Question

Why might acquaintances prove to be more important in the job search process than our family and friends (as is argued in the "strength of weak ties" thesis)? In what circumstances is embeddedness more valuable to a person than weak ties?

Answer 1

We have more weak than solid ties, so the chances are simply higher. On the off chance that you connect with a couple hundred individuals searching for work leads, and chances are that the vast majority of them will be weak ties. In spite of the fact that this may be valid, the proof backings an all the more remarkable clarification: regardless of their sincere goals, solid ties will in general give us excess information. Our nearest contacts will in general know indistinguishable individuals and data from we do. Weak ties travel in various circles and learn various things, so they can offer us progressively effective access to novel data. The greater part of us pass up this novel data, filling our systems with individuals whose points of view are excessively like our own.

Weak ties are a special social asset: they associate us with a more extensive arrangement of interpersonal organizations than do social ties. Acquaintances each have their own solid ties—loved ones to whom they are extremely near. Through your colleagues, you access their solid ties—and to the informal organizations to which they have a place. Every single interpersonal organization offer different assets, for example, data about openings for work, thus by associating with a more prominent number of informal communities, by means of feeble social ties, you access increasingly conceivable business openings. Embeddedness alludes to how much ties are strengthened through circuitous ways inside an informal organization. The more implanted a tie is, the more grounded it is.