Cognitive mapping the topic of social capital

Joseph Kim-keung Ho

Independent Trainer

Hong Kong, China

Abstract: The topic of social capital in the subject of Social Sciences is complex. By making use of the cognitive mapping technique to conduct a brief literature review on the social capital topic, the writer renders a systemic image on the topic of social capital. The result of the study, in the form of a cognitive map on social capital, should be useful to those who are interested in the topics of cognitive mapping, literature review and social capital.

Key words: Social capital, cognitive mapping, literature review

Introduction

As a topic in Social Sciences, social capital is complex. It is thus useful to employ some learning tool to conduct its study, notably for literature review purpose. For a teacher in research methods, systems thinking and management, the writer is specifically interested in finding out how the cognitive mapping technique can be employed to go through a literature review on  Social capital. This literature review exercise is taken up and reported in this article.

On the cognitive mapping exercise for literature review

Literature review is an important intellectual learning exercise, and not just for doing final year dissertation projects for tertiary education students. On these two topics of intellectual learning and literature review, the writer has compiled some e-learning resources. They are the Managerial intellectual learning Facebook page and the Literature on literature review Facebook page. Conducting literature review with the cognitive mapping technique is not novel in the cognitive mapping literature, see Eden and Simpson (1989), Eden, Jones and Sims (1983), Open University (n.d) and the Literature on cognitive mapping Facebook page. In this article, the specific steps involved in the cognitive mapping exercise are as follows:

Step 1: gather some main points from a number of academic journal articles on Social capital. This result in the production of a table (Table 1) with the main points and associated references.

Step 2: consolidate  the main points from Table 1 to come up with a table listing the cognitive map variables (re: Table 2).

Step 3: link up the cognitive  map variables in a plausible way to produce a cognitive map (re: Figure 1) on the topic under review.

The next section applies these three steps to produce a cognitive map on social capital.

Descriptions of cognitive map variables on the social capital topic

From the reading of some academic articles on Social capital, a number of main points (e.g., viewpoints, concepts and empirical findings) were gathered by the  writer. They are shown in Table 1 with explicit referencing on the points.

Table 1: Main points from the social capital literature and referencing

Main points from the social capital literature	Referencing
Point 1: "Although the conceptual origins are old—similar ideas appear in works of Adam Smith, Alexis de Toqueville, John Stuart Mill and Max Weber—the study by James Coleman (1988) brought wide attention to social capital and interest took off when Robert Putnam (1993) used the concept to explain differences in the quality of regional government in Italy and the country’s North–South divide".	Bjørnskov, C. 2006. "The multiple facets of social capital" European Journal of Political Economy 22, Elsevier: 22-40.
Point 2: "Putnam (1993, p. 167) defines social capital as "features of social organization, such as trust, norms, and networks, that can improve the efficiency of society by facilitating coordinated actions". This definition certainly hit a note with its obvious intuitive appeal, since most people seem to make an immediate connection to features in their own lives and societies. However, seen from a scientific perspective, the definition is discomfortingly vague by clustering different features of society into one concept".	Bjørnskov, C. 2006. "The multiple facets of social capital" European Journal of Political Economy 22, Elsevier: 22-40.
Point 3: "... individuals congregate in voluntary organisations of different types where they learn to trust each other through repeated interactions. This in turn underlies the creation of social norms and trust, the idea being that social norms of honesty and cooperation are disseminated through overlapping networks, and that when an individual learns to trust others (who used to be strangers) through repeated interactions, the individual will also learn to trust other people who remain strangers. Associational activity and socialisation are thus at the heart of Putnam’s concept".	Bjørnskov, C. 2006. "The multiple facets of social capital" European Journal of Political Economy 22, Elsevier: 22-40.
Point 4: "... a proportionate emergence of different viewpoints and theories in fields of definitions, models and tools for measuring social capital and the elements affecting it has occurred. Coleman (1990) regards social capital as a combination of social structures that facilitate certain actions of actors within the structures".	Mahdavi, A. and H. Azizmohammadlou. 2013. "The effects  of industrialization on social capital: the case of Iran" International Journal of Social Economics 40(9), Emerald: 777-796.
Point 5: "According to Paxton (1999), social capital consists of two components: objective associations between individuals as an objective network that connects them in a social environment; and a subjective type of association, which results in the formation of relationships based on mutual trust and positive emotions among people".	Mahdavi, A. and H. Azizmohammadlou. 2013. "The effects  of industrialization on social capital: the case of Iran" International Journal of Social Economics 40(9), Emerald: 777-796.
Point 6: "Based on Aldridge et al.’s (2002) opinion bonding capital is among individuals who have a close and friendly relationship such as family, close friends and neighbors whereas bridging capital is among individuals who share less common features and friendly relationships such as social or political groups and associations. According to Hitt et al. (2002) structural social capital facilitates collective action through established rules. Social networks, in this regard, supplement rules, procedures and precedents. Cognitive social capital, from Krishna and Uphoff’s (2002) viewpoint includes common norms, values, attitudes, and beliefs, which predisposes people towards mutually beneficial collective action".	Mahdavi, A. and H. Azizmohammadlou. 2013. "The effects  of industrialization on social capital: the case of Iran" International Journal of Social Economics 40(9), Emerald: 777-796.
Point 7: "The term social capital was originally used to describe the relational resources, embedded in cross-cutting personal ties, that are useful for the development of individuals in community social organizations (e.g., Jacobs, 1961; Loury, 1977). Recent research has applied this concept to a broader range of social phenomena, including relations inside and outside the family (Coleman, 1988), relations within and beyond the firm (Burt, 1992), the organization-market interface (Baker, 1990), and public life in contemporary societies (Putnam, 1993, 1995)".	Tsai, W.P. and S. Ghoshal. 1998. "Social capital and value creation: the role of intrafirm networks" The Academy of Management Journal 41(4) August: 464-476.
Point 8: "Building on Moran and Ghoshal's (1996) formulation of value creation as arising from the combination and exchange of resources, Nahapiet and Ghoshal (1)identified three dimensions of social capital structural, relational, and cognitive-and (2) theoretically justified how attributes of each of these dimensions facilitate the combination and exchange of resources within firms".	Tsai, W.P. and S. Ghoshal. 1998. "Social capital and value creation: the role of intrafirm networks" The Academy of Management Journal 41(4) August: 464-476.
Point 9: "Taking child safety in Jerusalem as an example, Coleman (1990: 303) showed how certain values collectively held in a society can be a kind of social capital that benefits the society as a whole, even in the absence of specific links between individual members of that society".	Tsai, W.P. and S. Ghoshal. 1998. "Social capital and value creation: the role of intrafirm networks" The Academy of Management Journal 41(4) August: 464-476.
Point 10: "... the social interaction context is singled out by collective GDT [globally distributed team] literature as the prime influence on knowledge-sharing processes and their effect on GDT performance. Broadly adopted in the international management literature, social capital theory is recognized as offering a powerful conceptual lens for developing an integrative perspective beyond individual factors (motivation, attitude, etc.) and general cultural influences (Ghosh and Scott, 2009; Kirsch et al., 2010; Makela et al., 2012; Montazemi et al., 2012; von Stetten et al., 2012)".	Van Dijk, A., P. Hendriks and I. Romo-Leroux. 2015. "Knowledge sharing and social capital in globally distributed execution" Journal of Knowledge Management 20(2), Emerald: 327-343.
Point 11: "According to Portes’ (1998) review of social capital, the first systematic analysis of the concept dates back to the work of Bourdieu (1986). In his analysis, Bourdieu defined the concept as “the aggregate of the actual or potential resources which are linked to possession of a durable network of more or less institutionalized relationships of mutual acquaintance or recognition” (Bourdieu, 1986, p. 248)".	Van Dijk, A., P. Hendriks and I. Romo-Leroux. 2015. "Knowledge sharing and social capital in globally distributed execution" Journal of Knowledge Management 20(2), Emerald: 327-343.
Point 12: ".... the cognitive dimension [of social capital], refers to those resources “providing shared representations, interpretations, and systems of meaning among parties” (Cicourel, 1973). These resources include a shared vision (Tsai and Ghoshal, 1998), and shared language (Nahapiet and Ghoshal, 1998). A shared vision “embodies the collective goals and aspirations of the members of an organization” (Tsai and Ghoshal, 1998, p. 467). The same authors claim that organization members will be more likely to become partners exchanging their resources when they share a common understanding of collective goals".	Van Dijk, A., P. Hendriks and I. Romo-Leroux. 2015. "Knowledge sharing and social capital in globally distributed execution" Journal of Knowledge Management 20(2), Emerald: 327-343.
Point 13: "Across the broader management field, interest in the concept of social capital, by which we mean the wealth (or benefit) that exists because of an individual’s social relationships and respective position in a social network, has become increasingly popular, in large part driven by the increasing recognition that assets such as physical capital, inventory, and work in progress are playing a diminished role in the new economy, while intellectual capital and relationships have assumed an enhanced role in value creation and sustained competitive advantage (Leana and Rousseau, 2000; Steier, 2001)".	Nordstrom, O.A. and L. Steier. 2015. "Social capital: a review of its dimensions and promise for future family enterprise research" International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research 21(6), Emerald: 801-813.
Point 14: "Drawing upon social capital theory, two distinct camps have emerged, regarding the competitive (dis)advantage of family businesses. The first has used social capital to show how factors such as cohesive clan cultures (Miller, 2003; Miller and Le-Breton-Miller, 2005), ongoing partnering relationships with external stakeholders, close ties that make up for institutional voids (Miller et al., 2009), and the ability to flow family social capital into organizational social capital (Arregle et al., 2007) are central to a family business’s competitive advantage. Conversely, social capital has also been applied to show how too much cooperation in relationships with outside stakeholders (Morck et al., 2005), nepotism, personal rivalries, and altruism (Schulze et al., 2001) can prevent family business from realizing a competitive advantage".	Nordstrom, O.A. and L. Steier. 2015. "Social capital: a review of its dimensions and promise for future family enterprise research" International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research 21(6), Emerald: 801-813.
Point 15: "Social capital originated with Loury (1977) who criticized the narrowly individualistic and atomistic understanding of human capital that dominated neoclassical economic theory, and developed the term to argue that in contrast to Becker (1964) and his followers, human capital was not completely about individual achievement or lack of it but rather it was an inherently social process".	Nordstrom, O.A. and L. Steier. 2015. "Social capital: a review of its dimensions and promise for future family enterprise research" International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research 21(6), Emerald: 801-813.
Point 16: "While social capital is typically examined at a macro level (e.g. culture, nations, communities, and organizations), it has also proved useful in the study of individual relationships (e.g. Burt, 2000; Podolny and Baron, 1997). If we agree that each customer service provider relationship has value to the firm, then examining how value is “stored up” or embedded in these individual relationships is an important avenue of inquiry for marketing. A better understanding of the social capital stored in a service provider-customer relationship may allow service firms to appropriate this value by generating customer loyalty".	Jones, T. and S.F. Taylor. 2012. "Service loyalty: accounting for social capital" Journal of Services Marketing 26(1), Emerald: 60-74.
Point 17: "Stronger relationships, shared beliefs between partners, and multiplex ties result in higher social capital. Marketing research has reported significant positive effects of commitment, relationship strength, relationship closeness, and the like (i.e. proxies for relational social capital) on loyalty-related outcomes (e.g. Bansal et al., 2004; Barnes, 1997; Bove and Johnson, 2001a). There is a dearth of research, however, on the cognitive and structural forms of social capital and this represents a potentially fruitful area of inquiry".	Jones, T. and S.F. Taylor. 2012. "Service loyalty: accounting for social capital" Journal of Services Marketing 26(1), Emerald: 60-74.
Point 18: "Social capital may be said to be possessed by an actor in relationship to any other actor in a social situation and is represented as a stock that influences, and is influenced by, the social component of any interaction, for example, economic or informational, that occurs between them. Actors can be individuals, groups of individuals, departments, organisations or groups of organisations. Such interactions not only draw upon social capital in order to achieve particular outcomes but also create, maintain and destroy social capital in the process. Thus the social capital concept helps us to understand the gap between the stocks and flows, particularly in social intercourse, and provides a richer view of the nature of the processes involved".	Bowey, J.L. and G. Easton. 2007. "Net social capital processes" Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing 22(3), Emerald: 171-177.
Point 19: "Social capital comprises status, reputation, credibility and/ or integrity that might have an effect upon a focal relationship even without the knowledge and/or intervention of one of the actors. Status refers to a perceived social rank or position. Reputation refers to the belief, often a net generalised belief, about an actor’s character. Credibility refers to the state of being endowed with some form of credit, believability and/or competence".	Bowey, J.L. and G. Easton. 2007. "Net social capital processes" Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing 22(3), Emerald: 171-177.
Point 20: "We use the term “business constellation” to describe the situation where a group of actors are highly connected by strong, mutual, social capital ties. .... Net social capital exists across the totality of the group of actors concerned in a business constellation and is diffused across the net. It comprises the social capital that any member of the net can draw upon by virtue of being a member of that group".	Bowey, J.L. and G. Easton. 2007. "Net social capital processes" Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing 22(3), Emerald: 171-177.
Point 21: "The premise of a relational approach to corporate performance is that corporate actors and their behaviors are “embedded in concrete, ongoing systems of social relations” (Granovetter, 1985, p. 487). To sociologists, organizations do not exist on a market-hierarchy continuum, but instead take on various network forms of governance structure as survival and developmental strategies (Powell, 1990). In such a way, the relational approach helps redefine the social nature of corporate actors and rewrite organizational theories".	Bian, Y. and L. Zhang. 2014. "Corporate social capital in chinese guanxi culture" Contemporary Perspectives on Organizational Social Networks Research in the Sociology of Organizations 40, Emerald: 421-443.
Point 22: "As a dynamic process, the formation and mobilization of social capital are culturally and institutionally contextualized. Culture provides values, norms, and meanings for social networking, and formal and informal institutions set up regulative, sometimes coercive, confines within which social capital functions and dysfunctions".	Bian, Y. and L. Zhang. 2014. "Corporate social capital in chinese guanxi culture" Contemporary Perspectives on Organizational Social Networks Research in the Sociology of Organizations 40, Emerald: 421-443.

With a set of main points collected, the writer produces a set of cognitive map variables. These variables are informed by the set of main points from Table 1. These variables are presented in Table 2.

Table 2: Cognitive map variables based on Table 1

Cognitive map variables	Literature review points
Variable 1: Drivers of interest in social capital	Point 1: "Although the conceptual origins are old—similar ideas appear in works of Adam Smith, Alexis de Toqueville, John Stuart Mill and Max Weber—the study by James Coleman (1988) brought wide attention to social capital and interest took off when Robert Putnam (1993) used the concept to explain differences in the quality of regional government in Italy and the country’s North–South divide". Point 7: "The term social capital was originally used to describe the relational resources, embedded in cross-cutting personal ties, that are useful for the development of individuals in community social organizations (e.g., Jacobs, 1961; Loury, 1977). Recent research has applied this concept to a broader range of social phenomena, including relations inside and outside the family (Coleman, 1988), relations within and beyond the firm (Burt, 1992), the organization-market interface (Baker, 1990), and public life in contemporary societies (Putnam, 1993, 1995)". Point 11: "According to Portes’ (1998) review of social capital, the first systematic analysis of the concept dates back to the work of Bourdieu (1986). In his analysis, Bourdieu defined the concept as “the aggregate of the actual or potential resources which are linked to possession of a durable network of more or less institutionalized relationships of mutual acquaintance or recognition” (Bourdieu, 1986, p. 248)". Point 13: "Across the broader management field, interest in the concept of social capital, by which we mean the wealth (or benefit) that exists because of an individual’s social relationships and respective position in a social network, has become increasingly popular, in large part driven by the increasing recognition that assets such as physical capital, inventory, and work in progress are playing a diminished role in the new economy, while intellectual capital and relationships have assumed an enhanced role in value creation and sustained competitive advantage (Leana and Rousseau, 2000; Steier, 2001)". Point 15: "Social capital originated with Loury (1977) who criticized the narrowly individualistic and atomistic understanding of human capital that dominated neoclassical economic theory, and developed the term to argue that in contrast to Becker (1964) and his followers, human capital was not completely about individual achievement or lack of it but rather it was an inherently social process".
Variable 2: Improve intellectual understanding of social capital	Point 2: "Putnam (1993, p. 167) defines social capital as "features of social organization, such as trust, norms, and networks, that can improve the efficiency of society by facilitating coordinated actions". This definition certainly hit a note with its obvious intuitive appeal, since most people seem to make an immediate connection to features in their own lives and societies. However, seen from a scientific perspective, the definition is discomfortingly vague by clustering different features of society into one concept". Point 3: "... individuals congregate in voluntary organisations of different types where they learn to trust each other through repeated interactions. This in turn underlies the creation of social norms and trust, the idea being that social norms of honesty and cooperation are disseminated through overlapping networks, and that when an individual learns to trust others (who used to be strangers) through repeated interactions, the individual will also learn to trust other people who remain strangers. Associational activity and socialisation are thus at the heart of Putnam’s concept". Point 4: "... a proportionate emergence of different viewpoints and theories in fields of definitions, models and tools for measuring social capital and the elements affecting it has occurred. Coleman (1990) regards social capital as a combination of social structures that facilitate certain actions of actors within the structures". Point 5: "According to Paxton (1999), social capital consists of two components: objective associations between individuals as an objective network that connects them in a social environment; and a subjective type of association, which results in the formation of relationships based on mutual trust and positive emotions among people". Point 12: ".... the cognitive dimension [of social capital], refers to those resources “providing shared representations, interpretations, and systems of meaning among parties” (Cicourel, 1973). These resources include a shared vision (Tsai and Ghoshal, 1998), and shared language (Nahapiet and Ghoshal, 1998). A shared vision “embodies the collective goals and aspirations of the members of an organization” (Tsai and Ghoshal, 1998, p. 467). The same authors claim that organization members will be more likely to become partners exchanging their resources when they share a common understanding of collective goals". Point 14: "Drawing upon social capital theory, two distinct camps have emerged, regarding the competitive (dis)advantage of family businesses. The first has used social capital to show how factors such as cohesive clan cultures (Miller, 2003; Miller and Le-Breton-Miller, 2005), ongoing partnering relationships with external stakeholders, close ties that make up for institutional voids (Miller et al., 2009), and the ability to flow family social capital into organizational social capital (Arregle et al., 2007) are central to a family business’s competitive advantage. Conversely, social capital has also been applied to show how too much cooperation in relationships with outside stakeholders (Morck et al., 2005), nepotism, personal rivalries, and altruism (Schulze et al., 2001) can prevent family business from realizing a competitive advantage". Point 19: "Social capital comprises status, reputation, credibility and/ or integrity that might have an effect upon a focal relationship even without the knowledge and/or intervention of one of the actors. Status refers to a perceived social rank or position. Reputation refers to the belief, often a net generalised belief, about an actor’s character. Credibility refers to the state of being endowed with some form of credit, believability and/or competence". Point 20: "We use the term “business constellation” to describe the situation where a group of actors are highly connected by strong, mutual, social capital ties. .... Net social capital exists across the totality of the group of actors concerned in a business constellation and is diffused across the net. It comprises the social capital that any member of the net can draw upon by virtue of being a member of that group". Point 21: "The premise of a relational approach to corporate performance is that corporate actors and their behaviors are “embedded in concrete, ongoing systems of social relations” (Granovetter, 1985, p. 487). To sociologists, organizations do not exist on a market-hierarchy continuum, but instead take on various network forms of governance structure as survival and developmental strategies (Powell, 1990). In such a way, the relational approach helps redefine the social nature of corporate actors and rewrite organizational theories".
Variable 3: Effective social capital practices	Point 6: "Based on Aldridge et al.’s (2002) opinion bonding capital is among individuals who have a close and friendly relationship such as family, close friends and neighbors whereas bridging capital is among individuals who share less common features and friendly relationships such as social or political groups and associations. According to Hitt et al. (2002) structural social capital facilitates collective action through established rules. Social networks, in this regard, supplement rules, procedures and precedents. Cognitive social capital, from Krishna and Uphoff’s (2002) viewpoint includes common norms, values, attitudes, and beliefs, which predisposes people towards mutually beneficial collective action". Point 8: "Building on Moran and Ghoshal's (1996) formulation of value creation as arising from the combination and exchange of resources, Nahapiet and Ghoshal (1)identified three dimensions of social capital structural, relational, and cognitive-and (2) theoretically justified how attributes of each of these dimensions facilitate the combination and exchange of resources within firms". Point 10: "... the social interaction context is singled out by collective GDT [globally distributed team] literature as the prime influence on knowledge-sharing processes and their effect on GDT performance. Broadly adopted in the international management literature, social capital theory is recognized as offering a powerful conceptual lens for developing an integrative perspective beyond individual factors (motivation, attitude, etc.) and general cultural influences (Ghosh and Scott, 2009; Kirsch et al., 2010; Makela et al., 2012; Montazemi et al., 2012; von Stetten et al., 2012)". Point 16: "While social capital is typically examined at a macro level (e.g. culture, nations, communities, and organizations), it has also proved useful in the study of individual relationships (e.g. Burt, 2000; Podolny and Baron, 1997). If we agree that each customer service provider relationship has value to the firm, then examining how value is “stored up” or embedded in these individual relationships is an important avenue of inquiry for marketing. A better understanding of the social capital stored in a service provider-customer relationship may allow service firms to appropriate this value by generating customer loyalty". Point 18: "Social capital may be said to be possessed by an actor in relationship to any other actor in a social situation and is represented as a stock that influences, and is influenced by, the social component of any interaction, for example, economic or informational, that occurs between them. Actors can be individuals, groups of individuals, departments, organisations or groups of organisations. Such interactions not only draw upon social capital in order to achieve particular outcomes but also create, maintain and destroy social capital in the process. Thus the social capital concept helps us to understand the gap between the stocks and flows, particularly in social intercourse, and provides a richer view of the nature of the processes involved". Point 22: "As a dynamic process, the formation and mobilization of social capital are culturally and institutionally contextualized. Culture provides values, norms, and meanings for social networking, and formal and informal institutions set up regulative, sometimes coercive, confines within which social capital functions and dysfunctions".
Variable 4: Learn from social capital practices	Point 9: "Taking child safety in Jerusalem as an example, Coleman (1990: 303) showed how certain values collectively held in a society can be a kind of social capital that benefits the society as a whole, even in the absence of specific links between individual members of that society". Point 17: "Stronger relationships, shared beliefs between partners, and multiplex ties result in higher social capital. Marketing research has reported significant positive effects of commitment, relationship strength, relationship closeness, and the like (i.e. proxies for relational social capital) on loyalty-related outcomes (e.g. Bansal et al., 2004; Barnes, 1997; Bove and Johnson, 2001a). There is a dearth of research, however, on the cognitive and structural forms of social capital and this represents a potentially fruitful area of inquiry".

The next step is to relate the cognitive map variables to make up a cognitive map on social capital. The cognitive map and its explanation are presented in the next section.

A cognitive map on social capital and its interpretation

By relating the four variables identified in Table 2, the writer comes up with a cognitive map on social capital, as shown in Figure 1.

These cognitive  map variables, four of them altogether, are related to constitute a systemic image of social capital. The links in the cognitive map (re: Figure 1) indicate direction of influences between variables. The + sign shows that an increase in one variable leads to an increase in another variable while a -ve sign tells us that in increase in one variable leads to a decrease in another variable.  If there no signs shown on the arrows, that means the influences can be positive or negative.

Concluding remarks

The cognitive mapping exercise captures in one diagram some of the main variables involved in social capital. The resultant cognitive map promotes an exploratory way to study social capital in a holistic tone. The experience of the cognitive mapping exercise is that it can be a quick, efficient and entertaining way to explore a complex topic such as social capital in Social Sciences. Finally, readers who are interested in cognitive mapping should also find the article informative on this mapping topic.

Bibliography

1.      Bian, Y. and L. Zhang. 2014. "Corporate social capital in chinese guanxi culture" Contemporary Perspectives on Organizational Social Networks Research in the Sociology of Organizations 40, Emerald: 421-443.

2.      Bjørnskov, C. 2006. "The multiple facets of social capital" European Journal of Political Economy 22, Elsevier: 22-40.

3.      Bowey, J.L. and G. Easton. 2007. "Net social capital processes" Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing 22(3), Emerald: 171-177.

4.      Eden, C. and P. Simpson. 1989. "SODA and cognitive mapping in practice", pp. 43-70, in Rosenhead, J. (editor) Rational Analysis for a Problematic World, Wiley, Chichester.

5.      Eden, C., C. Jones and D. Sims. 1983. Messing about in Problems: An informal structured approach to their identification and management, Pergamon Press, Oxford.

6.      Jones, T. and S.F. Taylor. 2012. "Service loyalty: accounting for social capital" Journal of Services Marketing 26(1), Emerald: 60-74.

7.      Literature on cognitive mapping Facebook page, maintained by Joseph, K.K. Ho (url address: https://www.facebook.com/Literature-on-cognitive-mapping-800894476751355/).

8.      Literature on literature review Facebook page, maintained by Joseph, K.K. Ho (url address: https://www.facebook.com/literature.literaturereview/).

9.      Mahdavi, A. and H. Azizmohammadlou. 2013. "The effects  of industrialization on social capital: the case of Iran" International Journal of Social Economics 40(9), Emerald: 777-796.

10. Managerial intellectual learning Facebook page, maintained by Joseph, K.K. Ho (url address: https://www.facebook.com/managerial.intellectual.learning/).

11. Nordstrom, O.A. and L. Steier. 2015. "Social capital: a review of its dimensions and promise for future family enterprise research" International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research 21(6), Emerald: 801-813.

12. Open University. n.d. "Sign graph" Systems Thinking and Practice (T552): Diagramming, Open University, U.K. (url address: http://systems.open.ac.uk/materials/T552/) [visited at April 10, 2017].

13. Tsai, W.P. and S. Ghoshal. 1998. "Social capital and value creation: the role of intrafirm networks" The Academy of Management Journal 41(4) August: 464-476.

14. Van Dijk, A., P. Hendriks and I. Romo-Leroux. 2015. "Knowledge sharing and social capital in globally distributed execution" Journal of Knowledge Management 20(2), Emerald: 327-343.