Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Is there a closure penalty? Cohesive network structures, diversity, and gender inequalities in career advancement


Author Info

  • Lutter, Mark
Registered author(s):


    That social capital matters is an established fact in the social sciences. How different forms of social capital affect gender disadvantages in career advancement is less clear, however. Qualitative research suggests that women face disadvantages in project-based labor markets where recruitment practices are based on informal and personal networks. Focusing on a project-based type of labor market, namely the U.S. film industry, this study argues that women suffer from social closure and face severe career disadvantages when collaborating in cohesive teams. At the same time, gender disadvantages are reduced for women who build social capital in open networks with a higher degree of diversity and information flow. I test and demonstrate these assumptions using a large-scale longitudinal dataset containing full career profiles of more than 1.2 million performances by 101,090 film actors in 483,949 feature film productions between the years 1900-2010. In particular, I analyze career survival models and interaction effects between gender and different measures of social capital and information openness. The findings reveal that female actors have a higher risk of career failure than their male colleagues when affiliated in cohesive networks, but have better survival chances when embedded in open and diverse structures. This study contributes to the understanding of how and what type of social capital can be either a beneficial resource for otherwise disadvantaged groups or a constraining mechanism that intensifies gender differences in career advancement. -- Sozialkapital stellt insbesondere auf projektorientierten Arbeitsmärkten eine wichtige Erfolgsressource dar. Auf die Frage, wie verschiedene Formen der sozialen Einbettung auf geschlechtsspezifische Erfolgsungleichheiten wirken, gibt es jedoch bislang keine eindeutige Antwort. Bisherige Einzelfalluntersuchungen legen nahe, dass Frauen besonders dann benachteiligt sind, wenn Rekrutierungspraktiken in hohem Maße auf informellen und auf persönlichen Netzwerken beruhen. Am Beispiel eines projektorientierten und durch informelle Rekrutierung gekennzeichneten Winner-take-all-Arbeitsmarktes - der US-Filmbranche - wird argumentiert, dass Frauen besonders dann Benachteiligungen erfahren, wenn sie ihre Karriere häufiger in engmaschigen, stark kohäsiven Teams aufbauen. Dagegen können sie Benachteiligungen deutlich reduzieren, wenn sie sich häufiger in Projektteams bewegen, die sich durch offene Netzwerkstrukturen und breite Erfahrungshintergründe auszeichnen. Auf Basis von Ereignisdatenanalysen und der Untersuchung vollständiger Karriereprofile von 101.090 US-Filmschauspielern in 483.949 Spielfilmproduktionen mit mehr als 1,2 Millionen Engagements testet der Beitrag diese Argumentation und zeigt - anhand diverser Indikatoren zur Messung von Teamkohäsion, Kollaborationshäufigkeit, Informationszugang und -vielfalt -, dass kohäsive Netze geschlechtsspezifische Karriereungleichheiten verstärken, während offene Netzwerke Benachteiligungen deutlich reduzieren. Vermutlich sind der in diesen Netzen höhere Informationsfluss und vor allem die Diversität der geteilten Informationen entscheidende Faktoren, die geschlechtstypische Benachteiligungen aufheben können. Diese Studie erweitert das Verständnis darüber, wie und unter welchen Bedingungen Sozialkapital zu einer vorteilhaften Ressource für benachteiligte Gruppen wird, und wann es beschränkende, Benachteiligungen intensivierende Wirkungen entfaltet.

    Download Info

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Bibliographic Info

    Paper provided by Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies in its series MPIfG Discussion Paper with number 13/9.

    as in new window
    Date of creation: 2013
    Date of revision:
    Handle: RePEc:zbw:mpifgd:139

    Contact details of provider:
    Postal: Paulstr. 3, 50676 Köln
    Phone: + 49 (0) 221-2767-0
    Web page:
    More information through EDIRC

    Related research


    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
    as in new window
    1. Andersen, Kristina Vaarst, 2013. "The problem of embeddedness revisited: Collaboration and market types," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 139-148.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)



    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.


    Access and download statistics


    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:mpifgd:139. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (ZBW - German National Library of Economics).

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.