In other words, a relationship, or sequence of successful transactions in

the eyes of both parties, is dependent, at least in part, upon either held or anticipated
value in the field. That is, if a relationship is based on the fact that one party is an agent
and the other is an executive, and the agent loses their position, then the normative
definition of the relationship we have a strong relationship may become out of sync
with the objective foundations of their exchange. Third, is the unfolding transaction
between the parties over time and the accumulation of social debts and credits as
temporal sequence. These debts and credits manifest themselves as moral feelings of
obligations of things owed. Yet, all to often, these debts are never repaid and the credits
given never incur any interest or reward.
The proposed model of social capital, and its application to the substantive area of
interest, Hollywood, will proceed in three stages. First, it will be shown how the strategic
value of social capital as brokerage results from the failure of the formal brokers in the
field to broker on behalf of both the buyers and the sellers in the marketplace. Second,
different objective basis of exchange will be considered: position, quality, status,
emotion, and context. Third, the importance of the three disconnects in social capital
synchronicity, asymmetry, and sequence will be shown to be the basis of the strategies
for social capital activation in the field. Last, the conclusion will link these empirical
findings to broader debates about social capital.

In order to examine how the field takes on a network form of organization, it is necessary
to draw the distinction between network brokerage as a function of location in the social
structure and formal brokers as a legitimate role defined in the field. Although Burt
(2005) in his seminal work on network brokerage notes that some roles have formal roles
as brokers he does not address it empirically by exploring instead how managers,
primarily, may occupy locations in the social structure that bridge structural holes defined
by relations of interpersonal communication. However, the presence of formal brokers in
the field is not incidental or additive to the process of network brokerage but structures
significantly how relationships come to form social capital. When network brokerage
takes place within Hollywood agencies it is subject to the potentially conflictual
incentives, interests and practices inherent in the organization which may lead to
brokerage failure. This creates a competitive advantage for those players in the field
who are able to form and use relationships independent of the agencies and deal directly
with other players. It is this central dynamic that orders the organizational arrangement
of brokerage in the field.