^ Acadumy of Management Journal2001. Vol. 44. No. 2. 219-237.docx

^ Acadumy of Management Journal
2001. Vol. 44. No. 2. 219-237.
A SOCIAL CAPITAL THEORY OF CAREER SUCCESS
SCOTT E. SEIBERT
MARIA L. KRAIMER
•̂ ' ' ' Cleveland State University
ROBERT C. LIDEN
University of Illinois at Chicago
A model integrating competing theories of social capital with
research on career
success was developed and tested in a sample of 448 employees
with various occupa-
tions and organizations. Social capital was conceptualized in
terms of network struc-
ture and social resources. Results of structural equation
modeling showed that net-
work structure was related to social resources and that the
effects of social resources
on career success were hilly mediated by three network benelits:
access to information,
access to resources, and career sponsorship.
Organizational researchers have begun to de-
velop increasingly comprehensive models of career
success using demographic, human capital, work-
family, motivational, organizational, and industry
variables (e.g., Dreher & Ash, 1990; Judge & Bretz,

1994: Judge, Cable. Boudreau, & Bretz. 1995; Kirch-
meyer, 1998). Although this work has provided
considerable evidence regarding the determinants
of career outcomes, the roles of informal interper-
sonal behaviors have not been fully explored (Judge
& Bretz, 1994; Pfeffer, 1989). Popular advice for
getting ahead in one's career rarely fails to mention
the importance of networking for the achievement
of career goals (e.g., Bolles, 1992; Kanter, 1977).
Indeed, Luthans, Hodgetts, and Rosenkrantz (1988)
found that the most successful managers in their
study spent 70 percent more time engaged in net-
working activities and 10 percent more time en-
gaged in routine communication activities than
their less successful counterparts. Recent advances
in social capital theory (Coleman, 1990) have begun
to provide a finer-grained analysis of the ways in-
dividuals' social networks affect their careers in
organizations (Burt, 1992, 1997; Ibarra, 1995;
Podolny & Baron, 1997; Sparrowe & Popielarz,
1995). This theoretical perspective has the poten-
Data were collected and the manuscript was submitted
and processed while Scott E. Seibert was in the Manage-
ment Department at the University of Notre Dame and
Maria L. Kraimer was a graduate student at the Univer-
sity of Illinois at Chicago. Support for this project was
provided by the Management Department at the Univer-
sity of Notre Dame and the Alumni Office of the Univer-
sity of Notre Dame. The current investigation is part of a
larger study of career success.
tial to considerably enhance scholars' knowledge of
the role of social processes in career success.
The first purpose of the current study was to

integrate the current conceptualizations of social
capital as they pertain to career success. Tbree dif-
ferent theoretical approaches—weak tie theory
(Granovetter, 1973), structural hole theory (Burt,
1992), and social resource theory (Lin, 1990)—
focus on different network properties as represen-
tations of social capital. However, in all those the-
ories, tbe key explanatory variables for tbe effect of
social capital on career mobility are greater access
to information, resources, and sponsorship. To
date, these explanatory variables have not been in-
cluded in empirical tests. Tbe main contribution of
the current investigation to tbe social network lit-
erature on careers is to provide a conceptual inte-
gration of tbe tbree major social capital theories
followed by an empirical test that includes tbe pro-
posed explanatory mechanisms.
A second purpose of tbis study was to model
social capital effects on a full set of career out-
comes, with other processes known to be determi-
nants of career success controlled. Social network
approaches to career success, growing out of a so-
ciological research tradition, tend to focus on occu-
pational status or job mobility as tbe primary career
outcome (e.g., Burt, 1992, 1997; Granovetter, 1973;
Ibarra, 1995; Lin, Ensel. & Vaughn, 1981a; Spar-
rowe & Popielarz, 1995). These studies bave often
been limited to single organizations and small sam-
ples, have had few control variables, or have as-
sessed outcomes over short time spans. Research in
tbe organizational literature, on the otber hand,
tends to bave large and diverse samples and models
witb broad sets of career processes. A model of
career success that does not account for determi-

219
220 Academy of Management Journal April
nants other than social capital may provide a bi-
ased estimate of the effect of tbe latter on careers.
Tbe organizational research has also moved to-
ward tbe use of a set of extrinsic and intrinsic
outcomes as measures of career success (e.g.. Judge
& Bretz, 1994; Judge et al., 1995; Kirchmeyer, 1998;
Seibert, Crant, & Kraimer, 1999; Turban & Dougb-
erty, 1994; Wayne. Liden, Kraimer, & Graf, 1999).
Extrinsic career outcomes are objectively observ-
able achievements such as salary and promotions,
and intrinsic career outcomes refer to individuals'
subjective feelings of accomplishment and satisfac-
tion with their careers (London & Stumpf, 1982).
Career scholars bave argued that these are related
but distinct constructs (Aryee, Chay, & Tan, 1994;
Hall, 1976; Wayne et al., 1999] and that both mea-
sures are important because together they reflect
not only conventional standards of success, but
also feelings of success relative to an individual's
own goals and expectations (Judge & Bretz, 1994;
Judge et al., 1995; London & Stumpf, 1982; Seibert
et al., 1999). By linking tbe social capital literature
witb this career success literature, we hoped to
provide a rigorous demonstration of the role of
social capital in career success.
Tbe tbird purpose of tbis study was to integrate
research on social network structure with that on
mentoring and careers. Mentoring has been defined

as a developmental relationship in wbicb a less
experienced organization member receives help
and guidance from a more experienced member
whose intent is to improve the career opportunities
and growth ofthe junior person (Kram, 1985). Re-
search has explored the origin and progress of men-
toring relationships and tbe types of activities tak-
ing place witbin the mentor-protege relationship
(e.g., Cbao, Walz, & Gardner, 1992; Noe, 1988; Tur-
ban & Dougherty, 1994). Tbe literature has also
emphasized tbe important effect that having a men-
tor may have on a protege's career success (e.g.,
Droher & Ash, 1990). Kram (1985) suggested that it
is important to understand the full constellation of
developmental relationships in wbicb a protege
can be involved. However, little research has ex-
plored (1) the simultaneous impact of multiple de-
velopmental contacts, (2) tbe way in which the
organizational location of these developmental
contacts affects tbeir contribution to career success,
or (3) how tbe structure of an employee's social
network facilitates access to developmental rela-
tionships in different parts of an organization. In
this study, we used social capital theories to extend
tbe mentoring literature by specifying the types of
network structures that are likely to provide the
most career benefits. At the same time, tbe social
capital literature is enhanced tbrougb its link witb
tbe extensive literature on developmental relation-
ships and the benefits tbey bring to careers.
THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
Theories of Social Capital

Coleman (1990) defined social capital as any as-
pect of social structure tbat creates value and facil-
itates the actions of tbe individuals witbin tbat
social structure. Just as tbe creation of physical
capital involves changes in materials so as to facil-
itate production, and human capital involves
changes in an individual's skills and capabilities,
social capital is created when tbe relations among
people change in ways tbat facilitate instrumental
action (Coleman, 1990).
Social network researchers bave taken the lead in
formalizing and empirically testing theories related
to tbe concept of social capital. Social network
researchers regard relationships, or ties, as the ba-
sic data for analysis. A network can be defined as
the pattern of ties linking a defined set of persons or
social actors. Each person can be described in terms
of bis or her links witb other people in the network.
The focal person in sucb an analysis (wbo is usu-
ally the person supplying tbe data) is referred to as
"ego," and those be or she is tied to are "alters"
(Knoke & Kuklinski, 1982).
The first approach to the conceptualization of
social capital, weak tie theory (Granovetter, 1973),
focuses on tbe strength of the social tie used by a
person in the process of finding a job. Granovetter
argued that ties among members of a social clique
are likely to be strong (defined as emotionally in-
tense, frequent, and involving multiple types of
relationships, sucb as those witb friends, advisors,
and coworkers). Tbe information possessed by any
one member of the clique is likely to be either
shared quickly or already redundant with the in-
formation possessed by tbe other members. How-

ever, ties that reach outside of one's social clique
are likely to be weak (tbat is, not emotionally in-
tense, infrequent, and restricted to one narrow type
of relationship) rather than strong. According to
Granovetter (1973), weak ties are often a bridge
between densely interconnected social cliques and
thus provide a source of unique information and
resources. Indeed, Granovetter (1973) found tbat
weak ties were more likely than strong ties to have
been tbe source of information about job openings
for tbe sample of job incumbents be interviewed.
Subsequent researcb has provided mixed support
for tbe weak tie hypothesis (Bridges & Villemez,
1986; McPherson, Popielarz, & Drobnic, 1992; Mur-
ray, Rankin, & Magill, 1981).
2001 Seibert, Kraimer, and Liden 221
Burt's (1992) structural holes approach to social
capital focuses not on the characteristics of ego's
direct ties, but on tbe pattern of relations among the
alters in ego's social network. A structural bole is
said to exist between two alters who are not con-
nected to eacb other. According to structural boles
theory, it is advantageous for ego to be connected to
many alters wbo are themselves unconnected to the
other alters in ego's network. According to Burt's
theory (1992, 1997), networks rich in structural
boles provide an individual with three primary
benefits: more unique and timely access to infor-
mation, greater bargaining power and thus control
over resources and outcomes, and greater visibility
and career opportunities throughout tbe social sys-
tem. Burt (1992) critiqued weak tie theory, pointing

out that the structural hole concept gets at tbe
bridging property of ties more directly than the
weak tie concept and therefore provides a "stronger
foundation for theory and a clearer guide for em-
pirical research" (1992: 28). Initial empirical evi-
dence has been supportive of structural holes the-
ory but has also provided a number of boundary
conditions limiting the range of tbe theory's appli-
cation (Burt, 1992, 1997; Podolny & Baron, 1997;
Sparrowe & Popielarz, 1995). To date, tbe role of
tbe proposed explanatory processes—access to in-
formation, bargaining control, and referral—have
not been empirically examined.
Tbe third major tbeoretical approach to the
conceptualization of social capital is social re-
sources theory (e.g., Lin, Ensel, & Vaugbn, 1981a,
1981b). Social resources theory focuses on the
nature of the resources embedded witbin a net-
work. Lin and coauthors (1981a) argued tbat it is
not the weakness of a tie per se tbat conveys
advantage (nor, by extension, is it the bridging
property of weak ties), but tbe fact tbat sucb ties
are more likely to reacb someone with the type of
resource required for ego to fulfill his or her
instrumental objectives. An alter who possesses
characteristics or controls resources useful for
tbe attainment of tbe ego's goals can be consid-
ered a social resource. For example, alters wbo
provide career development advice and support
are tbe relevant social resource when considering
an ego's pursuit of instrumental career goals.
Lin's researcb showed that tie strengtb was neg-
atively related to tbe occupational prestige of the
alter contacted (tbat is, weak ties reach higher-
status alters) and that tbe alter's occupational

prestige was in turn positively related to tbe pres-
tige of tbe job secured by ego (Lin et aL, 1981a,
1981b; see also De Graaf & Flap, 1988; Marsden &
Hurlbert, 1988).
Integration of Social Capital Theories
As the literature review above reveals, contro-
versy exists regarding tbe proper conceptualization
of social capital. Weak tie theory focuses on tbe
nature of ties; structural holes theory focuses on tbe
pattern of the ties among alters; and social resource
theory focuses on tbe characteristics of the alters
contacted. The two later theories are eacb claimed
to supersede tbe earlier theory (e.g., Burt, 1992; Lin
et al., 1981a), and competitive model testing has
been performed in an effort to empirically deter-
mine the best conceptualization (Sparrowe & Pop-
ielarz, 1995).
Despite tbis controversy, a fruitful integration of
the differing conceptualizations of social capital is
possible. Tbe key to this integration is to recognize
an analytical distinction between the structural
properties of networks and tbe nature of tbe social
resources embedded in networks and to thus draw
a distinction between their form and their content
(see Lin, 1999). Weak tie theory and structural hole
theory each focuses on the structure of a network.
Social resources tbeory focuses on tbe content of a
network. Tbese theories are not mutually exclu-
sive, as competitive model testing implies, but can
function together because tbey focus on different
points in the process of accumulating social capi-
tal. According to our conceptual integration, the
overarching social capital construct is best Uiougbt

of as both the different network structures tbat fa-
cilitate (or impede) access to social resources and
tbe nature of tbe social resources embedded in tbe
network. The key empirical question then becomes,
"What network structures lead ego to have more (or
less) access to important social resources?"
A MODEL FOR A SOCIAL CAPITAL THEORY
OF CAREER SUCCESS
Figure 1 presents the model of social capital and
career success tested in the current study. Accord-
ing to the model, tw ô measures of social network
structure, weak ties and structural holes, are related
to two forms of social resources, tbe number of
contacts in other functions and the number of con-
tacts at higher organizational levels. Social re-
sources effects on career success are in turn medi-
ated by tbree types of network benefits: access to
information, access to resources, and career spon-
sorship. Career success is assessed in terms of cur-
rent salary, tbe number of promotions received
over tbe entire career, and career satisfaction. A full
set of variables drawn from tbe organizational lit-
erature were used as controls in model tests but are
not shown in Figure 1.
FIGURE 1
Hypothesized Model of Social Capital Effects on Career
Success'
Network Structure Social Resources Network Benefits Career

Success
Contacts in
Other Functions
Control variables and their paths are not shown for the sake of
clarity. Current salary was a logarithm.
We examined the network of career develop-
mental relationships maintained by ego within
his or her organization in order to capture the
social resources relevant for the instrumental oh-
jective of career success. Maintaining consis-
tency with previous research on social networks
and promotions [Burt, 1992, 1997; Podolny &
Baron, 1997), we focused on intraorganizational
ties because contacts within an employee's own
organization were the ones we expected would
provide the kinds of benefits discussed in social
capital theories (information, resources, and
sponsorship) and would thus influence her or his
success within the organization. We conceptual-
ized social resources as developmental contacts
in other functions and at higher organizational
levels because, within formal organizations,
functional or technical specialty and hierarchical
level are likely to impose salient social bound-
aries between organization members (Burt, 1992;
Ibarra, 1993). These organizational identity
groups are likely to form their own interaction
cliques based on shared interests, values, train-
ing, socialization, or worldviews (Ibarra, 1995;
Kanter. 1977; Lincoln & Miller. 1979). Develop-
mental contacts who are members of social iden-
tity groups other than ego's are likely to provide
unique information, resources, and influence

useful to ego.
Social Network Structure and Social Resources
The fundamental tenet of weak tie theory is that
a weak tie is valuable because it is more likely than
a strong tie to act as a bridge between social cliques,
providing an organization member with contact
with people of different social groups or statuses
(Granovetter, 1973. 1982). An assumption of social
network approaches to social capital theory is that
a person has a finite amount of time and energy to
invest in social relationships. Given that, by defi-
nition, strong ties require a greater investment of
time and energy, the individual must make a stra-
tegic decision to invest his or her social energy in
either maintaining a relatively small number of
strong ties or in developing a relatively large num-
ber of weak ties (Podolny & Baron, 1997). Our ar-
gument is not that a weak tie to a given individual
is better than a strong tie to the same person.
Rather, we seek to relate the number of weak ties, a
structural property of an ego's network, to the num-
ber oi valuable social contacts in ego's network. A
social network characterized hy many weak ties is
more likely to provide access to critical social re-
sources. That is, people who choose to invest their
social energy in developing large numbers of weak
ties will have greater access to social groups other
than their own. Although some empirical evidence
has suggested that bridging is more likely with
weak ties than with strong ties (Friedkin. 1980).
surprisingly little empirical research has specifi-

2001 Seibert. Kraimer, and Uden 223
cally examined the extent to which weak ties
bridge relatively unconnected social groups. Hy-
potheses la and l b state that, within a career de-
velopment network, the number of weak ties will
be related to the number of contacts in other social
identity groups defined by the formal properties of
an organization:
Hypothesis la. The number of weak ties in a
network will be positively related to the num-
ber of ego's contacts in other organizational
functions.
Hypothesis lb. The number of weak ties in a
network will be positively related to the num-
ber of ego's contacts at higher organizational
levels.
A structural hole is said to exist between two
alters when they are unconnected to each other
(Burt, 1992). An ego who is connected to two alters
who are not connected to each other is, by defini-
tion, a bridge between those alters. According to
Burt (1992). this structural position conveys certain
advantages to ego, in that he or she may be able to
trade information gathered from one alter to the
other. Ego provides added value to the organization
through his or her ability to provide information
and coordinate activities among separated alters
(Burt, 1997: Galbraith, 1977). Further, to the extent
that the two alters possess similar resources, ego
can play them off against each other, seeking to set
up social (or material) exchanges with the alter who
offers the best return.

According to structural hole theory, an alter who
is already connected to other alters within ego's
network is "redundant" (Burt, 1992) and does not
convey the kinds of benefits to ego that a nonre-
dundant alter would. Parallel to our argument re-
garding weak ties is the argument that ego must
make the strategic choice either to invest in main-
taining a relationship with a redundant alter or to
invest in developing a relationship with an alter
who is not redundant with other alters in his or her
network. The addition of a nonredundant alter in-
troduces another set of structural holes into ego's
network. Because members of the same social
clique or social identity group are likely to be
strongly connected to each other (e.g., Festinger,
Schacter, & Back, 1950; Homans, 1950; Popielarz,
1994), structural holes are likely to be found be-
tween alters who are members of different social
groups, such as those defined by functional and
hierarchical boundaries within organizations (Burt,
1992; Ibarra, 1993). The fact that ego is acting as a
bridge between two unconnected social groups am-
plifies the henefits derived from acting as a bridge
between two unconnected individuals. Alters who
are members of unconnected social groups are
therefore uniquely beneficial to an ego. An ego
whose network is rich in structural holes is there-
fore likely to have greater access to social resources
as defined here—contacts in other functions and at
higher organizational levels. Hypotheses 2a and 2b
allow tests of this proposition:
Hypothesis 2a. The extent of structural holes in
a network will be positively related to ego's

number of contacts in other organizational
functions.
Hypothesis 2b. The extent of structural holes in
a network will be positively related to ego's
number of contacts at higher organizational
levels.
Social Resources and Network Benefits
The notion that social resources embedded in
networks will provide benefits to actors is central
to all three network approaches to social capital. In
general, these benefits include greater and more
timely access to information, greater access to fi-
nancial or material resources, and greater visibility,
legitimacy, or sponsorship within a social system.
However, previous researchers have not incorpo-
rated these constructs in their models. The overall
purpose of the remaining set of hypotheses was to
allow us to demonstrate that the effects of social
capital on career success are through the thtee ex-
planatory mechanisms.
The notion that different functional units within
an organization have differing perspectives, con-
trasting worldviews, and unique information is ax-
iomatic to the information-processing perspective
on organizations (e.g., Galbraith. 1977; March &
Simon, 1958). The literatures on matrix or lateral
organizational designs (Davis & Lawrence, 1977;
Galbraith, 1994) and overlapping or cross-fimc-
tional teams (Clark & Fujimoto, 1991) also contain
the assumption that different functional groups
need to share information across functional bound-
aries because the groups hold different information

and views. This work suggests that an employee's
contact with members of other organizational func-
tions will provide access to information not avail-
able within his or her own functional group. Al-
though other functions may also possess unique
resources, these resources are less likely than is
information to be available for transfer and of use
across functional boundaries. And, unless they are
at higher organizational levels, developmental con-
tacts in other functions are not likely to have the
Status and influence to provide sponsorsbip to an
employee's career. Accordingly,
Hypothesis 3. The number of contacts in other
functions in a network will be positively re-
lated to ego's access to organizational informa-
tion.
We expect that contacts at higher levels of the
organization will also he heneficial to an individual
in a numher of ways. A fundamental principle of
rational organization design is that higher-level po-
sitions convey more authority than lower-ievel po-
sitions (March & Simon. 1958; Massie, 1965; We-
ber, 1946). Ideally, higher positions also convey a
broader perspective on issues relevant to an orga-
nization and greater access to information upon
which incumbents can base decisions (Galhraith,
1977; March & Simon, 1958). According to the clas-
sical principles of formal organizations, those in
positions at higher levels also have greater formal

decision-making authority over the allocation of
resources than do those in iower-level positions.
This legitimate hasis of social power [French &
Raven. 1968) means that higher-level individuals
have greater formal power, influence, and control
over resources. They may also be members of dom-
inant coalitions within the organization and there-
fore enjoy informal bases of power, influence, and
control over resources as well [Thompson, 1967).
Positive relations with developmental contacts at
higher levels should therefore provide an actor
with greater access to these benefits.
Hypothesis 4a. The number of an individual's
contacts at higher organizational levels will be
positively related to access to organizational
information.
Hypothesis 4b. The number of an individual's
positively related to access to resources.
We expect contacts at higher organizational lev-
els to also he related to the third network benefit,
career sponsorship. Social network theorists have
variously referred to visibility, legitimacy, social
credentialing, and inclusion in career opportuni-
ties (Burt, 1992; Lin, 1999) as a benefit of specific
network structures and sociai resources. Social net-
work researchers have, however, overlooked the
conceptual overlap of this construct with the no-
tion of career sponsorship developed in the litera-
ture on mentoring and careers (Kram, 1985; Noe,
1988). Career sponsorship, one ofthe primary func-
tions fulfilled by a mentor (Kram, 1985; Noe, 1988),
involves providing a protege with favorable and

timely exposure, opportunities to engage in chal-
lenging assignments, and career advice and coach-
ing. Because mentors are found among individuals
at higher organizational levels [Kram, 1985), we
expect relations with developmental contacts at
higher organizational levels to be related to receiv-
ing career sponsorship.
Hypothesis 4c. The number of an individual's
positively related to career sponsorship.
Network Benefits and Career Success
There are two reasons to expect access to infor-
mation and access to resources to each be related to
objective career success. First, greater access tc in-
formation and resources should enhance individ-
ual work performance. Information and resources
have been noted as contextual factors that empower
employees, leading to higher levels of motivation
and performance [e.g., Hackman & Oldham, 1980;
Spreitzer, 1996). Burt (1992, 1997) argued that in-
dividuals able to use their network positions to fill
a broker or boundary spanner role within an organ-
ization add greater value to the organization. In
fact, centrality in the advice network has been
linked to joh performance [Sparrowe, Liden, Wayne,
& Kraimer, 2001). The information-processing ap-
proach to organizational design also emphasizes
the value added to organizations by individuals
who play key boundary-spanning, liaison, conflict
resolution, and coordination roles (e.g., Galbraith.
1977). Improved work performance and adding
value should enhance an individual's objective ca-

reer outcomes [Burt, 1992, 1997; London & Stumpf,
1983; Medoff & Abraham, 1981). Second, informa-
tion and resources are fundamental bases of social
power [French & Raven, 1968). Greater access to
information and resources will increase an individ-
ual's organizational reputation [Kilduff & Krack-
hardt, 1994; Tsui, 1984), and the individual will
be perceived as more powerful or influential in
the organization (Brass, 1984; Brass & Burkhardt,
1993). These perceptions should make the individ-
ual better able to secure valuable organizational
rewards independent of her or his actual perfor-
mance [Ferris & Judge, 1991; Luthans et al., 1988).
We also expect access to information and access
to resources to be positively related to career satis-
faction. Having access to relevant organizational
information and to resources such as funds, mate-
rials, and space should increase feelings both of
control and competence at work [Gist & Mitchell,
1992) and of psychological empowerment (Spre-
itzer, 1996). Psychological empowerment in gen-
eral and self-determination and competence in par-
2001 Seibert, Kraimer, and Uden 225
ticular are extensions of job design theory (Kraimer,
Seibert, & Liden, 1999; Spreitzer, 1995, 1996), ac-
cording to which enriched jobs are more satisfying
to individuals (Hackman & Oldham, 1980; Spre-
itzer, 1996). Thus, those who feel greater psycho-
logical empowerment with respect to their careers
should be more satisfied with their career progress.
Theory supports the existence of a relationship be-

tween access to information and career satisfaction
and between access to resources and career satis-
faction, but we are not aware of empirical research
directly testing these propositions.
The above discussion leads to the following hy-
potheses regarding access to information:
Hypothesis 5a. An employee's access to infor-
mation will be positively related to current sal-
ary, independent of other career outcomes.
Hypothesis 5b. An employee's access to infor-
mation will be positively related to the number
of promotions received over his or her career,
independent of other career outcomes.
Hypothesis 5c. An employee's access to infor-
mation will be positively related to his or her
level of career satisfaction, independent of
other career outcomes.
Our discussion also leads to these hypotheses
regarding access to resources:
Hypothesis 6a. An employee's access to re-
sources will be positively related to current
salary, independent of other career outcomes.
Hypothesis 6b. An employee's access to re-
sources will be positively related to the number
of promotions received over her or his career,
independent of other career outcomes.
Hypothesis 6c. An employee's access to re-
sources will be positively related to her or his

level of career satisfaction, independent of
Although the relationships between access to in-
formation and career success and between access to
resources and career success are thought to work
through similar processes (work performance,
power, reputation, and empowerment), these are
considered to be independent constructs having
unique effects on outcomes (Spreitzer, 1996). How-
ever, it is also likely that access to information has
a direct influence on access to resources. Informa-
tion is a basis for social power (French & Raven,
1968), and access to and control over information
can be translated into power and influence in organ-
izations (Hickson, Hinings, Lee, Schneck, & Pen-
nings, 1971; Pfeffer, Salancik, & Leblibici, 1978).
Possessing relevant organizational information
would give individuals the ability to develop
means of acquiring necessary resources other than
going through formal channels. In essence, infor-
mation expands one's options for acquiring re-
sources.
Hypothesis 7. An employee's access to infor-
mation will be positively related to his or her
access to resources.
The positive effects of mentoring in general and
career sponsorship in particular on career out-
comes have been amply demonstrated in the ca-
reers literature (Ghao, 1997; Ghao et a l , 1992;
Dreher & Ash, 1990: Wayne et a l , 1999; Whitely,
Dougherty, & Dreher, 1991). For example, Dreher
and Ash (1990) found that, after they controlled for

several demographic, human capital, and organiza-
tional variables, individuals who reported more ex-
tensive mentoring received more promotions, had
higher incomes, and were more satisfied with their
total compensation. Ghao and colleagues (1992)
performed a canonical correlation analysis and
found career mentoring to he most strongly associ-
ated with employees' intrinsic job satisfaction. Ac-
cordingly, the following hypotheses were formu-
lated to allow replication of previous research on
career mentoring within an integrated model of
social capital and career success:
Hypothesis 8a. The level of an employee's ca-
reer sponsorship will be positively related to
current salary, independent of other career
outcomes.
Hypothesis 8b. The level of an employee's ca-
the number of promotions received over her or
his entire career, independent of other career
outcomes.
Hypothesis 8c. The level of an employee's ca-
her or his career satisfaction, independent of
Control Variables
Organizational researchers have tested relatively
comprehensive models of career success. Some
specific findings are that human capital variables
(education, years in the workforce, experience in
multiple organizations, and career interruptions),

demographic variables (gender, marital status, and
spouse's employment status), and organizational
characteristics (organization size, metropolitan lo-
cation, and industry sector) have effects on salary,
promotions, and/or career satisfaction [Judge &
Bretz, 1994; Judge et al., 1995; Kirchmeyer, 1998;
Seibert et al., 1999; Wayne et a l , 1999). In addition,
career satisfaction and salary have been found to
vary by occupation. Specific theoretical links be-
tween each category of variables and the career
outcomes discussed above were beyond the scope
of this study (see Judge et al., 1995) but these vari-
ables were included as controis.
METHODS
Sample and Procedures
A diverse sample of 2,781 randomly selected un-
dergraduate business, master of business adminis-
tration (M.B.A.), and engineering school alumni of
a large, private, midwestern university received
surveys at their home addresses. The alumni, who
had graduated from 3 to 30 years prior to the date of
the study, were instructed to complete the survey
and return it directly to the first author in a postage-
paid envelope. Confidentiality of survey responses
was ensured to all alumni. To encourage responses,
we entered ail alumni respondents into a drawing
for three prizes of approximately $50 in value. A
reminder postcard was mailed three weeks after the

initial mailing.
A total of 773 surveys were returned [a 28 per-
cent response rate). Respondents who were not cur-
rently working [n = 73), working only part-time
[n = 42), or self-employed (n = 116) were elimi-
nated from the analyses because theii career out-
comes would not he comparable to those of alumni
with current fuli-time employment. After cases
with missing data had been eliminated, the final
sample consisted of 448 alumni. T-tests revealed
that respondents and nonrespondents did not sig-
nificantly differ with respect to gender, race, or
major [business versus engineering). However, the
percentage of responses from M.B.A. graduates
(13%) was lower than the percentage they repre-
sented in the target sample [25%).
The demographic breakdown of the respondents
was as follows: Their average age was 35.6 years;
the average time since their graduation from the
university was 13.0 years; 65 percent were male; 72
percent were married; and 96 percent were Cauca-
sian. Forty-three percent had a hachelor's degree as
their highest degree attained, 9 percent had a mas-
ter's degree other than an M.B.A., 41 percent had an
M.B.A., 5 percent had a law degree, and 2 percent
had a Ph.D. Average tenure in their current organi-
zation was 6.16 years.
Measures
Social capital. Respondents were asked to list (by
initials) "the people who have acted to help yoiu-
career hy speaking on your behalf, providing you
with information, career opportunities, advice or psy-

chological support or with whom you have regularly
spoken regarding difficulties at work, alternative joh
opportunities, or long-term career goals." We chose
this description of a network relation on the basis of
theoretical considerations, as it directly addresses the
sociai resources mobilized in pursuit of instrumental
career goals. Network size was the total number of
alters indicated by a respondent.
For alters who were past or current members of a
respondent's organization, the respondent also
indicated the alter's organizational function re-
lative to him or herself ("same function" or "different
function") and organizational level ["lower," "same,"
or "higher"). Contacts in other functions is the num-
her of individuals who were identified as members of
a different function. The number of individuals who
were identified as higher in organizational level
formed the contacts at higher levels variahle. Addi-
tionally, we asked respondents to indicate how close
they felt to the alter and how close the alters were to
each other on a scale where 2 was "especially close,"
1 was "less close," and 0 was "distant." Weak ties was
the sum of all ties between the respondent and his/
her alters coded as 0 or 1. Following Burt [1992,
1997), we calculated structural holes, using the ego
network data, as 1 minus the calculated value of the
constraint posed by an individual alter;': ĉ ^ = [p,y -f-
^PiqPqf^' for q ^ J,;, where p,y is the proportion of i's
relations invested in contact /, p,q is the proportion of
i's relations invested in q, and p^j is the proportion of
g's relations invested in /. The total in parentheses is
the proportion of j's relations that are directly or in-
directly invested in the connection with contact /.
The sum of squared proportions, ĉ̂ y, is the constraint
posed hy the entire network. One minus constraint

(1 - Cjy) is thus the lack of constraint, or the degree of
structural holes present in the ego network.
Network research typically relies on single-item
sociometric questions, which by themselves do not
provide information regarding measurement reli-
ability. To ensure reliability, we pretested the sur-
vey instrument and allowed respondents to list a
large enough number of individuals to generate an
accurate representation of their networks (Mars-
den, 1990; Rogers & Kincaid, 1981). Sociometric
questions were also designed to be as specific as
possible, to enhance accuracy of recall. Finally,
questions were focused on typical, long-term rela-
tionships rather than on brief, transient, or episodic
interactions. Research has shown that people's re-
2001 Seibert, Kraimer. and Liden 227
call of brief, episodic interactions is highly inaccu-
rate (Bernard, Killworth, Kronenfeld, & Sailer,
1984) but that people are remarkably accurate in
recalling typical interactions and long-term rela-
tionships (Freeman, Romney, &. Freeman, 1987)
like the developmental relationships analyzed in
the current study.
Access to information and resources. The ac-
cess variables were measured using Spreitzer's
(1996) six-item scale. Three items were designed to
measure access to information, and three were de-
signed to measure access to resources (1 - "stroug-
ly disagree" to 7 = "strongly agree"). An explor-
atory factor analysis specifying a varimax rotation

indicated that five of the six items formed two clear
factors representing access to resources [a — .89)
and access to information (a = .87). One item in-
tended to measure access to information. "I have
access to the strategic information I need to do my
job well," cross-loaded and was therefore elimi-
nated from further analyses.
Career sponsorship. The eight career sponsor-
ship items from Dreher and Ash's (1990) global
mentoring scale were summed to form a composite
[a = .90). This scale assesses the extent to which
senior colleagues have provided sponsorship, ex-
posure and visibility, challenging assignments, and
protection. Responses were made with a five-point
scale (1 = "very little" to 5 = "a great deal"). An
example item is, "Gone out of his/her way to pro-
mote your career interests."
Career success. Career success was measured in
terms of promotions, salary, and career satisfaction.
Respondents reported the number of promotions
they had received over their entire careers. Promo-
tions were defined as "any increases in level and/or
any significant increases in job responsibilities or
job scope." They also indicated their current an-
nual salaries (including bonuses and other direct
income). Self-reports of income have been shown
to correlate highly with archival company records
(Judge et al., 1995; Turban & Dougherty, 1994).
Because a Z-test on the skewness statistic indicated
a nonnormal distribution for salary [Z = 36.5, p <
.001), we followed Gerhart and Milkovich's (1989)
recommendation and used a natural logarithmic
transformation of salary for all analyses. Career sat-
isfaction was measured using Greenhaus, Parasura-

man, and Wormley's (1990) five items (1 = "very
dissatisfied" to 5 = "very satisfied"), which were
summed to form a composite [a = .83). An example
item is, "The progress I have made toward meeting
my goals for advancement."
Control variables. These variables were gender
(0 = "male," 1 = "female"); marital status (0 = "not
married," 1 = "married"); spouse employment sta-
tus (0 = "spouse not employed," 1 = "spouse em-
ployed"); having an M.B.A. degree (1 = "yes"),
having had an employment gap and, if so, the num-
ber of weeks it lasted; residence in a major metro-
politan city, defined as one with a population over
1 million (1 = "yes"); the number of organizations
worked for over the career; and having an occupa-
tion categorized as general management (1 =
"yes").^ The number of employees in a respon-
dent's firm was scaled from 1, "less than 50 em-
ployees," to 5, "more than 1,000 employees." Num-
ber of years in the workforce was measured by
subtracting the year of graduation from the year the
study was conducted. We also used network size as
a control variable in order to examine the unique
effects of developmental contacts in other func-
tions and at higher levels as distinct from the sheer
number of developmental contacts.
Analyses
The hypothesized structural equations model
was tested using LISREL 8 (Joreskog & Sorbom,
1993), with the covariance matrix as input. Because
no conventional estimate of error was available for
the single-item measures, we assumed no error in

the measurement model for the four social capital
variables, the single-item control variables, aud the
two single-item dependent variables. The assump-
tion of no error provided a conservative test of the
' As previous research has shown differences in re-
ported salary, promotions, and/or career satisfaction that
are based on different occupations and industries, we
asked respondents to indicate which of 11 categories
best described their occupations and which of 12 catego-
ries hest described their industries. We dummy-coded
each of those variables so that manufacturing was the
comparison category for all industries and accounting
was the comparison category for all occupations. Rather
than include every dummy-coded variable in the hypoth-
esized model, we ran multivariate analyses of variance
(MANOVAs) using career satisfaction, promotions, and
salary as the dependent variables and industry type and
occupation type as the independent variables. We then
included only the statistically significant industry and
occupation types in the LISREL analysis. The results of
the MANOVA revealed that the only statistically signif-
icant occupation category was general management.
Thus, the dummy code for general management is in-
cluded in the hypothesized model as a cnntrol variahle.
Although two industry categorfes (nonprofit and finance)
were significant in the MANOVA, their paths were not
statistically significant in the initial LISREL analysis of
the hypothesized model; thus, we deleted them from the
hypothesized model hefore making further model com-
parisons.

model. In order to increase sample size relative to
the parameter estimates, we used single-scale score
indicators to measure the other latent constructs in
the structural model. For access to information,
access to resources, career sponsorship, and career
satisfaction, the measurement path estimates were
set equal to 1 in order to scale the latent variables
(BoUen, 1989), and the error variance was set equal
to the scale variance times 1 minus the reliability in
order to account for measurement error (Hayduk,
1987). We also allowed the error terms for the three
endogenous latent constructs for salary, promo-
tions, and career satisfaction to be correlated in
order to account for the correlations among these
three constructs.
In testing the theoretical framework, we fitted sev-
eral nested models to the data, each incorporating
different assumptions about the model parameters.
Gomparisons with reasonable alternative models are
recommended as a means of showing that a hypoth-
esized model is the best representation of the data
and are considered to be an important part of assess-
ing model fit (Bollen, 1989; Kelloway, 1998). The first
alternative model specifies only the direct paths from
the control variables to the career outcome variables.
This control-variables-only model provided a base-
line fit for an assessment ofthe incremental contribu-
tion of tbe additional paths in the theoretical model.
The relationships tested in the control-variables-only
model were based on prior research findings. The
hypothesized model specifies both the control vari-
able paths and the set of paths hypothesized in this
study.
With the remaining alternative models, we com-

pared the fully mediated hypothesized model with
the partially mediated and nonmediated models, as
recommended by Kelloway (1998). We examined
three partially mediated models that assessed both
the direct and indirect effects between our sets of
constructs. Tbe partially mediated models are tests
of whether hypothesized mediated effects are better
represented as direct and indirect effects. We also
examined two nonmediated models in order to as-
sess whether the effects of social capital on career
success were only direct, with no indirect effects
through the network benefits. All of these alterna-
tive models included the control variable paths.
RESULTS
Preliminary Analyses " /
To assess the degree to which common method
bias might present a problem, we subjected all the
scale items for the variables used in this study to
a principal components analysis using varimax
rotation (Harman, 1967). From this analysis, six
clear factors representing the expected constructs
emerged; career sponsorship, career satisfaction,
access to resources, social capital, objective career
success, and access to information. The average
item loading on the intended construct was .75
and, of the 120 potential cross-loadings, only 3
were above ,30, with the largest equal to .40. The
absence of cross-loadings among the items for so-
cial capital, network benefits, and career success
provides confidence that common method hias was
not a problem for this study. Additionally, the fact
that the access to resources, access to information,

and career sponsorship items loaded on three sep-
arate factors provides evidence of discriminant va-
lidity among our network benefits constructs.
Hypothesized Model
Table 1 reports the means, standard deviations, and
correlations among the study variables. Our hypoth-
esized model fit the data well (̂ ^ = 191.11, c(f = 88,
p < .01; root mean square error of approximation
IRMSEA] = .05; adjusted goodness-of-fit index
[AGFI] = .90; normed fit index [NFI] = .91; compar-
ative fit index [GFI] = .95). Utilizing the change in
chi-square test (Bentler & Bonett, 1980), we compared
our hypothesized model with a number of nested
models (Table 2). The first comparison showed that
the hypothesized model provided a significantly bet-
ter fit than did the control-variables-only model
( A / = 498.83, df= 18, p < .01). The second com-
parison was between the hypothesized model and the
first partially mediated model (partially mediated
model 1). Partially mediated model 1 specified the
paths in the hypothesized model as well as the direct
paths from the network structure constructs (weak
ties and structural holes) to the network benefits (ac-
cess variables and sponsorship). The change in chi-
square test showed that this alternative model was
significantly better than the hypothesized model
( A / = 25.82, Ac//= 6, p < .01).
Partially mediated model 1 was therefore re-
tained as the best-fitting model and was then com-
pared with the second partially mediated model
(partially mediated model 2] and the third partially
mediated model (partially mediated model 3). Par-
tially mediated model 2 specifies the same paths as

partially mediated model 1 and also the direct
paths from the social resources constructs (contacts
across functions and at higher levels) to career out-
comes. Partially mediated model 3 includes all di-
rect paths from network structure to network ben-
efits, from network structure to career outcomes,
and from social resources to career outcomes, in
addition to the hypothesized mediated effects. The
03
U
u
O
U
M O
-J '.5
1̂
T3
ca
IS
s
cd
!/)
CO
u
I t

n j rt
O o O O
O D J f
n m o o o o o o
» CO
o o o o o
-a
2
Si
oin
2
5
B
O
O
•a
in VI
a -.=1 —I » O
o ^ CD - r
O q q q
r i" r
o o o o
9 P P 9
i' r r

M CM -H EM
rr r- 01 ID
r - n O O O O O O O O O
O O O O
• r-
I c»
• CB
I D
O
01
o
•-'J
CO
-n
o
O i
m
o

CO
O i
t o O
1
1-
o
f i
o o
OJ
c
r - '
CO
•V
1
CO
ĉ )
1
o
cc
r*

CN O
z o
a
i.
a
a
i
a>,
_o
"a.
if
em
x;
c
33
sSi
I
c
6
•S
lo
g
a
II "cd

q
V
a.
rl
O
V
Q .
230 Academy of Management Joumal April
TABLE 2
Nested Model Comparisons
Model (Ad/1 RMSEA AGH CH NFI Model Comparisons
191.11** ( 88) .05 .90 ,95 .91Hypothesized
Control variables only 689.94'* (106) -498.83** (18) .11 .74 .69
.67 Control variables compared to hypothesized model
Partially mediated 1 165.29** ( 82) 25.82** ( 6 ] .05 .91 .96 .92
Partially mediated model 1 compared to
hypothesized model
Partiaily mediated 2
Partially mediated 3
Nonmediated 1
Nonmediatad 2

158.41** ( 76) 6.88 ( 6) .05 ,90 .96 .92 Partially mediated
model 2 compared to partially
mediated model 1
154.46** ( 70) 10.83 [12) .05 .90 .96 .93 Partially mediated
mediated model 1
297.90** ( 85) -143.44** ( 5) .08 .84 .89 .86 Nonmediated
mediated model 3 (nested models)
301.25** ( 85) -146.79** ( 5) .08 ,84 .89 .86 Nonmediated
mediated mndu! 3 (nested models)
**p < .01
change in chi-square tests revealed that partially
mediated models 2 and 3 were not significantly
hetter than the first partially mediated model and
were less parsimonious.
Lastly, the nonmediated model test comparisons
were conducted. In the first nonmediated model,
the paths from network benefits to career outcomes
were constrained to zero, but the paths from social
resources to career outcomes were freely estimated.
The second nonmediated model also constrained
the paths from network benefits to career outcomes
to zero but allowed the paths from network struc-
ture to career outcomes to be estimated. Because
the nonmediated models were not nested within
partially mediated model 1 but were nested within
partially mediated model 3, the nonmediated mod-

els were compared to partially mediated model 3.
Both nonmediated models fit significantly worse
than the third partially mediated model. Table 2
reports the change in chi-square for all nested
model comparisons and other fit indexes for all
seven comparative models.
The nested model comparisons indicated that the
model including the hypothesized effects and di-
rect effects from network structure to network ben-
efits (partially mediated model 1) was the best-
fitting, most parsimonious model. Thus, we
retained this model as the best-fitting model and
interpret it below in order to examine the hypoth-
esized relationships.
Examination of the standardized parameter esti-
mates indicated that 14 of the 17 hypothesized
relationships were significant and in the predicted
directions (see Figure 2) when the control variables
were accounted for. Specifically, Hypotheses la
and l b positively relate weak ties to contacts in
other functions (la) and at higher levels (lb). The
statistically significant parameter estimates [b =
.14 and .44, respectively; p < .01) indicated sup-
port for Hypotheses la and lb. Hypotheses 2a and
2b positively relate structural holes to contacts in
other fimctions (2a) and at higher levels (2b). A
statistically significant parameter estimate was
found for the path between structural holes and
higher-level contacts [b = .31, p < .01) providing
support for Hypothesis 2b, but the estimated path
between structural holes and cross-function con-
tacts was only marginally significant [b = .09, t =
1.94). Overall, the hypotheses relating network

structure to social resources were supported.
Hypothesis 3 was supported, as a statistically
significant parameter estimate was found for the
path between contacts in other functions and ac-
cess to information (b = .15, p < .01). Hypotheses
4a, 4b, and 4c relate contacts at higher levels to
access to information (4a), access to resources (4b),
and career sponsorship (4c). A statistically signifi-
cant parameter estimate was found for the path
from contacts at higher levels to access to informa-
tion (b = .14, p < .05) and from these contacts to
career sponsorship [b = .29, p < .01), but the path
between these contacts and access to resources was
not significant. Thus, support was indicated for
Hypotheses 4a and 4c, but not for Hypothesis 4b.
Hypotheses 5a, 5b, and 5c positively relate access
to information to salary (5a), promotions (5b), and
2001 Seibert, Kraimer. and LJden 231
FIGURE 2
Results of Structural Equation ModeP
Contacts in
Other Functions
" Fit: x^ = 165.25, df= 82, p < .01; AGFI = .91, NFI = .92, CFI
= .96. Parameter estimates are from the completely standardized
solution
and are significant at p < .05. Hypothesized relationships are
represented by bold arrows, and relationships that were not
hypothesized

are repre.sented by light arrows. Hypothesized paths that were
not significant were eliminated from the model. Control
variables and their
paths are not shown for the sake of clarity. Current salary was a
logarithm.
career satisfaction (5c). The results indicated sup-
port for Hypotheses 5b [b = .11, p < .05) and 5c
[b = .14, p < .05) but failed to support Hypothesis
5a. Respondents wbo indicated greater access to
information reported more promotions and greater
career satisfaction. Hypotheses 6a, 6b, and 6c pos-
itively relate access to resources to salary (6a], pro-
motions (6b), and career satisfaction (6c). The re-
sults indicated support for Hypotheses 6a [b = .11,
p < .05) and 6c [b = .28, p < .01). Respondents who
indicated greater access to resources reported
higher salaries and greater career satisfaction. Hy-
pothesis 7 was supported as a significant, positive
parameter estimate was found for the path from
access to information to access to resources [b =
.56, p < .01). Fully supporting Hypotheses 8a, 8b,
and 8c, respondents who reported greater career
sponsorship reported higher salaries, more promo-
tions, and greater career satisfaction, as all three
parameter estimates were statistically significant
and positive {b = .12, .17, and .32, respectively; all
p < .01).
Although not hypothesized, there were two other
significant path estimates pertaining to social cap-
ital in partially mediated model 1: significant, neg-
ative parameter estimates were found for the path
from weak ties to access to information [b = - . 1 4 ,
p < .05) and for the path from weak ties to career
sponsorship [b = -.28, p < .01). None of the paths

from structural holes to the network benefit vari-
ables were statistically significant.
Finally, consistent with previous findings in the
careers literature, several of the control variables
were significantly (p < .05) related to the career
success outcomes. Salary was predicted by years
since graduation [b = .41), marital status (b = .22),
spouse employment [b = -.14), M.B.A. degree (6 =
.22), employment gaps [b = -.18), size of employ-
ing organization [b = .12), metropolitan area [b ~
.16), and management occupation [b = .16). The
number of promotions was predicted by years since
graduation [b = .33), marital status [b = .11),
M.B.A. degree [b = .17), employment gaps (-.20),
number of employing organizations {b = .18), and
management occupation [b = .14). Career satisfac-
tion was predicted by network size (6 = .11), gen-
der (.11), and the size of the employing organiza-
tion {b = .11). The social capital and control
variables together explained 47 percent of the vari-
ance in current salary, 34 percent of the variance in
promotions, and 36 percent of the variance in ca-
reer satisfaction. The explained variance in the
career outcomes was greater in the alternative hy-
pothesized model than in the control-variables-
only model: the latter explained 42 percent of
salary, 29 percent of promotions, and 5 percent
of career satisfaction.
DISCUSSION
Support of our hypothesized model revealed the
importance of social capital to career success. Spe-

m Academy of Management Journal April
cifically, our results demonstrate that two measures
of network structure, weak ties and structural
holes, positively relate to the level of social re-
sources embedded in a person's network, measured
as the number of developmental contacts in func-
tional areas of an organization other than their own
and at higher levels in the organization. Social re-
sources were in turn positively related to current
salary, number of promotions over the career, and
career satisfaction through their positive relation-
ships with three measures of network benefits—
access to information, access to resources, and ca-
reer sponsorship. The veridicality of these results
was strengthened by the control of a diverse set of
demographic, human capital, and organizational
variables as well as network size. This was clearly
demonstrated by the significantly better fit of the
model including the social capital and control vari-
ables over the alternative model containing only
the control variables as predictors. Our findings
have implications both for the social capital and
careers literatures.
Social Capital
The current results provide support for the
model of social capital used in the current study
and help to resolve a growing controversy in the
literature regarding the conceptualization of social
capital. Various scholars have tended to focus on
only one aspect of the social network as the defin-
ing element of social capital, but the current study
demonstrates the analytic utility of separately de-

fining social resources and social network structure
and empirically examining the ways in which net-
work structure influences the level of social re-
sources emhedded in a network.
Specifically, the results of this study show that
the number of weak ties and the level of structural
holes in an actor.'s network each has independent
effects on the level of social resources. As indicated
by the larger parameter estimates, the weak ties
measure appears to have the stronger and more
robust effect on social resources. However, weak
ties were significantly, negatively related to two of
the network henefit measures, access to informa-
tion and career sponsorship. These results supply
additional support for the traditional emphasis
placed on the value of strong ties in providing
information and social support (Festinger et a l ,
1950; Krackhardt, 1992). That is, people with
whom one has a strong relationship are likely to
provide one with more information and assistance.
Overall, these results redress the overemphasis in
weak tie theory on the strength of the tie per se,
rather than on its function as a bridge for soqial
benefits. Our results suggest that, from a practical
standpoint, it may be best for a person to invest in
the development of weak ties to increase the level
of social resources embedded in his or her network,
but then to invest (perhaps selectively) in strength-
ening those ties to increase the benefits actually
mobilized on his or her behalf.
Previous research has demonstrated direct rela-
tions between network structure and several organ-
izational outcomes, such as promotions (Burt,

1992, 1997), influence (Brass & Burkhardt. 1993),
and turnover (Krackhardt & Porter. 1986]. The ef-
fects of social capital on these outcomes have often
been theoretically explained (but not empirically
tested) as occurring because of the access to infor-
mation, resources, and sponsorship opportunities
resulting from social contacts (e.g.. Blau & Alba.
1982; Burt, 1997). The current study was unique for
its inclusion of these mediating variables that aid in
imderstanding ivhy social capital affects outcomes.
Specifically, we found support for the role of access
to information, resources, and career sponsorship
as full mediators of the relations between social
capital and career success. Support for the medi-
ated rather than direct paths from social network
variables to career outcomes suggests that mere
"schmoozing" with individuals outside of one's
work unit will not affect career outcomes unless
one is able to reap resources and sponsorship from
these contacts (cf. Wayne & Liden, 1995).
Findings of the current investigation also suggest
that the value of social capital may vary with re-
spect to the nature of the contacts that comprise a
social network. Specifically, we found that devel-
opmental contacts in other functions were related
to access to information and indirectly to access to
resources hut were not significantly related to ca-
reer sponsorship. Developmental contacts at higher
organizational levels were related to access to in-
formation and career sponsorship and. indirectly,
to access to resources. Thus, the location of devel-
opmental contacts appears to be differentially re-
lated to the nature of the network benefits pro-
vided. Consistent with traditional mentoring
research, higher-level contacts provided more ca-

reer sponsorship than did those across functions.
With respect to resource access, it is likely that
contacts in other functions did not have formal
authority to directly provide resources to those in
other units. It was, however, surprising that con-
tacts at higher organizational levels did not directly
relate to access to resources, but only indirectly
provided resources by providing more information
to their junior colleagues. Future research is
needed to determine if the location of exchange
contacts affects access to information, resources,
2001 Seibert, Kraimer, and Uden 233
and sponsorship opportunities differently at each
stage in a career. For example, close contacts with
the immediate superior and peers may be most
beneficial diu-ing an employee's early socialization
in an organization (Liden, Wayne, & Stilwell, 1993;
Major, Kozlowski, Chao. & Gardner, 1995), but after
she or he has been assimilated into the organiza-
tion, contacts with individuals at higher levels and
other functions may prove most useful.
The varying effects of the mediating variables on
career outcomes also invites additional research.
Although simple correlations between the three
mediating variables and the three career outcomes
were all positive and significant, path estimates
within the model showed that career sponsorship
was the most important network benefit in terms of
career success. The importance of career sponsor-
ship relative to resource and information access
should be verified in future research. Future re-

search should also examine the effects of other
types of networks, such as those composed of
friendship and interorganizational ties, on career
success.
Careers
The results of the current investigation strongly
suggest the relevance of integrating social capital
theory with research on careers. Previous research
demonstrating the influence of social capital on
career success variables such as promotions (Brass,
1984: Burt, 1992) has not been linked to the litera-
ture on careers. Similarly, most studies in the ca-
reers literature have not included social capital as
an antecedent of career success (Judge & Bretz,
1994; Judge et al., 1995; Wayne et al., 1999). Inves-
tigations of career success that have acknowledged
the importance of social capital bave typically not
used social network methods (e.g., Gould & Penley,
1984; O'Hara, Beehr, & Colarelli, 1994). To our
knowledge, no previous attempt has been made to
examine social capital within the context of the
careers literature.
In the current study, an explicit attempt was
made to merge the literatures on social capital and
careers. Specifically, many of the variables in-
cluded in comprehensive investigations of career
success (Judge et al., 1995) were tested as controls.
Thus, the added contribution of social capital, op-
erating through the mediating variables, was
clearly demonstrated. Additionally, most of the re-
search on networks and careers has focused on
promotion rates or mobility. By incorporating both
objective and subjective measures of career suc-

cess, we were able to more readily compare the
social capital effects on career success found here
with findings from other career success research in
the organizational literature. These results provide
a strong incentive for future researchers to consider
social capital as a key variable in relation to both
objective and subjective career success.
The findings of the current study also have im-
portant implications for a key subfield of the ca-
reers research, mentoring. It is assumed in some
mentoring studies that proteges have only one men-
tor at a time (Chao et a l , 1992; Judge & Bretz, 1994;
Tepper, 1995). In other studies (Dreber & Ash,
1990; Turban & Dougherty, 1994), researchers have
assessed the amount of mentoring received without
differentiating between respondents with single
and those with multiple mentors. Our results show
that individuals with multiple mentors reap greater
career benefits than those having only one mentor.
Furthermore, the results indicate that the more con-
tacts that people establish at high organizational
levels, the more they gain from career sponsorship.
Kram's (1985; Kram & Isabella, 1985) interviews
suggested that peers play an important role in ca-
reer development, but the current investigation is
unique because it relates a full set of developmental
relationships involving superiors and peers situ-
ated in different parts of organizations to level of
career success. In essence, we have expanded the
study of mentorsbip to include a network of men-
tors who should be located in various functions of
and at higher levels in the focal employee's organi-
zation.

This notion of a "mentoring network" suggests
many topics for future research. For example, su-
periors may be beneficial not only for the mentor-
ing that they personally provide, but also for intro-
ducing subordinates to influential organization
members who subsequently play a role in mentor-
ing the subordinates (Sparrowe & Liden, 1997).
Longitudinal research could assess the way in
which a newcomer to an organization develops a
mentoring network. Future research might also ex-
amine the type of mentoring provided by each men-
tor. For example, one mentor might provide emo-
tional support and spiritual guidance. Another
mentor might help the protege with task and tech-
nical advice. Yet another mentor might assist the
protege in coping with organizational politics. Dis-
covering that each mentor does indeed provide a
unique type of advice or assistance would explain
our finding that the larger the mentoring network,
the more beneficial it is to the protege. In essence,
the more mentors, the greater the coverage of dif-
ferent types of advice and support. Conversely, our
results demonstrate the constraining weakness of
multiplex ties in which an individual is in the
precarious position of relying on the same tie(s) for
multiple types of assistance (Podolny & Barron,
1997).
In summary, the current study makes several
contributions to the literature: (1) We enhanced
research on social networks by integrating contend-

ing theories of social capital, testing an analytical
distinction between network structure and network
resources and testing for their relationship. (2) We
extended the social capital and careers literatures
by testing for the effects of social capital on a full
set of career outcomes after controlling for other
variables related to careers. (3) Our integrated so-
cial capital theory of career success was further
supported by the findings that information, re-
source access, and sponsorship play a mediating
role in the relation between social network vari-
ables and career outcomes. And (4) we augmented
the mentoring literature by examining the influ-
ence that multiple developmental relationships
have on career success and by assessing the way in
which the location of the developmental contact in
an organization influenced a protege's access to
information, resources, and career sponsorship.
Limitations , * ,
Although its large sample and numerous control
variables represent strengths of the study, a limita-
tion is that, owing to the cross-sectional design, it
was not possible to make inferences concerning
causal direction for the paths tested in our model.
For example, rather than higher-level contacts pro-
viding information to focal individuals, perhaps
focal individuals who have gained access to infor-
mation are more attractive to contacts at higher
organizational levels. Another limitation associ-
ated with the design is that valid variance in career
outcomes explained by differences in organiza-
tions, culture, or norms was treated as error. An
ideal study would include a large sample of indi-
viduals within a large sample of organizations. This

would enable the researcher to examine organiza-
tion type, and accompanying culture and norms, as
multiple-level effects in a comprehensive model of
career success.
A second limitation of the study is the possibility
of common method bias, which can inflate relation-
ships among variables. We took several steps to
minimize the problem, including separating the
items for the independent and dependent variables
into different sections of the survey instrument and
using different question formats for each set of vari-
ables. Because the social capital variables are be-
havioral and the career outcome variables are fac-
tual or attitudinal, common method bias should
have been minimized.
A third limitation is that although the initial re-
sponse rate of 28 percent is typical for mailed sur-
veys, the effective response rate of 17.3 percent that
pertained after we bad removed responses from
self-employed individuals and part-time employ-
ees and those with missing data is somewhat low.
Although nonrespondents did not differ from re-
spondents on demographic characteristics or major
in school, it was found that the response rate for
M.B.A. graduates was lower than that for under-
graduate alumni. It is therefore possible that the
sample is not as representative of tbe population of
M.B.A.'s as it is of the population of undergradu-
ates. A final limitation of our research is the use of
single-item scales for some of the variables. Al-
though single-item scales are common in social
network research, it would be preferable in future
research to use three or more items for each mea-
sure so that reliability can be estimated.

In sum, the path model tested in the current
investigation represents an attempt to test an inte-
grated theory of social capital and career success.
Support for our hybrid model suggests that both the
social capital and careers literatures can be en-
hanced through integration. It follows that future
research on career success would benefit from the
inclusion of social capital variables.
REFERENCES
Aryee, S., Chay. Y. W., & Tan. H. H. 1994. An examina-
tion of the antecedents of subjective career success
among a managerial sample in Singapore, Human
Relations, 47: 487-509.
Bentler, P. M.. & Bonett, D. G. 1980. Significance tests
and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance
structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88: 588-606.
Bernard, R. H., Killworth. P.. Kronenfeld, D., & Sailer, L.
1984. The problem of informant accuracy: The va-
lidity of retrospective data. In B. J. Siegel (Ed.) &
A. R. Beals & S. A. Tyler (Assoc. Eds.), Annual
review of anthropology, vol. 13: 495-517. Palo Alto,
CA: Annual Reviews.
Blau. J. R.. & Alba, R. D. 1982. Empowering nets of
participation. Administrative Science Quarterly,
27: 363-379.
Bollen, K. A. 1989. Structural equations with latent
variables. New York: Wiley.
BoUes, R. N. 1992. What color is your parachute? Berke-

ley, CA: Ten Speed Press.
Brass, D. J. 1984. Being in the right place: A structural
analysis of individual influence in an organization.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 29: 518-539.
Brass, D. J., & Burkhardt, M. E, 1993, Potential power and
power use: An investigation of structure and behav-
2001 Seibert, Kraimer, and Liden 235
ior. Academy of Management Journal, 36: 4 4 1 -
470.
Bridges. W, P., & Villemez. W. J. 1986. Informal hiring
and income in the labor market. American Sociolog-
ical Review, 51: 574-582.
Burt, R. S. 1992, Stractural holes: The social structure
of competition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press.
Burt, R. S. 1997. The contingent value of social capital.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 42: 339-365.
Chao, G. 1997. Mentoring phases and outcomes. Journal
of Vocational Behavior, 51: 15-28.
Chao, G., Walz, P.. & Gardner, P. 1992. Formal and infor-
mal mentorships: A comparison on mentoring fiuic-
tions and contrast with nonmentored counterparts.
Personnel Psychology, 45: 619-636.
Clark, K., & Fujimoto, T. 1991. Product development

performance. Boston: Harvard Business School
Press.
Coleman, ]. S. 1990. Foundations of social theory. Gam-
bridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Davis, S. M,, & Lawrence, P, R. 1977. Matrix. Reading,
MA: Addison-Wesley.
De Graaf, N. D.. & Flap, H. D. 1988. With a little help from
my friends: Social capital as an explanation of occu-
pational status and income in the Netherlands, the
United States and West Germany. Social Forces, 67:
452-472.
Dreher, G. F., & Ash. R. A. 1990. A comparative study of
mentoring among men and women in managerial,
professional, and technical positions. Journal of Ap-
plied Psychology, 75: 539-546.
Ferris, G. R., & Judge, T. A. 1991. Personnel/hnman re-
sources mamagement: A political influence perspec-
tive. Journal of Management, 17: 447-488.
Festinger, L., Schacter. S., & Back, K. W. 1950. Social
pressures in informal groups. Stanford, CA: Stan-
ford University Press.
Freeman, L. C., Romney, A. K.. & Freeman, S. C. 1987.
Cognitive structure and informant accuracy. Ameri-
can Anthropologist, 89: 310-325.
French, J. R. & Raven. B. 1968. The bases of social power.
In D. Cartwright & A. Zander (Eds.), Group dynam-
ics (3rd ed.): 259-269. New York: Harper & Row.

Friedkin, N. E. 1980. A test of the structural features of
Granovetter's strength of weak ties theory. Social
Networks, 2: 411-422.
Galbraith, J. R. 1977. Organizational design. Reading,
MA: Addison-Wesley.
Galbraith. J. R. 1994. Competing with flexible lateral
organizations [2nd ed.). Reading, MA: Addison-
Wesley.
Gerhart, B. A.. & Milkovich, G. T. 1989. Salaries, salary
growth, and promotions of men and women in a
large, private firm. In R. T. Michael, H. I. Hartmann.
& B. O'Farrell (Eds.), Pay equity: Empirical inquir*
ies: 23-43. Washington, DG: National Academy
Press.
Gist, M. E.. & Mitchell. T. N. 1992. Self-efficacy: A theo-
retical analysis of its determinants and malleability.
Academy of Management Review, 17: 183-211.
Gould. S., & Penley. L. E. 1984. Gareer strategies and
salary progression: A study of their relationships in a
municipal bureaucracy. Organizational Behavior
and Human Performance, 34: 244-265.
Granovetter, M. S. 1973. The strength of weak ties. Amier-
ican Journal of Sociology, 6: 1360-1380.
Granovetter, M. S. 1982. The strength of weak ties: A
network theory revisited. In P. V. Marsden & N. Lin
(Eds.), Social structure and network analysis: 1 OS-
ISO. Beverly Hills, GA: Sage.

Greenhaus, J. H., Parasuraman, S.. & Wormley. W, M.
1990. Effects of race on organizational experiences,
job performance evaluations, and career outcomes.
Academy of Management Journal, 33: 64-86.
Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. 1980. Work redesign.
Readings, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Hall, D. T. 1976. Careers in organizations. Santa
Monica, GA: Goodyear.
Harman, H. H. 1967. Modern factor analysis (2nd ed.).
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Hayduk. L. A. 1987. Structural equation modeling with
LISREL: Essentials and advances. Baltimore: John
Hopkins University Press.
Hickson, D. J.. Hinings, C. A.. Lee, C. A.. Schneck. R. E.,
& Pennings, ]. M. 1971. A "strategic contingencies"
theory of intraorganizational power. Administrative
Science Quarterly, 14: 378-397.
Homans. G. G. 1950. The human group. New York: Har-
court. Brace & World.
Ibarra, H. 1993. Network centrality, power, and innova-
tion involvement: Determinants of technical and ad-
ministrative roles. Academy of Management Jour-
nal, 36: 471-501.
Ibarra. H. 1995. Race, opportunity, and diversity in social
circles in managerial networks. Academy of Man-
agement Journal, 38: 673-703.
Jdreskog, K. G., & Sorbom, D. 1993. LISREL 8: User's

reference guide. Ghicago: Scientific Software Inter-
national.
Judge, T. A., & Bretz, R. D. 1994. Political influence
behavior and career success. Journal of Manage-
ment, 20: 43-65.
Judge. T. A., Gable. D. M., Boudreau, J. W.. & Bretz, R. D.
1995. An empirical investigation of the predictors of
executive career success. Personnel Psychology, 48:
485-519.
Kanter, R. M. 1977. Men and women of the corporation.
New York: Basic Books.
Kelloway, E. K. 1998. Using LISREL for structural
equation modeling: A researcher's guide. Thou-
sand Oaks, CA; Sage.
Kilduff, M.. & Krackhardt, D. 1994, Bringing the individ-
ual back in; A structural analysis of the internal
market for reputation in organizations. Academy of
Management Journal, 37: 87-109.
Kirchmeyer, C. 1998. Determinants of managerial career
success: Evidence and explanation of male/female
differences. Journal of Management, 24: 673-692.
Knoke. D.. & Kuklinski, J. H. 1982. Network analysis
(Sage university paper series on quantitative appli-
cations in the social sciences no. 07-028). Beverly
Hills. CA: Sage.

Krackhardt, D. 1992. The strength of strong ties: The
importance of philos in organizations. In R. Eccles &
N. Nohria (Eds.), Networks and organizations:
Structure, form and action: 216-239. Boston: Har-
vard Business School Press.
Krackhardt. D., & Porter, L. W. 1986. The snowball effect:
Turnover embedded in communication networks.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 71: 50-55.
Kraimer, M. L., Seibert, S., & Liden, R. C. 1999, Psycho-
logical empowerment as a multidimensional con-
struct: A test of construct validity. Educational and
Psychological Measurement, 59: 127-142.
Kram, K. E. 1985. Mentoring at work: Developmental
relationships in organizational life. Glenview, IL:
Scott, Foresman.
Kram. K. E.. & Isabella, L. A. 1985. Mentoring alterna-
tives: The role of peer relationships in career devel-
opment. Academy of Management Journal, 28:
110-132.
Liden. R. C. Wayne. S. J.. & Stilwell. D. 1993. A longitu-
dinal study on the early development of leader-
member exchanges. Journal of Applied Psychology,
78: 662-674.
Lin. N. 1990. Social resources and social mobility: A
structural theory of status attainment. In R. L. Breiger
(Ed.), Social mobility and social structure: 247-
271. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Lin. N. 1999. Building a network theory of social capital.

Connections, 22(1): 28-51.
Lin, N., Ensel, W. M., & Vaughn, J. C. 1981a. Social
resources and occupational status attaimnent. Social
Forces, 59: 1163-1181.
Lin, N., Ensel, W. M., & Vaughn. J. C. 1981h. Social
resources and strength of ties. American Sociologi-
cal Review, 46: 393-405.
Lincoln, J. R. & Miller, J. 1979, Work and friendship ties
in organizations: A comparative analysis of rela-
tional networks. Administrative Science Quarterly,
24: 181-199.
London, M., & Stumpf, S. A. 1982. Managing careers.
Reading. MA: Addison-Wesley.
London. M.. & Stumpf, S. A. 1983. Effects of candidate
characteristics on management promotion decisions:
, An experimental study. Personnel Psycholagy, 36:
241-259.
Luthans, F., Hodgetts, R. M., & Rosenkrantz, S. A. 1988.
Real managers. Cambridge. MA: BalHnger.
Major, E. A.. Kozlowski. S, W.. Chao, G. T,. & Gardner,
P. D. 1995. A longitudinal investigation of newcomer
expectations, early socialization outcomes, and the
moderating effects of role development factors. Jour-
nal of Applied Psychology, 80: 418-429.
March. J. G., & Simon, H. A. 1958. Organizations. New
York: Wiley.

Marsden. P. V. 1990. Network data and measurement. In
W. R. Scott & J. Blake (Eds.). Annual review of
sociology, vol 16: 435-463. Palo Alto, CA: Annual
Reviews.
Marsden, P. V.. & Hnrlbert, J. S. 1988. Social resources
and mobility outcomes: A replication and extension.
Social Forces, 66: 1039-1059.
Massie, J. L. 1965. Management theory. In J. G. March
(Ed.), Handbook of organizations: 387-422. Chi-
cago: Rand McNally.
McPherson. J. M.. Popielarz, P. A., Drobnic. S. 1992.
Social networks and organizational dynamics.
American Sociological Review, 57: 153-170.
Medotf, 1. L.. & Abraham, K. G. 1981. Are those paid more
really more productive? The case of experience.
Journal of Human Resources, 16: 186-216.
Murray, S. O., Rankin. J. H.. & McGill, D. W. 1981. Strong
ties and job information. Sociology of Work and
Occupations, 8: 119-136.
Noe, R. A. 1988. An investigation of the determinants of
successful assigned mentoring relationships. Per-
sonnel Psychology, 41: 457-479.
O'Hara, K. B., Beehr. T. A., & Colarelli. S. M. 1994.
Organizational centrality: A third dimension of in-
traorganizational career movement. Journal of Ap-
plied Behavioral Science, 30: 198-216.
Pfeffer. J. 1989. A political perspective on careers: Inter-
ests, networks, and environments. In M. G. Arthur.

D. T, Hall. & B. S. Lawrence (Eds.), Handbook of
career theory: 380-396. New York: Cambridge Uni-
versity Press.
Pfeffer, J., Salancik. G. R., & Leblibici, H. 1978. Uncer-
tainty and social influence in organizational deci-
sion making. In M. W. Meyer (Ed.) Environments
and organizations: 306-332. San Francisco: )ossey-
Bass.
Podolny. J. M., & Baron, J. N. 1997. Resources and rela-
tionships: Social networks and mobility in the work-
place. American Sociological Review, 62: 673-693.
Popielarz, P. A. 1994. Do weak ties span longer dis-
2001 Seibert. Kraimer, and Uden 237
tances? Paper presented at the International Social
Networks Conference, New Orleans.
Rogers. E, M.. & Kincaid, D. L. 1981. Communication
networks. New York: Free Press.
Seibert, S. E.. Crant. J. M., & Kraimer, M. L. 1999. Proac-
tive personality and career success. Journal of Ap-
plied Psychology, 84: 416-427.
Sparrowe, R. T,. & Liden, R. C. 1997. Process and struc-
ture in leader-member exchange. Academy of Man-
agement Review, 22: 522-552.
Sparrowe, R. T., Liden. R. C . Wayne, S. J., & Kraimer,
M. L. 2001. Social exchange processes, social struc-

ture, and performance, Academy of Management
Journal, 44: 316-325.
Sparrowe, R. T., & Popielarz, P. A. 1995, Weak ties and
structural holes: The effects of network structure
on careers. Paper presented at the annual meeting of
the Academy of Management. Vancouver.
Spreitzer, G. M. 1995. Individual empowerment in the
workplace: Dimensions, measurement, and valida-
tion. Academy of Management Journal, 38: 1442-
1465.
Spreitzer, G. M. 1996. Social structural characteristics of
psychological empowerment. Academy of Manage-
ment Journal, 39: 483-504,
Tepper, B. J, 1995. Upward maintenance tactics in super-
visory mentoring and nonmentoring relationships.
Academy of Management Journal, 36: 1191-1205.
Thompson, J. D. 1967. Organizations in action. New
York: McGraw-Hill.
Tsui, A. S, 1984. A role set analysis of managerial repu-
tation. Organizational Behavior and Human Per-
formance, 34: 64-96.
Turban, D. B. & Dougherty, T. W. 1994. Role of prot6g6
personality in receipt of mentoring and career suc-
cess. Academy of Management Journal, 37: 6 8 8 -
702.
Wayne, S. J., & Liden, R. C. 1995. Effects of impression
management on performance ratings: A longitudinal
study. Academy of Management Journal, 38: 232-

260.
Wayne, S. ).. Liden. R. C , Kraimer, M. L,, & Graf, I, K.
1999. The role of human capital, motivation, and
supervisor sponsorship to career success. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 20: 577-595.
Weber, M. 1946. From Max Weber: Essays in sociology
(H. H. Gerth & C. W. Mills, eds.). New York: Oxford
University Press.
Whitely. W., Dougherty, T. W., & Dreher. G. F. 1991. The
relationship of career mentoring and socioeconomic
origin to managers' and professionals' early career
progress. Academy of Management Journal, 34;
331-351.
Scott E. Seibert (Ph.D., Cornell University) is an assistant
professor of management and labor relations at the James
J. Nance College of Business Administration. Cleveland
State University. His interests in personality, interper-
sonal processes, and social networks inform his research
on group decision making, mentoring, and career suc-
cess. He will be joining the department of managerial
studies at the University of Illinois at Chicago in the fall
of 2001.
Maria L. Kraimer (Ph.D., University of Illinois at Chi-
cago) is an assistant professor of management and labor
relations at the James J. Nance College of Business Ad-
ministration, Cleveland State University. Her research
interests include career-related issues, employee adjust-
ment, and the employee-employer relationship. She will
be joining the department of managerial studies at the
University of Illinois at Ghicago in the fall of 2001.

Robert C. Liden (Ph.D., University of Gincinnati) is a
professor of management at the University of Illinois at
Chicago. His research focuses on interpersonal processes
within the context of such topics as leadership, groups.
Ccireer progression, and employment interviews.

^ Acadumy of Management Journal2001. Vol. 44. No. 2. 219-237.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to ^ Acadumy of Management Journal2001. Vol. 44. No. 2. 219-237.docx

Similar to ^ Acadumy of Management Journal2001. Vol. 44. No. 2. 219-237.docx (20)

More from hanneloremccaffery

More from hanneloremccaffery (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

^ Acadumy of Management Journal2001. Vol. 44. No. 2. 219-237.docx