JOURNAL BROWSE
Search
Advanced SearchSearch Tips
How Do South Koreans Perceive Corporate Social Capital and Its Benefits? An Application to Corporations and Community
facebook(new window)  Pirnt(new window) E-mail(new window) Excel Download
 Title & Authors
How Do South Koreans Perceive Corporate Social Capital and Its Benefits? An Application to Corporations and Community
Jin, Bumsub;
  PDF(new window)
 Abstract
A recent public opinion survey found that the anti-corporate sentiment of South Korean citizens is primarily due to the misbehavior of Korean corporations. South Korean citizens` skepticism of corporations may hinder the democratic and economic development of the country. As a driving force for community development, social capital is considered to enable citizens to collaborate with one another to resolve a shared problem. Specifically, this study pays attention to the relationship among social capital, corporate capacity, and trust, which may perhaps contribute to developing a democratic environment in Korean society. The study aims to explore whether Korean citizens` perceived corporate bonding and bridging social capital affect corporate capacity for collaborative action and trust in corporations. A Web survey of 385 South Koreans was conducted. The findings show that perceived bonding social capital among employees is positively related to corporate capacity for collaboration action. Moreover, perceived bonding among employees and bridging social capital between employees and local residents are positively related to corporate capacity for collaboration action and trust in corporations. These findings suggest that researchers and practitioners for organizational development and community-building need to enhance corporate social capital.
 Keywords
Social capital;corporate social responsibility;trust;corporate capacity;community relations;
 Language
English
 Cited by
 References
1.
Bae, J., & Cameron, G. T. (2006). Conditioning effect of prior reputation on perception of corporate giving. Public Relations Review, 32(2), 144-150. crossref(new window)

2.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.

3.
Burke, E. M. (1999). Corporate community relations: The principle of the neighbor of choice. Westport, CT: Praeger.

4.
Cohen, D., & Prusak, L. (2001). In good company: How social capital makes organizations work. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

5.
Coleman, J. C. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94, S95-S120. crossref(new window)

6.
Dolfsma, W., & Dannreuther, C. (2003). Subjects and boundaries: Contesting social capitalbased policies. Journal of Economic Issues, 37(2), 405-413 crossref(new window)

7.
Fukuyama, F. (1995). Trust: The social virtues and the creation of prosperity. New York: Free Press.

8.
Grootaert, C., Narayan, D., Jones, V. N., & Woolcock, M. (2004). Measuring social capital: An integrated questionnaire. Washington, DC: World Bank Publications.

9.
Heath, R. (2006). Onward into more fog: Thoughts on public relations' research directions. Journal of Public Relations Research, (18)2, 93-114 crossref(new window)

10.
Hon, L. C., & Grunig, J. E. (1999). Guidelines for measuring relationships in public relations. Gainesville, FL: The Institute for Public Relations.

11.
Hwang, I., & Song, Y. (2014). A survey of South Koreans' perception on corporate and economic issues: 2014. Seoul. Korean Economic Research Institute.

12.
Jin, B. (2009). The roles of public relations and social capital for communal relationship building: Enhancing collaborative values and outcome. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Florida.

13.
Jin, B. (2014). Disaster handling through volunteering and charitable donation: The roles of South Korean telethon, involvement, and collective-efficacy. Asian Journal for Public Opinion Research, 1(3), 203-216 crossref(new window)

14.
Jin, B., & Lee, S. (2013). Enhancing community capacity: Roles of perceived bonding and bridging social capital and public relations in community building. Public Relations Review, 39(4), 290-292. crossref(new window)

15.
Jin, B. & Lubbers, C. (2006). Integrative theory and collective efficacy as predictors of intention to participate in a campus nonviolence campaign. Business Research Yearbook, 13, 400-404

16.
Jones, V. N., & Woolcock, M. (2007). Using mixed methods to assess social capital in low income countries: A practical guide. Manchester, U.K.: Brooks World Poverty Institute. Retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1205165

17.
Kennan, W. R., & Hazleton, V. (2006). Internal public relations, social capital, and the role of effective organizational communication. In C. H. Botan, & V. Hazleton (Eds.), Public relation theory II (pp. 311-338). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

18.
Ki, E., & Hon, L. (2012). Causal linkages among relationship quality perception, attitude, and behavior intention in a membership organization. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 17(2), 187-208. crossref(new window)

19.
Kim, J., Chang, C., & Lee, H. (2011). A study on the revitalizing community through corporate community investment: In case of 1 Company - 1 Village Campaign. Journal of the Economic Geographical Society of Korea, 14(2), 211-224 crossref(new window)

20.
Kruckeberg, D., & Starck, K. (1988). Public relations and community: A reconstructed theory. New York: Praeger.

21.
Kruckeberg, D., Starck, K., & Vujnovic, M. (2006). The role and ethics of community-building for consumer products and services: With some recommendations for newmarketplace economies in emerging democracies. In C. H. Botan, & V. Hazleton. (Eds.), Public relations theory II (pp. 465-483). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Publishers.

22.
Leonard, M. (2004). Bonding and bridging social capital: Reflections from Belfast. Sociology: The Journal of the British Sociological Association, 38(5), 927-944

23.
Lesser, E. L. (2000). Leveraging social capital in organizations. In E. L. Lesser. (Ed.), Knowledge and social capital: Foundations and applications (pp. 3-16). Woburn, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann.

24.
Luloff, A.E., & Bridger, J. (2003). Community agency and local development. In D. Brown &L. Swanson (Eds.), Challenges for rural America in the twenty-first century (pp. 203-213). University Park, PA: Penn State University Press.

25.
Luoma-aho, V (2009). On Putnam: Bowling together - applying Putnam's theories of community and social capital to public relations. In O. Ihlen, van Ruler, & Fredriksson (Eds.), Public relations and social theory (pp. 231-251). London: Routledge.

26.
Pennings, J. M., Lee, K., & van Witteloostujin, (1998). Human capital, social capital, and firm dissolution. Academy of Management Journal, 41(4), 425-440. crossref(new window)

27.
Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. NY: Simon and Schuster.

28.
Putnam, R. D., & Feldstein, L. M.; with Cohen, D. (2003). Better together: Restoring the American Community. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.

29.
Robison, L . J., Schmid, A. A., & Siles, M. E. (2002). Is social capital really capital? Review of Social Economy, 60(1), 1-21. crossref(new window)

30.
Sommerfeldt, E. J., & Taylor, M. (2011). A social capital approach to improving public relations' efficacy: Diagnosing internal constraints on external communication. Public Relations Review, 37(3), 197-206 crossref(new window)

31.
Statistics Korea & Eurostat European Commission (SK & ES) (2012). The European Union and the Republic of Korea: A statistical portrait. European Union. Retrieved from http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-32-11-816/EN/KS-32-11-816-EN.PDF

32.
Taylor, M. (2009). Civil society as a rhetorical public relations process. In R. Heath, E. L. Toth, & D. Waymer (Eds.), Rhetorical and critical approaches to public relations II (pp. 76-91). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

33.
Wilkinson, K. P. (1991). The community in rural America. Middleton, WI: Social Ecology Press.