Abstract
In the research, data were obtained from 200 different senior managers. As a result of the analysis, it was concluded that the attitudes of senior managers in Türkiye, the general level of trust similar to the general structure in Türkiye, and the rate of civic participation are low. In this respect, in the context of weak and strong ties, which is the first type of social capital, it is seen that senior managers in Türkiye have weak and strong ties at a low level. Finally, it was concluded that senior managers in Türkiye are higher than all other types of social capital in terms of structural social capital based on the existence of network structures between individuals and conceptual social capital, which is a more abstract part of social capital and is representative of trust, norms, and common discourses.
TopIntroduction
While social capital is defined as “work of togetherness” for Tocqueville, (Singing, 2007: 73), it is defined as “goodwill, friend, closeness and social classes between family and family groups” for Hanifan (Hanifan, 1916). On the other hand, it is considered to be a better society and a better life as “awareness networks” for Loury (Loury, 1977). This historical development pointed out by the literature shows that next researchers also carried out the process in this context. As a matter of fact, while Field (2008) points out who he knows, not what he knows, Coleman (1988) emphasizes the way social networks work and Woolcock (2001) emphasizes who social networks will be with and how. While Bourdieu (1986) and Fukuyama (2005) agreed that social capital means trust, Fukuyama emphasized that trust is actually necessary for class formations, and Bourdieu emphasized that it should be based on reciprocity and for everyone. Of course, social capital, which Putnam (1993; 1995) pointed out as the basis of cooperation, is actually a bond and this plays a leading role for development-growth. In addition, Nan Lin (1999) states that the network can be virtual, not just face to face. This is important in online relations. For inference about whether the network is weak or strong, the discussion on whether Coleman's understanding of “closed networks” or Granovetter's understanding of “weak networks” provides more benefits (Abay Alyüz, 2018; 21) has been concluded as being related to the individual's conditions and the purpose of using the relationship.
In this context, the existence of social capital should be examined within the framework of a series of questions such as for whom it is necessary, how it is formed and what its meaning is. In this context, the existence of social capital should be examined within the framework of a series of questions such as for whom it is necessary, how it is formed and what its meaning is. In this study, the answers to these questions were investigated in the context of the managers of companies operating in Türkiye. While the types of social capital examined in the research were questioned through the relationship styles of company managers, the meaning and formation of social capital for companies were also sought. On the other hand, although not the main purpose of the study, This study is expected to contribute to the search for the connection and meaning of Bourdieu's or Coleman's class relations with social capital..
Key Terms in this Chapter
Linking Social Capital: Linking social capital is a type of social capital that describes norms of respect and networks of trusting relationships between people who are interacting across explicit, formal or institutionalized power or authority gradients in society.
Bonding Social Capital: The relationships a person has with friends and family, making it also the strongest form of social capital. Bridging capital: the relationship between friends of friends, making its strength secondary to bonding capital.
Structural Social Capital: Structural social capital is a dimension of social capital that relates to the properties of the social system and of the network of relations as a whole. The term describes the impersonal configuration of linkages between people or units.
Strong Ties: Strong ties refer to intimate connections you have with family, friends, spouses, and coworkers. Nurturing these social relationships is a lot of work, but they're some of the most fruitful you will have in your life. That's because these strong-tie relationships have three important components to them.
Weak Ties: Weak ties are people you know but not very well. They're merely acquaintances. You interact with these people at work and in your personal life only as much as you need to.
Intermediary Social Capital: In intermediary social capital, which focuses on individual returns, the position of the individual in relations determines the advantages. In other words, those who are in the bridge position in the networks have more social capital due to their position in the network. Necessary prerequisites, structural gap, bridge role in intermediary social capital.
Relational Social Capital: Relational social capital is a dimension of social capital that relates to the characteristics and qualities of personal relationships such as trust, obligations, respect and even friendship.
Bridging Social Capital: Bridging social capital is defined as the connections between individuals who are dissimilar with respect to socioeconomic and other characteristics.
Solidarity Social Capital: Solidarity social capital network closure, high security, and strong bonds.
Trust: Trust is often mentioned specifically in definitions of social capital, for example, “connections among individuals—social networks and the norms of reciprocity and trustworthiness that arise from them”. Some authors even equate trust with social capital, such as Francis Fukuyama.