فایل ورد کامل اندازه گیری سرمایه اجتماعی از طریق تحلیل شبکه و تاثیر آن بر روی عملکرد فردی

توجه : به همراه فایل word این محصول فایل پاورپوینت (PowerPoint) و اسلاید های آن به صورت هدیه ارائه خواهد شد

این مقاله، ترجمه شده یک مقاله مرجع و معتبر انگلیسی می باشد که به صورت بسیار عالی توسط متخصصین این رشته ترجمه شده است و به صورت فایل ورد (microsoft word) ارائه می گردد

متن داخلی مقاله بسیار عالی، پر محتوا و قابل درک می باشد و شما از استفاده ی آن بسیار لذت خواهید برد. ما عالی بودن این مقاله را تضمین می کنیم

فایل ورد این مقاله بسیار خوب تایپ شده و قابل کپی و ویرایش می باشد و تنظیمات آن نیز به صورت عالی انجام شده است؛ به همراه فایل ورد این مقاله یک فایل پاور پوینت نیز به شما ارئه خواهد شد که دارای یک قالب بسیار زیبا و تنظیمات نمایشی متعدد می باشد

توجه : در صورت مشاهده بهم ریختگی احتمالی در متون زیر ،دلیل ان کپی کردن این مطالب از داخل فایل می باشد و در فایل اصلی فایل ورد کامل اندازه گیری سرمایه اجتماعی از طریق تحلیل شبکه و تاثیر آن بر روی عملکرد فردی،به هیچ وجه بهم ریختگی وجود ندارد

تعداد صفحات این فایل: ۲۷ صفحه

یافته ها نشان می دهند که PDI یک شاخص جایگزین مفید برای اندازه گیری عملکرد محقق در شبکه هم نویسندگی او با در نظر گرفتن تنوع مخاطبان(تماس ها) و نیز ارزش و قدرت آن ها( عملکرد) می باشد. PDI افراد با ارتباطات مستقیم را با افراد قدرتمند مختلف شناسایی می کند. PTDI، افراد دارای ارتباطات قوی مستقیم با افراد قدرتمند مختلف را شناسایی می کند. این شاخص ها، نشان دهنده قدرت و تاثیر توانایی فرد برای کنترل ارتباطات و اطلاعات می باشد.
با استفاده از این شاخص های جدید برای شبکه های اجتماعی دیگر به منظور تست ارتباط آن ها با عملکرد افراد می تواند یک دنباله مفید از شاخص های مرکزیت استاندارد و یک شاخص مناسب برای عملکرد افراد در یک شبکه باشد. به منظور رسیدن به این هدف، ارزیابی این شاخص های جدید با آزمون آن در سایر شبکه های اجتماعی نیاز است.

عنوان انگلیسی:Measuring social capital through network analysis and its influence on individual performance~~en~~

Introduction Notable sociologists such as Burt (1992), Coleman (1988), and Granovetter (1973) claim that individuals’ personal characteristics are not their only success factors; rather it is the extent of social capital accrued in their respective personal networks that is more influential (Oh, Choi, & Kim, 2006). The core idea of social capital is that a person’s, or a group of people’s, associates (e.g., family members, friends, colleagues) form an important asset that can be used to gain optimal performance (Woolcock & Narayan, 2000). Social capital produces bene- fits or outcomes for individuals and collective actors which drive from their social structure (Burt, 1992). The concept of social capital provides a useful and comprehensive conceptual perspective (Sawyer, Crowston, & Wigand, 1999; Tsai & Ghoshal, 1998) for understanding the benefits and outcomes of individual and collective action, as well as value creation within a networking context. Accordingly, social capital has been defined as “the set of social resources embedded in relationships” (Tsai & Ghoshal, 1998, p. 464). Social capital has three components: structural, relational, and cognitive (Tsai & Ghoshal, 1998; Wellman, 1988). The structural dimension involves social interaction that the actor uses to gain access, information, or resources. The relational dimension encompasses aspects that arise from interactions, including trust and loyalty. The cognitive dimension includes attributes such as shared norms, codes of action, and convergence of views. In this line of research, studies have anticipated “the creation of value” owing to the existence of social relationships (Arregle, Hitt, Sirmon, & Very, 2007). Research suggests that conceptualizing social capital in terms of network structures, as articulated by the strength of weak ties theory (Granovetter, 1973, 1983), provides valuable insight into scholars’ coauthorship activities. In most large organizations performance of individuals and teams is measured through a set of metrics that pertain to task and contextual performance. Similarly, in academia, scholars and scientists are evaluated on their academic performance (e.g., research productivity, teaching evaluations, governance capabilities, funded research grants). Such evaluation of scholars is necessary, not only for faculty recruitment and promotion schemes, but also for industry and government funding allocation, as well as for achieving a high reputation within the research community (Abbasi & Jaafari, 2013). Collaboration is essential in the enhancement of knowledge and experience of graduate students and post-doctoral researchers (Bozeman & Corley, 2004) and also leads to improved productivity of scholars (Melin, 2000). On a global level, with respect to governmental funding (i.e., the allocation of funding for a specific project to a scientific research group) and university strategy, it is important to identify key scholars, collaboration areas, and research strengths within universities, with the aim of maximizing research output, cost optimization, and resource utilization. A researcher’s time, abilities, skills, and resources are understood to be restricted. Therefore, to conduct most large research projects, collaboration is required and, in turn, often leads to large-scale scientific collaboration. Bringing together scholars with different skills, expertise, and knowledge as human capital, in group work is, thus, essential (McFadyen, Semadeni, & Cannella, 2009). Diversity of actors involved in group work then facilitates the integration of expertise, contributes to successful projects’ implementation, and accelerates cycle time for new product development (Cummings, 2004; Eisenhardt & Tabrizi, 1995; Griffin & Hauser, 1992; Pinto, Pinto, & Prescott, 1993). However, in such group work, a basic and shared understanding of each participant’s knowledge and expertise is crucial to the overall understanding of the project, or research, as a whole. A coauthorship network represents a form of collaboration among scholars that includes scientific interactions and collective action to conduct research, producing results in the form of a publication. Therefore, social norms and trust build among scholars, over time, through collaborations and constitute a form of social capital for academia. In other words, when researchers collaborate on projects they share substantial amounts of knowledge. This flow of knowledge becomes a stock of knowledge that mutually benefits the researchers (Dierickx & Cool, 1989). Therefore, social capital resulting in collaboration networks can be used to explain the concept of knowledge capital (Oh et al., 2006). The motivating questions for this study were as follows: (a) How does one measure the concept of social capital of scholars (b) Do scholars’ social capital metrics associate with their performance 2. Problem statement The number of collaborations is the simplest proxy for quantifying the collaborative activities of scholars. Other studies have used concepts such as proximity (e.g., Frenken, Hardeman, & Hoekman, 2009; Havemann, Heinz, & Kretschmer, 2006; Ponds, van Oort, & Frenken, 2007) and diversity (e.g., Abbasi & Jaafari, 2013) to conceptualize the frequency of relationships among authors and institutions.

$$en!!