Labor Market Advantages of Organizational Status: A Study of Lateral Partner Hiring by Large U.S. Law Firms

References

• Abbott A (1981) Status strain in the professions. Amer. J. Sociol. 86(4):819–835.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Abowd JM, Kramarz F, Margolis DN (1999) High wage workers and high wage firms. Econometrica 67(2):251–333.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Almeida P, Kogut B (1999) Localization of knowledge and the mobility of engineers in regional networks. Management Sci. 45(7):905–917.Link, Google Scholar
• Askin N, Bothner MS (2012) Peer effects in tournaments for status: Evidence from rank dynamics of U.S. colleges and universities. Working paper, University of Chicago, Chicago.Google Scholar
• Baty GB, Evan WM, Rothermel TW (1971) Personnel flows as interorganizational relations. Admin. Sci. Quart. 16(4):430–443.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Benjamin BA, Podolny JM (1999) Status, quality, and social order in the California wine industry, 1981–1991. Admin. Sci. Quart. 44(3):563–589.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bidwell M, Briscoe F (2010) The dynamics of interorganizational careers. Organ. Sci. 21(5):1034–1053.Link, Google Scholar
• Bidwell M, Won S, Barbulescu R, Mollick E (2014) I used to work at Goldman Sachs! How firms benefit from organizational status in the market for human capital. Strategic Management J., ePub ahead of print May 16, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/smj.2272.Google Scholar
• Bielby WT, Bielby DD (1999) Organizational mediation of project-based labor markets: Talent agencies and the careers of screenwriters. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 64(1):64–85.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bothner MS, Smith EB, White HC (2010) A model of robust positions in social networks. Amer. J. Sociol. 116(3):943–942.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Broschak JP (2004) Managers’ mobility and market interface: The effect of managers’ career mobility on the dissolution of market ties. Admin. Sci. Quart. 49(4):608–640.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burton MD, Sørensen JB, Beckman CM (2002) Coming from good stock: Career histories and new venture formation. Res. Sociol. Organ. 19:229–262.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carnahan S, Somaya D (2013) Alumni effects and relational advantage: The impact on outsourcing when a buyer hires employees from a supplier’s competitors. Acad. Management J. 56(6):1578–1600.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chung S, Singh H, Lee K (2000) Complementarity, status similarity, and social capital as drivers of alliance formation. Strategic Management J. 21(1):1–22.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Coff R (1997) Human assets and management dilemmas: Coping with hazards on the road to resource-based theory. Acad. Management Rev. 48(2):374–402.Google Scholar
• Coleman JS (1990) Foundations of Social Theory (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Cowen AP (2012) An expanded model of status dynamics: The effects of status transfer and interfirm coordination. Acad. Management J. 55(5):1169–1186.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Deckop JR (1988) Determinants of chief executive officer compensation. Indust. Labor Relations Rev. 41(2):215–226.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dokko G, Rosenkopf L (2010) Social capital for hire? Mobility of technical professionals and firm influence in wireless standards committees. Organ. Sci. 21(3):677–695.Link, Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt KM, Schoonhoven CB (1990) Organizational growth: Linking founding team, strategy, environment, and growth among U.S. semiconductor ventures, 1978–1988. Admin. Sci. Quart. 35(3):504–529.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Elsbach KD, Glynn MA (1996) Believing your own PR: Embedding identification in strategic reputation. Adv. Strategic Management 13:65–90.Google Scholar
• Fershtman C, Weiss Y (1993) Social status, culture and economic performance. Econom. J. 103(419):946–959.Google Scholar
• Frank RH (1985) Choosing the Right Pond: Human Behavior and the Quest for Status (Oxford University Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Freeman JH (1986) Entrepreneurs as organizational products: Semiconductor firms and venture capital firms. Libecap G, ed. Advances in the Study of Entrepreneurship, Innovation, and Economic Growth, Vol. 1 (JAI Press, Greenwich, CT), 33–52.Google Scholar
• Freeman JH, Hannan MT (1975) Growth and decline processes in organizations. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 40(2):215–228.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Galanter M, Palay T (1991) Tournament of Lawyers (University of Chicago Press, Chicago).Google Scholar
• Gardner T (2005) Interfirm competition for human resources: Evidence from the software industry. Acad. Management J. 48(2):237–256.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gerhart B, Milkovich GT (1990) Organizational differences in managerial compensation and financial performance. Acad. Management J. 33(4):663–691.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Goode WJ (1978) The Celebration of Heroes: Prestige as a Social Control System (University of California Press, Berkeley).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gould RV (2002) The origins of status hierarchies: A formal theory and empirical test. Amer. J. Sociol. 107(5):1143–78.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Groysberg B, Lee L-E, Nanda A (2008) Can they take it with them? The portability of star knowledge workers’ performance. Management Sci. 54(7):1213–1230.Link, Google Scholar
• Heinz JP (2009) When law firms fail. Suffolk Univ. Law Rev. 43:67–78.Google Scholar
• Heinz JP, Nelson RL, Sandefur RL, Laumann EO (2005) Urban Lawyers: The New Social Structure of the Bar (University of Chicago Press, Chicago).Google Scholar
• Higgins MC, Gulati R (2003) Getting off to a good start: The effects of upper echelon affiliations on underwriter prestige. Organ. Sci. 14(3):244–263.Link, Google Scholar
• Higgins MC, Gulati R (2006) Stacking the deck: The effects of top management backgrounds on investor decisions. Strategic Management J. 27(1):1–25.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hillman RW (2002) The hidden costs of lawyer mobility: Of law firms, law schools, and the education of lawyers. Kentucky Law J. 91:299–310.Google Scholar
• Hogan R, Hogan J (1991) Personality and status. Gilbert DG, Connolly JJ, eds. Personality, Social Skills, and Psychopathology: An Individual Differences Approach (Plenum Press, New York), 137–154.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hsu DH (2004) What do entrepreneurs pay for venture capital affiliation? J. Finance 59(4):1805–1844.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jensen M (2006) Should we stay or should we go? Accountability, status anxiety, and client defections. Admin. Sci. Quart. 51(1):97–128.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jensen M, Roy A (2008) Staging exchange partner choices: When do status and reputation matter? Acad. Management J. 51(3):495–516.Crossref, Google Scholar
• King G, Zeng L (2001) Logistic regression in rare events data. Political Anal. 9(2):137–163.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Koppel N (2007) LeBouef shooting for the stars. Law Blog (blog), November 30, http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2007/11/30/leboeuf-shooting-for-the-stars/.Google Scholar
• Lin N (1999) Social networks and status attainment. Annual Rev. Sociol. 25:467–487.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lincoln JR (1984) Analyzing relations in dyads: Problems, models, and an application to interorganizational research. Sociol. Methods Res. 13(1):45–76.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lynn FB, Podolny JM, Tao L (2010) A sociological (de)construction of the relationship between status and quality. Amer. J. Sociol. 115(3):755–804.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Major, Lindsey & Africa (2012) Partner compensation survey: 2012. Report, Major, Lindsey & Africa, Hanover, MD.Google Scholar
• McEvily B, Jaffe J, Tortoriello M (2012) Not all bridging ties are equal: Network imprinting and firm growth in the Nashville legal industry, 1933–1978. Organ. Sci. 23(2):547–563.Link, Google Scholar
• Merton RK (1968) The Matthew effect in science. Science 159(3810):56–63.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Meyer J, Rowan B (1977) Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. Amer. J. Sociol. 83(2):340–363.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Petersen MA (2009) Estimating standard errors in finance panel data sets: Comparing approaches. Rev. Financial Stud. 22(1):435–480.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Phillips DJ (2001) The promotion paradox: The relationship between organizational mortality and employee promotion chances in Silicon Valley law firms, 1946–1996. Amer. J. Sociol. 106(4):1058–1098.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Phillips DJ, Zuckerman EW (2001) Middle-status conformity: Theoretical restatement and empirical demonstration in two markets. Amer. J. Sociol. 107(2):379–429.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Podolny JM (1993) A status-based model of market competition. Amer. J. Sociol. 98(4):829–872.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Podolny JM (1994) Market uncertainty and the social character of economic exchange. Admin. Sci. Quart. 39(3):458–483.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Podolny JM (2001) Networks as the pipes and prisms of the market. Amer. J. Sociol. 107(1):33–60.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Podolny JM (2005) Status Signals (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Google Scholar
• Podolny JM, Phillips DJ (1996) The dynamics of organizational status. Indust. Corporate Change 5(2):453–471.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Podolny JM, Scott-Morton F (1999) Social status, entry, and predation: The case of British shipping cartels, 1879–1929. J. Indust. Econom. 47(1):41–67.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Podolny JM, Stuart TE, Hannan MT (1996) Networks, knowledge, and niches: Competition in the worldwide semiconductor industry. Amer. J. Sociol. 102(3):659–689.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rao H, Drazin R (2002) Overcoming resource constraints on product innovation by recruiting talent from rivals: A study of the mutual fund industry, 1986–94. Acad. Management J. 45(3):491–507.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Roberts PW, Khaire M (2009) Getting known by the company you keep: Publicizing the qualifications and associations of skilled employees. Indust. Corporate Change 18(1):77–106.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Roberts PW, Khaire M, Rider CI (2011) Isolating the symbolic implications of employee mobility: Price increases after hiring winemakers from prominent wineries. Amer. Econom. Rev. Papers Proc. 101(3):147–151.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rosen S (1986) The theory of equalizing differences. Ashenfelter OC, Layard R, eds. Handbook of Labor Economics, Vol. 1 (Elsevier, Amsterdam), 641–692.Google Scholar
• Sauder M (2008) Interlopers and field change: The entry of U.S. news into the field of legal education. Admin. Sci. Quart. 53(2):209–234.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sauder M, Lynn FB, Podolny JM (2012) Status: Insights from organizational sociology. Annual Rev. Sociol. 38:267–283.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sherer PD, Lee K (2002) Institutional change in large law firms: A resource dependency and institutional perspective. Acad. Management J. 45(1):102–119.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Somaya D, Williamson IO, Lorinkova N (2008) Gone but not lost: The different performance impacts of employee mobility between cooperators and competitors. Acad. Management J. 51(5):936–953.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sørensen JB (1999) Executive migration and interorganizational competition. Soc. Sci. Res. 28(3):289–315.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sørensen JB, Sorenson O (2007) Corporate demography and income inequality. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 72(5):766–783.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sorenson O, Audia PG (2000) The social structure of entrepreneurial activity: Geographic concentration of footwear production in the United States, 1940–1989. Amer. J. Sociol. 106(2):424–462.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stern S (2004) Do scientists pay to be scientists? Management Sci. 50(6):835–853.Link, Google Scholar
• Tortoriello M, Perrone V, McEvily B (2011) Cooperation among competitors as status-seeking behavior: Network ties and status differentiation. Eur. Management J. 29(5):335–346.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Triedman J (2006) To lure top laterals, LeBoeuf Lamb turns rainmaker magnet. American Lawyer (February 1) http://www.americanlawyer.com/id=900005547509/To-Lure-Top-Laterals,-LeBoeuf-Lamb-Turns-Rainmaker-Magnet.Google Scholar
• Uzzi B, Lancaster R (2004) Embeddedness and price formation in the corporate law market. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 69(3):319–344.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wezel FC, Cattani G, Pennings JM (2006) Competitive implications of interfirm mobility. Organ. Sci. 17(6):691–709.Link, Google Scholar