4.4 Article

More or less guanxi: Trust is 60% network context, 10% individual difference

Journal

SOCIAL NETWORKS
Volume 54, Issue -, Pages 12-25

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.socnet.2017.12.001

Keywords

Trust; Guanxi; Network closure; Entrepreneurs; Social isolation

Funding

  1. University of Chicago Booth School of Business
  2. Marianne and Marcus Wallenberg Foundation
  3. Jan Wallanders and Tom Hedelius Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The strong ties known in China as guanxi can be distinguished by a high level of trust relatively independent of the surrounding social structure. Using network data from a stratified probability sample of 700 entrepreneurs citing 4664 contacts, we study guanxi relative to other relations to learn how much individual differences such as well-being, business differences, political participation and demographic factors matter for the guanxi distinction. Two findings stand out: First, the connection between trust and social network is robust to most differences between individuals, especially business and political differences. Trust variance is 60% network context, and 10% individual differences. Trust increases within a relationship as network closure increases around the relationship, but some relationships mature into guanxi ties within which trust is high and relatively independent of the surrounding social structure. Second, when individual differences matter, they concern social isolation. Guanxi ties are more distinct in the networks around entrepreneurs with small, marginal families, and around those with small, closed networks. Both categories of entrepreneurs are likely to experience difficulties with respect to resource access and doing business with people beyond their network, which may explain why longstanding guanxi ties linked to important events are particularly distinct for these entrepreneurs. (C) 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available