Structural Holes

201

Chapter 7

The Social Capital of Structural Holes

INTRODUCTION

This chapter — drawn in large part from lengthy review elsewhere of argument and

evidence on social capital (Burt, 2000) — is about current work on the social capital

of structural holes. I begin broadly with social capital in metaphor, get more specific

with four network mechanisms that define social capital in theory (contagion,

prominence, closure, and brokerage across structural holes), then focus on three

categories of empirical evidence on the fourth mechanism: evidence of rewards and

achievement associated with brokerage, evidence of creativity and learning

associated with brokerage, and evidence on the process of bridging structural holes.

SOCIAL CAPITAL METAPHOR

Figure 1 is an overview of social capital in metaphor and network structure. The

diagram is a road map through the next few pages, and a reminder that beneath

general agreement about social capital as a metaphor lie a variety of network

mechanisms that can make contradictory predictions about social capital.

Cast in diverse styles of argument (e.g., Coleman 1990; Bourdieu and

Wacquant 1992; Burt 1992; Putnam 1993), social capital is a metaphor about

advantage. Society can be viewed as a market in which people exchange all variety

of goods and ideas in pursuit of their interests. Certain people, or certain groups of

people, do better in the sense of receiving higher returns to their efforts. Some

people enjoy higher incomes. Some more quickly become prominent. Some lead

more important projects. The interests of some are better served than the interests

of others. The human capital explanation of the inequality is that the people who do

better are more able individuals; they are more intelligent, more attractive, more

articulate, more skilled.

Social capital is the contextual complement to human capital. The social

capital metaphor is that the people who do better are somehow better connected.

Certain...