1. Entrepreneurial Networks and Social Capital of Academic Scientists Ms. Agrita Kiopa, Doctoral Student Dr. Julia Melkers, Associate Professor School of Public Policy Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia, USA Prepared for the S&T Research Symposium Chicago, IL, March 2009 Data analyzed in this presentation were collected under the auspices of the 2005-09 project, Women in Science and Engineering: Network Access, Participation, and Career Outcomes, a project funded by the National Science Foundation (Grant # REC-0529642).

2. Research Question: What type of networks provide more/better/right social capital? Intuition: Entrepreneurial

3. Roots: Social capital literature: ◦ “investment in social relations with expected returns (Lin 2001) Network literature: ◦ Structural holes are source of social capital (“early” Burt, 1992) ◦ The content of social relationships is as important in instrumental action as structure (Podolny and Baron, 1997) ◦ Right balance of open and close relationships in network (“late” Burt, 2001) Our Data: Who are those ngnot(s)?

4. Entrepreneurial networks: Individual networks that are rich in the structural holes (Burt, 1992, 2000, 2004, 2005) Individual networks that consist of strong ties with individuals outside of ones organization (Higgins and Kram, 2001)

5. General model: Creation and Use of the Social Capital (Adapted from Lin, 2001) 5

6. Hypotheses: Effects of Network Properties H1: Individuals with networks rich with structural holes will mobilize more social capital Networks that are rich in the structural holes are source of social capital (Burt, 1992, 2000, 2004, 2005) H2: Individuals with networks rich with multiplex relationships will mobilize more social capital Strong ties are source of social capital (Ibarra, 1995, Krackhardt, 1992, Nelson, 1989, Lin et al, 1981, among others)

7. Hypotheses: Effects of Network Properties H3: Individuals with networks rich with multiplex relationships with unconnected alters will mobilize more social capital In other words H3: Individuals with entrepreneurial networks will mobilize more social capital

8. Hypotheses: Effects of Network Properties H3a: Men with entrepreneurial networks with will mobilize more social (van Emmerik, 2006)

9. Overlap of name generator networks Assistant and Associate Profs only Excluding Primary Mentors N= 837 Close Collaborators in Same University Close Collaborators Outside Respondent University Individuals from whom respondents seek career advice N= 91 N= 66 N= 776 N= 97 N= 297 N= 1353N= 1790 N= 53N= 117 N= 521 N= 6 N= 21N= 240 N= 2 Individuals from whom respondents seek advice re: dept matters Individuals with whom respondents seek advice about their research, but have not collaborated.

10. Explanatory Model Mobilized Resources=f (Gender, Position, Network Structure, Network Content, Embedded Resources) 10

11. Variables Variables: Dependent - Mobilized Resources: Mean Reviews (0-1) Mean Introductions (0-1) Mean Nominations (0-1) Mean Range of Career Support Resources (0-3) Independent - Individual Characteristics & Network Properties: Male (0, 1) Network Efficiency (0-1) Mean Multiplexity (0-4) Multiplex Efficiency (0-1) Resources – Mean Seniority (0-1) Control - Structural Position And resources: Associate Professor (0, 1) Full Professor (0, 1) Mean seniority (0-1) Mean equality of seniority (status homophily) (0-1)

12. Findings: Network Properties and Mobilized Resources Effect of Structural Holes - NO Effect of Multiplexity – Maybe Efficient Multiplexity - YES

13. Findings by position: Assistant Professors Efficient Multiplexity - YES, for Reviews and Range of Resources Associate Professors Efficient Multiplexity - YES, for Nominations

14. Discussion: Measure of efficient multiplexity can be used to understand the entrepreneurial activities of academic scientists; Different network structures and properties of relationship may be beneficial for mobilization of different resources; Relationships within the individual research discussion networks differ by position; 14

15. Further Steps: Analysis of other types of relationships in our data; Conceptual expansion of entrepreneurial networks: ◦ “right” balance of “open” and “close” relationships (“late” Burt, 2001, Kadushin, 2002); ◦ “right” balance of “open talk network” and “closed collaboration networks” Operationalization of entrepreneurial network as one that is rich with multiplex relationships outside of respondents university, country Thank YOU! Questions and Feedback Welcome!