"Social Capital" Definitions

Social capital has been there since the initial formation of a society, but the notion of studying and defining social capital started in early 1950’s. Ever since, several sociologists have came up with several definitions for social capital. The diversity presented in the definitions was very remarkable as researchers from different disciplines had different way of defining social capital. Economists, political sociologists, organizational sociologists, Information Technology specialists and many more experts from various different disciples had a different way of defining social capital. Even the definitions tend to change over time with the social changes of the world. In this paper we will look at three of such definitions.

First definition is from a book published in the United State in early nineties that had a clear definition of social capital. It says that social capital is “those tangible assets [that] count for most in the daily lives of people: namely goodwill, fellowship, sympathy, and social intercourse among the individuals and families who make up a social unit” (Hanifan, Lyda. 1916). The author tries to explain social capital as tangible assets that connect a society. 

 Second, social capital is defined by its function by Coleman.  He further states that social capital “is not a single entity, but a variety of different entities having two characteristics in common: They all consist of some aspect of social structure, and they facilitate certain actions of individuals who are within the structure” (Coleman 1990, p. 302).  The function identified is that the social capital can be used as a resource to achieve one’s goals and objectives. 

Third is by Putnam as he defines social capital as “features of social organization such as networks, norms, and social trust that facilitate coordination and cooperation for mutual benefit” (Putnam, 1995). He views social capital as a rewarding factor in a social organization.

Social capital can also be defined as the amount of essential information that you get from others, and the support you receive both mentally and economically from the people you know. For example, in an organization not everyone receives all the important information that are crucial for survival; employees who identifies themselves in-group with the management gets most the benefits by getting the information. Also, the amount of support we receive from people we know gives us strong belongingness and security.

We define people as “What they eat”, “What they own” and sometimes by “What they know”.  However, in a networking perspective we define people as “Whom they know”; people are evaluated on the type of connections they have with other people (Woolcock, Michael. and Narayan, Deepa. 2000). As we all know, when a person is experiencing a hard time, it is the people he knows supports him and act as a safety net preventing him from falling off from the labor force.  In addition, the more networks a person has the more chances of taking effective decisions.  It is for the same reason that the modern time managers who spend 44% of their time in networking are marked as effective managers (Robbins, P. Stephen. et al. 2010).