Effects of structural, relational and cognitive social capital on resource acquisition: a study of entrepreneurs residing in multiply deprived areas

Abstract

Emerging research demonstrates that structural social capital facilitates the resource acquisition of entrepreneurs residing in multiply deprived areas. However, their usage of relational and cognitive social capital that translates to accessible resources is not well understood. We contribute to knowledge and comprehensively examine effects of structural, relational and cognitive social capital taken together on the resource acquisition of entrepreneurs residing in multiply deprived areas. Results from a national survey of entrepreneurs residing in multiply deprived areas across England show that large networks, bonding ties, trust, reciprocity, obligations and expectations, and shared language and codes facilitate their resource acquisition. Also, we demonstrate that they are reluctant or unable to bridge social distance and adopt narrative storytelling. Furthermore, the results indicate that entrepreneurs residing in multiply deprived areas in the most deprived regions suffer from less resource acquisition.

The Role of a Manager’s Intangible Capabilities in Resource Acquisition and Sustainable Competitive Performance

“…Moreover, Kamukama and Sulait [22] claimed that IC (such as human capital, structural capital, and relational capital) helps firms in establishing a sustainable competitive position in turbulent markets. In a similar context, our research favors Lee et al [37], who investigated whether IC helps firms to gain tangible and intangible means. These resources, in turn, can lead to SCP (e.g., [8,42]), thus supporting H3.…”

“…Promoting skills such as human capital, relational capital, and structural capital influence the embeddedness of resource integration among firms [36]. For instance, Lee et al [37] argue that social capital helps firms to acquire both tangible and intangible resources that may not be gained through other sources. Therefore, we hypothesize the following: Hypothesis H2.…”

“…To gain more helpful insights, we aimed to check how a firm can acquire external resources (tangible and intangible) through IC. Thus, we used six items to measure resource acquisition that were merged and adopted from prior studies (e.g., [12,37]). Five Likert scales were given representing strongly disagree, 1, to strongly agree, 5.…”

Doubly Disadvantaged: Gender, Spatially Concentrated Deprivation and Nascent Entrepreneurial Activity

“…In line with intersectionality theory (Martinez Dy et al, 2017), but subtly different to the literature, we find that deprivation prevents women from taking advantage of any human capital assets they might have that are relevant to engagement in nascent entrepreneurial activity. One interpretation might be that while women are exposed to the same obstacles as men in deprived locales in terms of socio-demographic factors (Lee and Cowling, 2013), social capital (Lee et al, 2019), and perceptions (Williams and Williams, 2011), women may find it more challenging to overcome those 1 Individuals who are either nascent entrepreneur (actively involved in start-up effort) or new entrepreneurs (owner managers of a business that is less than 42 months old). potential barriers due to family burdens (Patrick et al, 2016), motivations (McGowan et al, 2012, differences in risk aversion (Fossen, 2012), trusting behaviours (Farr-Wharton and Brunetto, 2007) and socio-economic norms (Marlow and Swail, 2014) that their counterparts in less deprived areas do not face.…”

“…In line with intersectionality theory (Martinez Dy et al, 2017), but subtly different to the literature, we find that deprivation prevents women from taking advantage of any human capital assets they might have that are relevant to engagement in nascent entrepreneurial activity. One interpretation might be that while women are exposed to the same obstacles as men in deprived locales in terms of socio‐demographic factors (Lee and Cowling, 2013), social capital (Lee et al, 2019), and perceptions (Williams and Williams, 2011), women may find it more challenging to overcome those potential barriers due to family burdens (Patrick et al, 2016), motivations (McGowan et al, 2012), differences in risk aversion (Fossen, 2012), trusting behaviours (Farr‐Wharton and Brunetto, 2007) and socio‐economic norms (Marlow and Swail, 2014) that their counterparts in less deprived areas do not face. Our empirical confirmation of a ‘double disadvantage’ suggests it is much more difficult for women to break through the vicious circle of deprivation, even if they have the human capital necessary for entrepreneurship, despite the evidence suggesting that entrepreneurship offers a route for people out of deprived areas (Frankish et al, 2014; Sutter et al, 2019).…”