Its Not What You Know But Who You Know – Should The Elite Use Their Networks To Secure Employment?
By Joyeeta Dey
20 November, 2014
Countercurrents.org
Why not?
Currently there is a growing problem of educated unemployment. For many this education is hard won and they are not willing to settle for jobs lower than a certain status. It usually happens that in most unequal societies high status jobs are partially blocked by the social elite. Wherever the role of networking for employment's role in furthering socio-economic inequality has been researched, the relationship has been seen to be positive. In this invisible job market vacancies are not advertised so they travel internally within certain social groups and access to these social groups has been seen to be directly linked to family income.
Before exploring this idea I would like to clarify that the extent to which this contributes to the problem of educated unemployment in India is not yet known. And this is no way an attempt to take away from the conversation on the need for training in skill sets in academic courses.
Why do we do it?
Recruiters operate under a knowledge deficit because of the thinness of information available through resumes and interviews and the consequent ease of going wrong. When candidates arrive through a network of trust more is seen as accounted for. This process is seen to yield candidates of approximately the same productivity as through a ‘fair' process. This spares the organization the high cost of a recruitment process. There is also the argument that networking itself is an important skill in the workplace and if someone has demonstrated the ability in that area it is only counted as a strength by a recruiter. An argument which may have greater moral legitimacy now with the rise of more egalitarian forums for professional networking such as LinkedIn. The theory of weak ties states that most jobs are acquired through ones acquaintances or ‘weak ties' (as opposed to family, close friends who are ‘strong ties'), and they increase with increase in qualifications, showing that networking isn't merely about privilege but also involves agency .For example, accessing college alumni networks. At the same much empirical evidence shows the need for a critical mass of ‘contacts' to gain a reasonable chance at gaining employment.
Those ‘recommending' the aspirants are often seen to experience an ego thrill out of being beneficient which comes allied with a sense of achievement at being able to do this for someone. In many cases a relationship of exchange is set up and this favour is granted with the expectation of similar favours in return.
In the fiercely competitive race between approximate equals, introducing an edge of personal and previous acquaintance leads to enormous gain given the extent to which one's job contributes to one's social standing. On the converse side, if the job hunter is currently unemployed there is the shame and loss of credibility that comes with it. Another thing that aids this process is the extreme endorsement for this practice that comes from nearly all quarters along with the simultaneous invisibilization of the process. That and the low need to meet those who do not benefit from this system keeps guilt at bay. Unfortunately, those who benefit from this system do so so substantially that it becomes easy to forget those out in the cold.
Can we stop?
If we have a rare skill, or one in high demand in the economy, (such as coding) or both, then the need for this is reduced and this process can be avoided.
At the same time, even if one is extremely principled, for those born into families with rich access to networks this becomes hard to avoid as some part of it is automatic.
Should we stop entirely?
I think an instructive example can be found in a story from post apartheid South Africa. The earlier ghettoisation had led to connections developing between rich and poor Blacks as they were enclosed in the same residential areas. After apartheid was lifted it was seen that the employment rates in poor blacks dramatically fell, as rich blacks moved into white areas . Some kinds of networking, therefore, do not further inequality but how far does it go to challenge its current structure?
Joyeeta Dey is currently working with a non-profit research team in West Bengal . She has a Masters degree in Sociology of Education from the Institute of Education, University of London and Bachelors in Philosophy from St. Stephen's College, Delhi University. Joyeeta most enjoys contemporary poetry and modern art.
Bibliography
1.Gender in Academic Networking: The Role of Gatekeepers in Professorial Recruitment.Marieke van den Brink and Yvonne Benschop. Journal of Management Studies 51:3 May 2014.doi: 10.1111/joms.12060
2. The Micro-politics of Gendering in Networking.Yvonne Benschop. Gender, Work and Organization. Vol. 16 No. 2 March 2009
3.A dynamic model of job networking and social influences on employment . Brian V. Krauth.Journal of Economic Dynamics & Control 28 (2004) 1185 – 1204
4.Social networking and inequality: the role of clustered networks. Emanuela D'Angelo and Marco Lilla. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society 2011, 4, 63–77doi:10.1093/cjres/rsq034
5.Social Network Analysis.John Scott.SAGE, 19-Nov-2012
Comments are moderated