The purpose of this study is to increase the understanding of mangergers subjective experiences about the meaning of social capital. The study further aims to identify how managers work at increasing their social capital. The result in this qualitative study is based on interviews with six mangergers. The study's theoretical framework consists of an explanation of social capital from both Pierre Bourdieu and James Coleman. The study is also based on Mark Granovetter's theory about weak ties. The result indicates the managers consider a big social capital as important for their career growth and their performance of work. It also becomes visible that the lack of contacts creates limitations when it comes to access to information and career growth. The results also indicate that social capital can develop in different ways, too both favor their own gain but also ones employees and organization.The conclusion is that the managers who were interviewed in this study believe that social capital has and is important for their career growth and performance of work. Another conclusion is that ones social capital can create limitations. Finally, a conclusion can be drawn that social capital can grow in multiple ways and with different purposes. / Syftet med denna studie är att öka förståelsen för chefers subjektiva erfarenheter av det sociala kapitalets betydelse. Studien syftar vidare till att ta reda på hur chefer går tillväga för att öka sitt sociala kapital. Denna kvalitativa studie baserar sitt resultat på intervjuer med sex stycken chefer. Studiens teoretiska ramverk består av en förklaring av begreppet socialt kapital utifrån både Pierre Bourdieu och James Coleman. Studien baseras också på Mark Granovetters teori om svaga band. Resultatet tyder på att chefer anser att stort socialt kapital är viktigt för deras karriärutveckling och yrkesutövande. Det visar också på att inte känna rätt personer kan begränsa chefer när det kommer till tillgång till information och karriärutveckling. Resultatet visar även att det finns flera sätt att utveckla sitt sociala kapital på, både för att gynna sig själv men också för sina medarbetare och organisationen i stort. Slutsatsen som kan dras är att cheferna som intervjuas i studien anser att socialt kapital har varit och är viktigt för deras karriärutveckling och yrkesutövande. En annan slutsats som kan dras är att socialt kapital kan begränsa cheferna. Till sist kan en slutsats dras att socialt kapital kan utvecklas och vårdas på flera olika sätt och med olika ändamål.

This thesis deals with meetings between peoples during prehistoric times in the northern part of Norrland, Sweden. Particular attention is paid to the possible occurrence of more temporary meetings between people in larger groups at aggregation camps during the period ca 7000 – 0 BC. The study has had the aim of increasing our understanding of how peoples’ meetings and contact networks may have been framed. Thirteen sites that previous research has interpreted to be aggregation camps within our field of study have been analysed and interpreted. These are: Jokkmokk, Purkijaur, Nelkerim, Porsi, Lundfors, Norrfors, Överveda, Rappasundet, Hälla, Lillberget, Glösa, Sörånäset and Ställverksboplatsen (the Ställverket site). The Ställverket site at Näsåker (Nämforsen) has been the object of particular study. It has also been viewed in a broader context by analysis and interpretation of other ancient remains in the neighbouring area. I have argued that some interpretations arrived at in earlier research are problematical and that none of the thirteen sites can be said with certainty to have been an aggregation camp. Thus aggregation camps seem not usually to have been a part of the contact network in the area of study. Instead of using aggregation camps as meeting-places, the people involved seem, at certain times and places, to have maintained contact with each other by means of meetings at the base camps, notably the winter sites. These sites seem to have been rather sedentary and are positioned at fairly even distances from one another. I call this model the base camp model. Some grounds for applying the base camp model seem to exist at certain places in the inland region from the end of the Mesolithic era up to 0 BC. After that contact networks seem to change. In the coastal district it seems possible to apply it to some places from the transition between the Mesolithic – Neolithic Age up to about 2500 BC. Thereafter the picture is unclear. The study does also emphasise however that more in-depth studies are needed to strengthen the viability of the base camp model’s applicability, that there are still big gaps in the material and that much work still remains to be done in order to solve the problems of how aggregation camps can best be defined and how they can be identified archaeologically.