRef]
416. Jose C. Alvarez, Kelly VoddenKnowledge building in participative projects 990-997. [CrossRef]
417. C. Guilmi, F. Clementi, T. Matteo, M. Gallegati. 2008. Social networks and labour productivity
in Europe: an empirical investigation. Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination 3:1, 43-57.
[CrossRef]
418. IOANNIS CHORIANOPOULOS. 2008. Institutional Responses to EU Challenges: Attempting to
Articulate a Local Regulatory Scale in Greece. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research
32:2, 324-343. [CrossRef]
419. Pierre Pestieau, Uri M Possen. 2008. Interaction of defined benefit pension plans and social security.
Pensions: An International Journal 13:1-2, 101-117. [CrossRef]
420. Hsin Hsin Chang, I. Chen Wang. 2008. The relationship between network structure and international
channel performance: a moderating effect of E-business activity. The Service Industries Journal 28:2,
255-274. [CrossRef]
421. C DEVILLANOVA. 2008. Social networks, information and health care utilization: Evidence from
undocumented immigrants in Milan. Journal of Health Economics 27:2, 265-286. [CrossRef]

422. Choon-Yin Sam. 2008. Partial privatization, corporate governance, and the role of state-owned holding
companies. Journal of the Asia Pacific Economy 13:1, 63-88. [CrossRef]
423. Lorenzo Cassi, Lorenzo Zirulia. 2008. The opportunity cost of social relations: On the effectiveness
of small worlds. Journal of Evolutionary Economics 18:1, 77-101. [CrossRef]
424. Evis Sinani, Anna Stafsudd, Steen Thomsen, Christofer Edling, Trond Randy. 2008. Corporate
governance in Scandinavia: comparing networks and formal institutions. European Management
Review 5:1, 27-40. [CrossRef]
425. Jim WatersSocial Network Behavior, Thought-Leaders and Knowledge Building in an Online
Learning Community 366-366. [CrossRef]
426. Yin-Wong Cheung, Clement Yuk-Pang Wong. 2008. Are All Measures of International Reserves
Created Equal? An Empirical Comparison of International Reserve Ratios. Economics: The OpenAccess, Open-Assessment E-Journal 2:2008-15, 1. [CrossRef]
427. Miranda Cahn. 2008. Indigenous entrepreneurship, culture and micro-enterprise in the Pacific Islands:
case studies from Samoa. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development 20:1, 1-18. [CrossRef]
428. Helin Melkas, Vesa Harmaakorpi. 2008. Data, information and knowledge in regional innovation
networks: Quality considerations and brokerage functions. European Journal of Innovation
Management 11:1, 103-124. [CrossRef]
429. George Galster, Jason Booza. 2007. The Rise of the Bipolar Neighborhood. Journal of the American
Planning Association 73:4, 421-435. [CrossRef]
430. Sandra Sattler Weber. 2007. Saving St. James: A case study of farmwomen entrepreneurs. Agriculture
and Human Values 24:4, 425-434. [CrossRef]
431. Philip J. Cook, Jens Ludwig, Sudhir Venkatesh, Anthony A. Braga. 2007. Underground Gun Markets.
The Economic Journal 117:524, F588-F618. [CrossRef]
432. Toseef Azid, Mehmet Asutay. 2007. Does ethicomoral coalition complement to economic coalition?.
Humanomics 23:3, 153-173. [CrossRef]
433. Roger Andersson, Sako Musterd, GEORGE Galster, Timo M. Kauppinen. 2007. What Mix
Matters? Exploring the Relationships between Individuals' Incomes and Different Measures of their
Neighbourhood Context. Housing Studies 22:5, 637-660. [CrossRef]
434. Choon Yin Sam. 2007. Corporate Governance Reforms in the Post-1997 Asian Crisis: Is There Really
a Convergence to the Anglo-American Model?. Global Economic Review 36:3, 267-285. [CrossRef]
435. Neil Fligstein, Luke Dauter. 2007. The Sociology of Markets. Annual Review of Sociology 33:1,
105-128. [CrossRef]
436. Pandej Chintrakarn. 2007. The determinants of cross-border equity flows: a dynamic panel data
reassessment. Applied Financial Economics Letters 3:3, 181-185. [CrossRef]
437. Monika J.A. Schrder, Sabine McKinnon. 2007. Learning good judgement: young Europeans'
perceptions of key consumer skills. International Journal of Consumer Studies 31:2, 152-159.
[CrossRef]
438. Changhui KANG, Seungjoo LEE. 2007. REGIONAL TIES AND DISCRIMINATION:
POLITICAL CHANGE, ECONOMIC CRISIS, AND JOB DISPLACEMENTS IN SOUTH
KOREA, 1997-99. The Developing Economies 45:1, 63-96. [CrossRef]
439. Nancy Ettlinger. 2007. Bringing Democracy Home: Post-Katrina New Orleans. Antipode 39:1, 8-16.
[CrossRef]
440. S. KestingCommunicative Transaction Benefits 322-342. [CrossRef]
441. H KONO. 2006. Employment with connections: Negative network effects. Journal of Development
Economics 81:1, 244-258. [CrossRef]

442. Arturs Kalnins. 2006. Markets: The U.S. Lodging Industry. Journal of Economic Perspectives 20:4,
203-218. [Abstract] [View PDF article] [PDF with links]
443. William B. Rouse. 2006. Enterprise Tranformation, Implications for Enterprise Information System.
The Journal of The Institute of Electrical Engineers of Japan 126:9, 599-603. [CrossRef]
444. William B. Rouse. 2006. Enterprise Transformation-Implications for Enterprise Information Systems.
IEEJ Transactions on Electronics, Information and Systems 126:9, 1069-1072. [CrossRef]
445. Greg HillAssociation and Civil Society in Transparent and Opaque Communities 45-88. [CrossRef]
446. William B. Rouse. 2005. A theory of enterprise transformation. Systems Engineering 8:4, 279-295.
[CrossRef]
447. Susan ScottThe Impact of Culture on Workplace Conflict in the Caribbean 1352-1366. [CrossRef]
448. Abel Usoro, Bridget AbiagamA Conceptual View of Knowledge Management Adoption in Hospitality
Industry of Developing Economies 39-56. [CrossRef]
449. Margarida Cardoso, Isabel RamosRvolta, a Case for Open Innovation 82-99. [CrossRef]
450. Ekaterina TurkinaCross-Border Inter-Firm Networks in Contemporary Europe 72-89. [CrossRef]
451. Ruth Bridgstock, Shane Dawson, Greg HearnCultivating Innovation through Social Relationships
104-120. [CrossRef]
452. Susan ScottThe Impact of Culture on Workplace Conflict in the Caribbean 292-306. [CrossRef]
453. Curt B. Moore, Chad W. Autry, Barry A. MacyInterpreneurship: How the Process of Combining
Relational Resources and Entrepreneurial Resources Drives Competitive Advantage 65-102.
[CrossRef]
454. Ekaterina TurkinaCross-Border Inter-Firm Networks in Contemporary Europe: 180-196. [CrossRef]
455. Tobias EndressDigital Governance and Social Media Engagement 28-57. [CrossRef]
456. Journal of Macroeconomics 45. . [CrossRef]
457. Jon Dron, Terry AndersonHow the Crowd Can Teach 1-17. [CrossRef]
458. Paul ManningEconomic Rationality and Corporate Social Irresponsibility: An Illustrative Review of
Social Capital Theory 111-134. [CrossRef]
459. Birger Maekelburger, Christian Schwens, Rdiger KabstChapter 2 SME International Mode Choice
Over Time: Forging a Link Between the Uppsala Model and Transaction Cost Economics 21-49.
[CrossRef]