THE IMPACT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL ON MARKET EXPLORATION AND EXPLOITATION WITH MEDIATING ROLE OF INTERNAL COMMUNICATION

Abstract

Purpose – Present study aims to test the mediating role of internal communication on the relationship between social capital and market exploration and exploitation, and to link the impact of market exploration and exploitation to the firm performance.

Methodology -  The hypotheses derived from the literature were tested on a sample of 173 information technology firms in Turkey. Survey data was gathered through questionnaires which were applied to the managers of the firms. Relationships among variables were analyzed through structural equation modeling using Amos 25.0 statistical tool. 

Findings- Internal communication's full mediating impact on the relationship between social capital and market exploitation and exploration was supported. In return, market exploration was found to have a significant impact on firm performance which was measured by quality, innovation, reputation and customer satisfaction. 

Conclusion- Social capital is an antecedent for an effective internal communication and should be well established in the firms. Internal communication has an impact on both market exploration and exploitation activities, thus it should be supported and encouraged within the firms. Market exploration activities should not be neglected since they may contribute to firms’ performance especially in the long run.         

Keywords

• Social capital,internal communication,market exploration,market exploitation,research paper

References

1. Adler, P. S., and Kwon, S. W. (2002). Social capital: Prospects for a new concept. Academy of management review, 27(1), 17-40.
2. Burt, R. S. (2004). Structural holes and good ideas. American journal of sociology, 110(2), 349-399
3. Chen, J., Zhu, Z., and Yuan Xie, H. (2004). Measuring intellectual capital: a new model and empirical study. Journal of Intellectual capital, 5(1), 195-212.
4. Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American journal of sociology, 94, S95-S120.
5. Garcia, R., Calantone, R., and Levine, R. (2003). The role of knowledge in resource allocation to exploration versus exploitation in technologically oriented organizations. Decision Sciences, 34(2), 323-349.
6. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., and Tatham, R. L. (1998). Multivariate data analysis (Vol. 5, No. 3, pp. 207-219). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice hall.
7. Hazleton, V., and Kennan, W. (2000). Social capital: reconceptualizing the bottom line. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 5(2), 81-87.
8. He, Z. L., and Wong, P. K. (2004). Exploration vs. exploitation: An empirical test of the ambidexterity hypothesis. Organization science, 15(4), 481-494.

9. Hsu, C. W., Lien, Y. C., and Chen, H. (2013). International ambidexterity and firm performance in small emerging economies. Journal of World Business, 48(1), 58-67.
10. Jacobs, J. (2016). The death and life of great American cities. Vintage.
11. Chisholm, A. M., and Nielsen, K. (2009). Social capital and the resource-based view of the firm. International Studies of Management and Organization, 39(2), 7-32.
12. Lane, P. J., and Lubatkin, M. (1998). Relative absorptive capacity and interorganizational learning. Strategic management journal, 461-477.
13. Levinthal, D. A., and March, J. G. (1993). The myopia of learning. Strategic management journal, 14(S2), 95-112.
14. Lin, Y., and Wu, L. Y. (2014). Exploring the role of dynamic capabilities in firm performance under the resource-based view framework. Journal of business research, 67(3), 407-413.
15. Lisboa, A., Skarmeas, D., and Lages, C. (2013). Export market exploitation and exploration and performance: Linear, moderated, complementary and non-linear effects. International Marketing Review, 30(3), 211-230.
16. March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization science, 2(1), 71-87.
17. Mitręga, M. (2012). Network partner knowledge and internal relationships influencing customer relationship quality and company performance. Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, 27(6), 486-496.
18. Molina-Castillo, F. J., Jimenez-Jimenez, D., and Munuera-Aleman, J. L. (2011). Product competence exploitation and exploration strategies: The impact on new product performance through quality and innovativeness. Industrial Marketing Management, 40(7), 1172-1182.
19. Moorman, C., and Rust, R. T. (1999). The role of marketing. The Journal of Marketing, 180-197.
20. Möller, K., and Svahn, S. (2003). Managing strategic nets: A capability perspective. Marketing theory, 3(2), 209-234.
21. Nahapiet, J., and Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Academy of management review, 23(2), 242-266.
22. Narver, J. C., Slater, S. F., and MacLachlan, D. L. (2004). Responsive and proactive market orientation and new‐product success. Journal of product innovation management, 21(5), 334-347.
23. Putnam, R. D. (1993). The prosperous community. The american prospect, 4(13), 35-42.
24. Ramaswami, S. N., Srivastava, R. K., and Bhargava, M. (2009). Market-based capabilities and financial performance of firms: insights into marketing’s contribution to firm value. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 37(2), 97.
25. Ritter, T., and Gemünden, H. G. (2003). Network competence: Its impact on innovation success and its antecedents. Journal of business research, 56(9), 745-755.
26. Song, L., Augustine, D., and Yang, J. Y. (2016). Environmental uncertainty, prospector strategy, and new venture performance: the moderating role of network capabilities. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 12(4), 1103-1126.
27. Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., and Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic management journal, 509-533.
28. Tushman, M. L., and Anderson, P. (1986). Technological discontinuities and organizational environments. Administrative science quarterly, 439-465.
29. Walter, A., Auer, M., and Ritter, T. (2006). The impact of network capabilities and entrepreneurial orientation on university spin-off performance. Journal of business venturing, 21(4), 541-567.
30. Westlund, H., and Bolton, R. (2003). Local social capital and entrepreneurship. Small business economics, 21(2), 77-113.
31. Wiklund, J., and Shepherd, D. (2003). Knowledge‐based resources, entrepreneurial orientation, and the performance of small and mediumsized businesses. Strategic management journal, 24(13), 1307-1314.
32. Yli‐Renko, H., Autio, E., and Sapienza, H. J. (2001). Social capital, knowledge acquisition, and knowledge exploitation in young technologybased firms. Strategic management journal, 22(6‐7), 587-613.
33. Yli-Renko, H., Autio, E., and Tontti, V. (2002). Social capital, knowledge, and the international growth of technology-based new firms. International Business Review, 11(3), 279-304.