IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/mpifgd/139.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Is there a closure penalty? Cohesive network structures, diversity, and gender inequalities in career advancement

Author

Listed:
  • Lutter, Mark

Abstract

That social capital matters is an established fact in the social sciences. How different forms of social capital affect gender disadvantages in career advancement is less clear, however. Qualitative research suggests that women face disadvantages in project-based labor markets where recruitment practices are based on informal and personal networks. Focusing on a project-based type of labor market, namely the U.S. film industry, this study argues that women suffer from social closure and face severe career disadvantages when collaborating in cohesive teams. At the same time, gender disadvantages are reduced for women who build social capital in open networks with a higher degree of diversity and information flow. I test and demonstrate these assumptions using a large-scale longitudinal dataset containing full career profiles of more than 1.2 million performances by 101,090 film actors in 483,949 feature film productions between the years 1900-2010. In particular, I analyze career survival models and interaction effects between gender and different measures of social capital and information openness. The findings reveal that female actors have a higher risk of career failure than their male colleagues when affiliated in cohesive networks, but have better survival chances when embedded in open and diverse structures. This study contributes to the understanding of how and what type of social capital can be either a beneficial resource for otherwise disadvantaged groups or a constraining mechanism that intensifies gender differences in career advancement.

Suggested Citation

  • Lutter, Mark, 2013. "Is there a closure penalty? Cohesive network structures, diversity, and gender inequalities in career advancement," MPIfG Discussion Paper 13/9, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:mpifgd:139
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/81129/1/766848736.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Simon Rodan & Charles Galunic, 2004. "More than network structure: how knowledge heterogeneity influences managerial performance and innovativeness," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(6), pages 541-562, June.
    2. Marco Tortoriello & Ray Reagans & Bill McEvily, 2012. "Bridging the Knowledge Gap: The Influence of Strong Ties, Network Cohesion, and Network Range on the Transfer of Knowledge Between Organizational Units," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(4), pages 1024-1039, August.
    3. D. R. Cox, 1972. "The Analysis of Multivariate Binary Data," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 21(2), pages 113-120, June.
    4. Andersen, Kristina Vaarst, 2013. "The problem of embeddedness revisited: Collaboration and market types," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 139-148.
    5. Ray Reagans & Ezra W. Zuckerman, 2001. "Networks, Diversity, and Productivity: The Social Capital of Corporate R&D Teams," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(4), pages 502-517, August.
    6. Ezra W. Zuckerman & Tai-Young Kim, 2003. "The critical trade-off: identity assignment and box-office success in the feature film industry," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 12(1), pages 27-67, February.
    7. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    8. Jaffe, Adam B, 1986. "Technological Opportunity and Spillovers of R&D: Evidence from Firms' Patents, Profits, and Market Value," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(5), pages 984-1001, December.
    9. Gino Cattani & Simone Ferriani, 2008. "A Core/Periphery Perspective on Individual Creative Performance: Social Networks and Cinematic Achievements in the Hollywood Film Industry," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(6), pages 824-844, December.
    10. Giuseppe Delmestri & Fabrizio Montanari & Alessandro Usai, 2005. "Reputation and Strength of Ties in Predicting Commercial Success and Artistic Merit of Independents in the Italian Feature Film Industry," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(5), pages 975-1002, July.
    11. Brambor, Thomas & Clark, William Roberts & Golder, Matt, 2006. "Understanding Interaction Models: Improving Empirical Analyses," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(1), pages 63-82, January.
    12. Carter, David B. & Signorino, Curtis S., 2010. "Back to the Future: Modeling Time Dependence in Binary Data," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(3), pages 271-292, July.
    13. Corey C. Phelps, 2010. "A longitudinal study of the influence of alliance network structure and composition on firm exploratory innovation," Post-Print hal-00528392, HAL.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ilse Lindenlaub & Anja Prummer, 2014. "Gender, Social Networks And Performance," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1461, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lutter, Mark, 2014. "Creative success and network embeddedness: Explaining critical recognition of film directors in Hollywood, 1900-2010," MPIfG Discussion Paper 14/11, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    2. Rajat Khanna & Isin Guler, 2022. "Degree assortativity in collaboration networks and invention performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(7), pages 1402-1430, July.
    3. Lee, Cheng-Yu & Wang, Ming-Chao & Huang, Yen-Chih, 2015. "The double-edged sword of technological diversity in R&D alliances: Network position and learning speed as moderators," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 450-461.
    4. de Vaan, Mathijs, 2014. "Interfirm networks in periods of technological turbulence and stability," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(10), pages 1666-1680.
    5. Linda Argote & Sunkee Lee & Jisoo Park, 2021. "Organizational Learning Processes and Outcomes: Major Findings and Future Research Directions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(9), pages 5399-5429, September.
    6. Oerlemans, Leon & Chan, K.Y. & Knoben, Joris & Vermeulen, P.A.M., 2018. "Structural and geographical conditions for exploitative innovation : Evidence from South African manufacturing firms," Other publications TiSEM 4abcf615-a0d4-49ef-ba25-c, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    7. Massimo Maoret & Marco Tortoriello & Daniela Iubatti, 2020. "Big Fish, Big Pond? The Joint Effect of Formal and Informal Core/Periphery Positions on the Generation of Incremental Innovations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(6), pages 1538-1559, November.
    8. Srikanth Paruchuri & Snehal Awate, 2017. "Organizational knowledge networks and local search: The role of intra‐organizational inventor networks," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(3), pages 657-675, March.
    9. Frédéric C. Godart & Charles Galunic, 2019. "Explaining the Popularity of Cultural Elements: Networks, Culture, and the Structural Embeddedness of High Fashion Trends," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(1), pages 151-168, February.
    10. Alnuaimi, Tufool & Opsahl, Tore & George, Gerard, 2012. "Innovating in the periphery: The impact of local and foreign inventor mobility on the value of Indian patents," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(9), pages 1534-1543.
    11. Yosem Companys & Jeffery McMullen, 2007. "Strategic Entrepreneurs at Work: The Nature, Discovery, and Exploitation of Entrepreneurial Opportunities," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 28(4), pages 301-322, April.
    12. Michelle Rogan & Marie Louise Mors, 2014. "A Network Perspective on Individual-Level Ambidexterity in Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(6), pages 1860-1877, December.
    13. Ricarda Bouncken & Boris Plüschke & Robin Pesch & Sascha Kraus, 2016. "Entrepreneurial orientation in vertical alliances: joint product innovation and learning from allies," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 381-409, March.
    14. Cui, Victor & Ding, Waverly W. & Yanadori, Yoshio, 2019. "Exploration versus exploitation in technology firms: The role of compensation structure for R&D workforce," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(6), pages 1534-1549.
    15. Hoskins, Jake D. & Carson, Stephen J., 2022. "Industry conditions, market share, and the firm’s ability to derive business-line profitability from diverse technological portfolios," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 178-192.
    16. Malik, Tariq, 2012. "Disparate association between alliance social capital and the global pharmaceutical firm's performance," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 21(6), pages 1017-1028.
    17. Forrest Briscoe & Michelle Rogan, 2016. "Coordinating Complex Work: Knowledge Networks, Partner Departures, and Client Relationship Performance in a Law Firm," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(8), pages 2392-2411, August.
    18. Jiancheng Guan & Yan Yan & Jingjing Zhang, 2015. "How do collaborative features affect scientific output? Evidences from wind power field," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(1), pages 333-355, January.
    19. Wadhwa, Anu & Phelps, Corey & Kotha, Suresh, 2016. "Corporate venture capital portfolios and firm innovation," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 95-112.
    20. Meichen Dong & Jie Jiao & Jun Xia, 2022. "Consequences of homophily: does social status similarity enhance project performance?," Asian Business & Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 21(1), pages 58-81, February.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:mpifgd:139. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/mpigfde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.