ISSC 2016 : International Soft Science Conference

The Social Capital, Marketing Capability and Competitive

Advantage: Evident from Indonesian SMEs
Aluisius Hery Pratonoa*, Ruswiati Surya Saputrab, Jatie K. Pudjibudojoc
* Corresponding author: Aluisius Hery Pratono, hery_pra@staff.ubaya.ac.id

a
Universitas Surabaya, Raya Kalirungkut, Surabaya 60293, Indonesia, hery_pra@staff.ubaya.ac.id
b
Othman Yeop Abdullah School of Business, Universiti Utara Malaysia, 06010 UUM Sintok, Malaysia, ruswiati@uum.edu.my
c
Universitas Surabaya, Raya Kalirungkut, Surabaya 60293, Indonesia, jatiekpudjibudojo@yahoo.co.id

Abstract
http://dx.doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2016.08.66
This study has intention to examine the direct impact of social capital and moderating impact of marketing
capability on firms competitive advantage. This study proposes a structural equation model and tests the
hypothesis through generalized structured component analysis with random survey on small medium enterprises in
Indonesia. The approach allows to analysis the ellement of social capital: network, trust and cognitive as well as
the ellements of marketing capability: pricing capability, product development, and marketing communication.
The result indicates the effect both social capital and marketing capability provide complement to the firm
performance. The result indicates that social capital is a unique resource, that enable organization to gain
competitive advantage.

2016 Published by Future Academy www.FutureAcademy.org.uk

Keywords: Social capital; performance; network; trust; cognitive.

1. Introduction

The role of social capital on the firm competitiveness has long been an interest to entrepreneurial
studies. However the transformation process from social capital to firm performance has raised
debates. Major literatures argue that social capital plays pivotal role on firm competitiveness through
providing valuable information access (Kwon and Adler, 2014) a high level of mutual of trust (Li,
Maggitti, Smith, Tesluk, and Katila, 2013). Previous studies also confirm that social capital has a

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial
4.0 Unported License, permitting all non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original
work is properly cited.
eISSN: 2357-1330
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the Organizing Committee

significant impact on innovation and supply channel (Alguezaui and Fillieri, 2010), work environment
(Duffy, Scott, Shaw, Tepper, and Aquino, 2012) and value creation (Afuah, 2013).
On the other hand, some other studies argue that social capital does not have significant impact on
firm performance for some reasons, e.g. the age of firm (Pirolo and Presutti, 2010), organizational
capacity (Jansen, Curseu, Vermeulen, Geurts, and Gibcus, 2011), and institutional context (Stam,
Arzalanian, and Elfiring, 2014). There is also spillover effect of social enterprise that comes from
homophile solidarities, which express similarities (Kwon and Adler, 2014). This article has intention to
fill the gap by investigating the impact of social capital (SC) on performance of small medium
enterprises. To understand the complex relationship, this study involves marketing capability (MC) as a
mediating variable. In addition, this study has intention to understand the impact of each element of SC
and MC through generalized structured component analysis (GeSCA).

2. Literature Review

2.1. Social Capital and Competitive Advantage

The concept of social capital mainly springs from social network theory, which becomes valuable
resources to gain competitive advantage. The measures of networks lay on cohesion and structural
relationship of the actors. The concept of social capital has been emerging from social to individual
perspective with Bourdie and Coleman as founders. Bourdie ponders profitability of social capital as a
private good, which springs from trust among group members along with stable relationship with honor
and reputation, while Coleman considers social capital as a public good which becomes an element of
social structure (Huberer, 2011). This simultaneous process brings about productivity improvement
with high competitiveness level (Denrell, Fang, and Zhao, 2013).
The performance of firms has been enhanced through the concept of competitive advantage that
involves value creating strategy of the firms, which greater than their competitor (Barney, 1991). This
concept of competitive advantages embraces resource-based theory (RBT) that higlights the role of
valuable resource on organizational transformation in small medium enterprises, which characterized
by lack of resource (Bradley, Wiklund, and Shepherd, 2011). The posible performance measures have
been developed with various interest, such as sales performance that indicates reward of sales staffs as
well as performance in marketing management (Homburg, Artz, and Wieseke, 2012). On the other
hand, the business owners consider firm performance is essential to monitor the outcomes of their
organizations in order to gain more profit (Garg, 2013).

2.2. Hypothesis Development

Hypothesis I: social capital has direct effect on firm performance. Social capital has become
major concern in social network theory with aims to understand the social relationship as well as
economic transaction. In the organization context, strong social capital provides positive work
environment (Duffy, Scott, Shaw, Tepper, and Aquino, 2012) and greater life satisfaction (Lim and
Putnam, 2010). Social capital can be a major key for firm performance through innovation as well as

465
http://dx.doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2016.08.66
eISSN: 2357-1330 / Corresponding Author: Aluisius Hery Pratono
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the Organizing Committee of the conference

supply management channel (Pratono, 2016). Greater social capital allows firms to manage their
relationship with other firms, which implies on cost and risk (Alguezaui and Fillieri, 2010).
Hypothesis 1.2. : There is a direct relationship between SC dimension of cognitive and firm
performance. Cognitive dimension refers to collective conscience and identity of the group, which can
bring efficient interaction. Information and resources are more accessible among people with a
collective identity. This dimension is associated with common codes and languages, which spring from
repeated social interaction (structural dimension), which can create trust and mutual commitment.
(Alguezaui and Fillieri, 2010) Collective identity may come with a complex challenge. Diversified
cultural background among the workforce in business organization has been emerged with issue of
organization performance. Cultural diversity may be more relevant to boast performance when learning
orientation among members of a network is greater (Pieterse, Van Knippenberg, and Van Dierendonck,
2013). However, a set of cognitive with moral disengagement allows members of a network to commit
acts, such as social undermining or self-condemnation (Duffy, Scott, Shaw, Tepper, and Aquino,
2012).
Hypothesis 1.3. There is a direct relationship between SC dimension of trust and firm
performance. Trust dimension is the core content of social capital, which enable a social order. In
organization context, social exchange relationship relies on inter-personal trust, which can reduce
uncertainty in relationship and enhance the quality of social exchange. High levels of trust show high
quality of exchange relationship. This implies on ability to access information, support and resources
(Schaubroeck, Peng, and Hannah, 2013). Trust can be divided into cognition-based and affect-based
trust. The cognition-based trust is similar to knowledge-based trust, which refers to confidence in
competence, reliability and dependability to partners. The affect-based trust refers to emotional
dimension embedded in confidence (Schaubroeck, Peng, and Hannah, 2013). Both dimensions play
pivotal role to develop intense personal relationships between leaders and peer group of workers. A
common social identity may elicit more approval and trust. In the context of business communication,
perceived social identity may come from synchronization of communication style, such as gesture,
voice and posture. Because linguistic style may serve as identity-descriptive information which
determines the decision making process, firms need to take into account tailored message to deal with
risk of messenger bias in persuasion context (Ludwig, Ruyter, Friedman, Brggen, Wetzels, and Pfann,
2013).
Hypothesis 2: Marketing capability provides mediating effect that may strengthen effect of
social capital (SC) on firm performance (FP). It is essential to business organization to invest on
social networks to boost their performance, however it does not always the case.. Marketing capability
can provide mediating effect to explain the relationship between structural social capital and marketing
performance (Parra-Requena, Ruiz-Ortega, and Garcia-Villaverde, 2011). However, the dense and
cohesive social networks can generate redundancy in the information exchange and call for marketing
capacity as mediator to drive performance (Rouzis, Hulland, and Barclay, 2010). In addition, Duffy et
al. (2012) identify a risk of moral disengagement, such as condemnation and loathing, due to cognitive
justification. A cognitive brings a constraint to utilize social capital due to exponentially level of social
capital (Oldroyd and Morris, 2012). Another example is strong cohesive work group bring about

466
eISSN: 2357-1330
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the Organizing Committee

dominant voice and views, which affected inferior group, such as woman in workplace (Broadbridge,
2010).

3. Method

This research uses quantitative method with cross-section design. The information required to
answer the research questions refers to quantify relationship among observed variables with family
business as unit analysis. This survey is equated with a list of distributed questionnaires through
random sampling method. To generalize the result, this research employs a random selection procedure
in order to ensure sample representation for the observed population. Data collection was taken in
Surabaya Indonesia with random selected respondents. Based on data based published by Directorate
General of Trade, Ministry of Trade and Industry, this research randomly selected 800 respondents and
send them questionnaires. From 390 respondents who provided contribution, 54% respondents
represent single-family ownership, 24% are partnerships, and the rest are limited corporations. There is
no respondent with go-public companies.

4. Result

Table 1: Path coefficients

Path Estimated Standard Critical

coefficient Errors
Social Capital>Performance 0.443 0.059 7.48*
Social Capital>Marketing Capability 0.641 0.043 14.74*
Marketing Capability> Performance 0.369 0.060 6.18*
Social Capital>Structure 0.902 0.013 71.46*
Social Capital>Trust 0.954 0.006 160.12*
Social Capital>Cognitive 0.939 0.008 117.66*
Marketing Capability>pricing capability 0.848 0.019 43.78*
Marketing Capability>product 0.812 0.025 32.96*
development 0.738 0.029 25.77*
Marketing Capability>marketing
communication
Model Fit
FIT 0.580
AFIT 0.577
GFI 0.990
SRMR 0.105
NPAR 111
*: significant with alpha at 5%

The goodness of fit testing shows that model is nearly fit. FIT 0.58 shows that the model can
explain 58% of the variance in the observed variables. Goodness of Fit Indices (GFI) exceeds 0.90
implies that the model is acceptable. Standardized Root Mean Residual (SRMR) as absolute fit
indicator is 0.105, which indicates that model is nearly perfect. A model should have SRMR smaller
than 0.08 for a good fit model. Path analysis also indicates that the impact of structure, trust and
cognitive on social capital is statistically significant. Similarly, pricing capability, product development
and marketing communication provide significant impact on marketing capability variable.

467
http://dx.doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2016.08.66
eISSN: 2357-1330 / Corresponding Author: Aluisius Hery Pratono
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the Organizing Committee of the conference

The bootstrap calculation shows that social capital (SC) has significant impact on performance (FP)
with t = 7.48 and p<.01. This implies that H1, which explains the relationship between SC and FP is
confirmed. The bootstrap also show that relationship between social capital (SC) and marketing
capability (MC) has t-test of 14.74 and p<.01. This indicates H2 is accepted and social capital (SC) has
significant impact on firm performance (FP). In addition, the impact of SC and FP has significant
impact with t-test = 6.18 and p.01. Hence, H3 is accepted, which implies that there is partial indirect
effect on social capital (SC) on firm performance (FP). Specifically, the role of MC on the relationship
between SC and FP shows complementary mediating effect 0.443x0.641x0.369 = 0.1047 (Zhao,
Lynch, and Chen, 2010).
Trust provides abundant contexts in SMEs. While financial slack is considered to be the most
challenging issue to small businesses (Bradley, Wiklund, and Shepherd, 2011), the businesses still can
seize business opportunities and gain competitive advantage by exploiting social network structure,
trust and cognition. While larger networks is not main factor which can attract customers and develop
market power (Afuah, 2013), this study shows that trust provide greater contribution to the context of
social capital.
This study presents empirical result that explains structural relationship between social capital and
competitive advantage in which marketing capability provides mediating effect. Apparently, terms
partial and full are associated with effect size of a mediating effect. Current practices suggest that
significant indirect effect can be observed even if c is not significant, this research considers that a
wide range of indirect effect level (Rucker, Preacher, Tormala, and Petty, 2011). Instead of claiming
that the result shows partial mediating effect, this research considers that the effect of marketing
capability as mediating variable can be computed by 0.641 x 0.369, which is equivalent to 0.236.

5. Conclusion

Nurturing small businesses should consider the role of social capital. While the businesses are
considered with limited financial resources and out of dated technology, it is important to pay more
attention on social capital as intangible resource, which can turn into performance. This refers to the
strong relationship among the stakeholders, including employees as well as business partners. This
resource can promote knowledge acquisition and innovation (Martnez-Caas, Sez-Martnez, and
Ruiz-Palomino, 2012) as well as positive work environment (Duffy, Scott, Shaw, Tepper, and Aquino,
2012).
This study confirms the combination between resource-based theory and social capital theory that
social capital determines the capacity of firms to control market price over its marginal cost. The result
indicates that social capital is a valuable resource, which allows small businesses to gain competitive
advantage. As the main ellements of social capital, networks, trust and cognitive allow the firms to gain
competitive advantage. Hence, firms performance does not only relies on their marketing capability but
also from social capital.

468
eISSN: 2357-1330
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the Organizing Committee

References

Afuah, A. (2013). Are network effect really all about size? The role of structure and conduct. Strategic
Management Journal , 34, 257-273.
Alguezaui, S., & Fillieri, R. (2010). Investigating the role of social capital in innovation: sparse versus dense
network. Journal of Knowledge Management , 14 (6), 891-909.
Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management , 17 (1), 99-120.
Bradley, S., Wiklund, J., & Shepherd, D. (2011). Swinging a double-edged sword: The effect of slack on
entrepreneurial management and growth . Journal of Business Venturing , 26 (5), 537-554.
Bradley, S., Wiklund, J., & Shepherd, D. (2011). Swinging a double-edged sword: The effect of slack on
entrepreneurial management and growth. Journal of Business Venturing , 6 (5), 537-554.
Broadbridge, A. (2010). Social capital, gender and careers: evidence from retail senior managers. Equality,
Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal , 29 (8), 815-834.
Denrell, J., Fang, C., & Zhao, Z. (2013). Inferring superior capabilities from sustained superior performance: a
bayesian analysis . Strategic Management Journal , 34 (1), 182-195.
Duffy, M., Scott, K., Shaw, J., Tepper, B., & Aquino, K. (2012). A social context model of envy and social
undermining. Academy of Management Journal , 55 (3), 643666.
Garg, J. (2013). Venture boards: distinctive monitoring and implications for firm performance. Academy of
Management Review , 38 (1), 90-108.
Huberer, J. (2011). Social Capital Theory Toward a Methodological Foundation. Prague: Springer Fachmedien
Wiesbaden GmbH.
Jansen, R., Curseu, P., Vermeulen, P., Geurts, J., & Gibcus, P. (2011). Social capital as a decision aid in strategic
decision-making in services organization. Management Decision , 49 (5), 734-747.
Kwon, S.-W., & Adler, P. (2014). Social capital: maturation of a field of research. Academy of Management
Review , 39 (4), 412-422.
Li, Q., Maggitti, P., Smith, K., Tesluk, P., & Katila, R. (2013). Top management attention to innovation: the role
of search selection and intensify in new product introduction. Academy of Management Journal , 56 (3),
893-916.
Lim, C., & Putnam, R. (2010). Religion, social networks and life satisfaction. American Sociological Review , 75
(6), 914-933.
Ludwig, S., Ruyter, K., Friedman, M., Brggen, E., Wetzels, M., & Pfann, G. (2013). More than words: the
influence of affective content and linguistic style matches in online reviews on conversion rates. Journal of
Marketing , 77 (1), 87-103.
Oldroyd, J., & Morris, S. (2012). Catching falling stars: a human resource response to social capital's detrimental
effect of information overload on star employees. Academy of Management Review , 37 (3), 398-418.
Parra-Requena, G., Ruiz-Ortega, M., & Garcia-Villaverde, P. (2011). Towards pioneering through capabilities in
dense and cohesive social networks. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing , 27 (1), 41-56.
Pieterse, A., Van Knippenberg, D., & Van Dierendonck, D. (2013). Cultural diversity and team performance: the
role of team member goal orientation. Academy of Management Journal , 56 (3), 782-804.
Pirolo, L., & Presutti, M. (2010). The impact of social capital on the start-ups' performance growth. Journal of
Small Business Management , 48 (2), 197-227.
Pratono, A.H. (2016). Strategic orientation and information technological turbulence: Contingency perspective in
SMEs. Business Process Management Journal, 22 (2), 368-382.
Rouzis, D., Hulland, J., & Barclay, D. (2010). Does marketing and sales integration always pay off? Evidence
from a social capital perspective . Stockholm: Handelshgskolan.
Rucker, D., Preacher, K., Tormala, Z., & Petty, R. (2011). Mediation analysis in social psychology: current
practices and new recommendations. Social and Personal Psychology Compass , 5 (6), 359-371.
Schaubroeck, J., Peng, A., & Hannah, S. (2013). Developing trust with peers and leaders: impacts on
organizational identification and performance during entry. Academy of Management Journal , 56 (4), 1148
1168.
Stam, W., Arzalanian, S., & Elfiring, T. (2014). Social capital of entrepreneurs and small firm performance: A
meta-analysis of contextual and methodological moderators. Journal of Business Venturing , 29 (1), 152-
173.
Zhao, X., Lynch, J., & Chen, Q. (2010). Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: myths and truths about mediation
analysis. The Journal of Consumer Research , 37 (2), 197-206.

469