‘Professional’ and ‘family-friendship’ social ties in hiring

practices of Russian employees

Evgeniya BalabanovaNational Research University – Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russia

SASE 26th Annual Conference July 10-12, 2014, Chicago

Using personal contacts in job search and job placement on the Russian labor market

• widespread • most important under the conditions of:– high-tension labor markets– high vacancy competition– applying for prestigious and high-paid positions

Hiring ‘by pulling strings’: vice or norm?

Social networks in job search and placement

• ‘strong’ and ‘weak’ ties (Granovetter 1973)• ‘information’ and ‘influence’ networks; ‘informative’ and

‘placement’ referrals (Simon, Warner 1992; Peterson et al. 2000; Yakubovich 2005)

• ‘professional’ (obtained during one’s career), e.g. – reputation in relevant professional community – referrals from previous workplaces– finding job through professional acquaintances

• versus ‘off-professional’ (‘old-boys networks’) – friendship and family ties

Social networks in job search and placement: differences of approaches

‘Strong’ vs. ‘weak’ (Granovetter 1973)

• Intensity and intersection of social contacts

Professional ties vs. family and friends networks

• Sources of social contacts

‘Specialists and managers in Russian business organizations: drivers and tendencies of development’, 2012

Center for Research in Social Organization of a Firm, HSE Faculty of Management

Sampling: 623 white-collar employees in 17 private-owned companies operating in Russia

Location Capital ownership Industries

Subsamples’ names Moscow Regions Domestic Foreign

(US, German)

Prestigious (finances,

services, IT)

Not prestigious (manufacturing)

Subsamples’ size, no. of respondents

323 300 322 301 382 241

Total, respondents 623 623 623

Using of formal and networking channels of job search, %% of valid answers, N=518

Groups most often having network capital

Professional

• males from: – regions; – foreign-owned companies; – prestigious industries (42% among

each)

• respondents from foreign-owned companies in prestigious industries (41%)

• supervisors (37%)• aged 30-39 (35%)• having both professional

experience and special education (34%)

Family-friendship

• aged 19-24 (74%)• respondents from domestic

companies in prestigious industries (73%)

• respondents from regions (71%)

Professional and family-friendship capital: opposition or complementarity?

Group no.

Professional experience (min.

5 years) + special education

(55%)

Professional social capital

(29%)

Family-friendship social

capital (62%)% in the sample

1 – – – 122 + – – 153 + + – 74 + – + 215 – + – 46 – + + 67 – – + 238 + + + 12

TOTAL 100

Job and career satisfaction and organizational commitment: comparison of 8 groups

Group no.

Professional experience +

special education

Professional social capital

Family-friendship social capital

1 – – –2 + – –3 + + –4 + – +5 – + –6 – + +7 – – +8 + + +

Index for professional social capital

Question Binary items included into Index

How did you get to know about vacation for your current workplace?

From colleagues or people I was acquainted with during my previous job

On your opinion, what were the main reasons for your appointment on the current position?

Me and my supervisor worked together on my previous job; he/she knows my professional qualities

On your opinion, what were the main reasons for getting your current job?

• My professional reputation among colleagues• My supervisor’s opinion based on his/her

knowledge of my professional qualities from our previous professional cooperation

Why did you leave your previous job? Opportunity to work with high-qualified professionals I know from my previous job

Index for family-friendship social capital

Question Binary items included into IndexHow did you get to know about vacation for your current workplace?

From my friends or relatives

Did you have friends or relatives working in this company before you came here?

• Yes, among subordinates

• Yes, my immediate supervisor was among them

• Yes, among other line or middle managers

• Yes, among top managers

On your opinion, what were the main reasons for your appointment on the current position?

• Close relationships with my immediate supervisor

• Referrals from my friends or relatives

• My reputation of ‘insider’ for this company; I’m well in with influential people here

On your opinion, what were the main reasons for getting your current job?

• Referrals from my friends or relatives

• Referrals from some influential persons

• Friendship or family ties with key personnel in the company

• My supervisor’s opinion based on his/her knowledge of my loyalty and agreeableness

Why did you leave your previous job? Opportunity to work with pleasant people I’m well in with (friends, relatives)

Regression models for employees’ well-being, standardized β-coefficients

VariablesCareer

promotionsFamily material

well-being

Wages are higher than average in the city for the

same job

Job satisfaction Organizational commitment

Career satisfaction

I II I II I II I II I II I II

Professional qualification (1=having both 5-year work experience and special education)

,103* ,053 -,033 -,009 -,033 -,009 -,082* -,059 ,014 -,057 ,022 -,017

Professional social capital ,107** ,023 ,152*** ,071 ,121** ,059 ,149*** ,116** ,112* ,074 ,091* ,033

Family-friendship social capital ,080* ,076* -,035 ,029 -,031 -,005 -,006 -,034 -,030 -,006 -,021 -,031

Location (1 = Moscow, 2 = regions)

,029 -,234*** -,044 -,073 -,151*** -,092*

Capital ownership (1 = domestic, 2 = foreign)

,044 ,302*** ,213*** -,050 ,135** ,004

Industry 1 = prestigious, 2 = not prestigious)

-,027 -,152*** -,094* -,235*** -,169*** -,175***

Gender (1 = male, 2 = female) -,070 ,038 -,002 ,001 ,106** ,034

Age -,066 -,081* -,061 -,009 ,235*** ,046

Position (1 = without subordinates, 2 = having subordinates)

,376*** ,216*** ,087* ,131** ,127** ,303***

Adjusted R2 ,023** ,159*** ,020** ,229*** ,011* ,072*** ,022** ,082*** ,010* ,158*** ,005 ,125***

Conclusions (1)

Conclusions (2)

• ‘old-boys networks’ is rather a compensatory hiring mechanism that provides only one-time or initial advantages for relatively uncompetitive applicants, e.g.– the first position in the career – getting a job after a period of unemployment or being out of the labor force– moving from the ‘bad’ workplace to a ‘good’ one

• using informal relatives’ or friends’ contacts to find jobs is rather a last resort for low-resource workers which stay on their jobs because of few alternative choices rather than because of better match quality (Loury 2006)

Directions for further research

Professional reputation and professional social networks: ‘meritocratic’ or ‘anti-meritocratic’ factors of development?