The Credibility of Social Climbing: When Does Inter-Firm Mobility [Not] Influence Organizational Status?

References

• Arndt M, Bigelow B (2000) Presenting structural innovation in an institutional environment: Hospitals’ use of impression management. Admin. Sci. Quart. 45(3):494–522.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bastedo MN, Bowman NA (2010) The U.S. News and World Report college rankings: Modeling institutional effects on organizational reputation. Amer. J. Ed. 116(5):163–184.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Beckman CM (2006) The influence of founding team company affiliations on firm behavior. Acad. Management J. 49(4):741–758.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Benjamin BA, Podolny JM (1999) Status, quality, and social order in the California wine industry. Admin. Sci. Quart. 44(3):563–589.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burt RS, Kilduff M, Tasselli S (2013) Social network analysis: Foundations and frontiers on advantage. Annual Rev. Psych. 64(1):527–547.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Castellucci F, Ertug G (2010) What’s in it for them? Advantages of higher-status partners in exchange relationships. Acad. Management J. 53(1):149–166.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chen G, Hambrick DC, Pollock TG (2008) Puttin’ on the Ritz: Pre-IPO enlistment of prestigious affiliates as deadline-induced remediation. Acad. Management J. 51(5):954–975.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Collet F, Hedström P (2013) Old friends and new acquaintances: Tie formation mechanisms in an interorganizational network generated by employee mobility. Soc. Networks 35(3):288–299.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cowen A (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
• 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
• Elsbach KD (1994) Managing organizational legitimacy in the California cattle industry: The construction and effectiveness of verbal accounts. Admin. Sci. Quart. 39(1):57–88.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Espeland W, Sauder M (2007) Rankings and reactivity: How public measures recreate social worlds. Amer. J. Soc. 113(1):1–40.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fiske ST, Taylor SE (1991) Social Cognition (McGraw-Hill, New York).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Galanter M, Palay T (1994) Tournament of Lawyers: The Transformation of the Big Law Firm (University of Chicago Press, Chicago).Google Scholar
• Gao GA, Gopal A, Agarwal R (2010) Contingent effects of quality signaling: Evidence from the Indian offshore IT services industry. Management Sci. 56(6):1012–1029.Link, Google Scholar
• Garicano L, Hubbard T (2007) Managerial leverage is limited by the extent of the market: Hierarchies, specialization, and the utilization of lawyers’ human capital. J. Law Econom. 50(1):1–43.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gulati R, Higgins MC (2003) Which ties matter when? The contingent effects of inter organizational partnerships on IPO success. Strategic Management J. 24(2):127–144.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gould RV (2002) The origins of status hierarchies: A formal theory and empirical test. Amer. J. Soc. 107(5):1143–1178.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hahl O, Gosline R (2014) May I deviate, please? Firm status and the efficacy of assertive versus deferential anticipatory impression management. Working paper, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh.Google Scholar
• Harvey P, Madison K, Martinko M, Crook TR, Crook TA (2014) Attribution theory in the organizational sciences: The road traveled and the path ahead. Acad. Management Perspect. 28(2):128–146.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Haunschild PR, Beckman CM (1998) When do interlocks matter? Alternate sources of information and interlock influence. Admin. Sci. Quart. 43(4):815–844.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Heinz JP, Laumann EO (1982) Chicago Lawyers: The Social Structure of the Bar (Russell Sage Foundation, New York).Google Scholar
• Jensen M (2003) The role of network resources in market entry: Commercial banks entry into investment banking, 1991–1997. Admin. Sci. Quart. 48(3):466–497.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
• Jones EE, Nisbett RE (1972) The actor and the observer: Divergent perceptions of the causes of behavior. Jones EE, Kanouse DE, Kelley HH, Nisbett RE, Valins S, Weiner B, eds. Attribution: Perceiving the Causes of Behavior (General Learning Press, Morristown, NJ), 79–94.Google Scholar
• Kelley HH (1973) The process of causal attribution. Amer. Psychologist 28(2):107–128.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kelley HH, Michela JL (1980) Attribution theory and research. Annual Rev. Psych. 31(February):457–501.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lee PM, Pollock TG, Jin K (2011) The contingent value of venture capitalist reputation. Strategic Organ. 9(1):33–69.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Leuven E, Sianesi B (2003) PSMATCH2. Accessed December 1, 2015, http://ideas.repec.org/c/boc/bocode/s4232001.Google Scholar
• MacKinnon DP, Lockwood CM, Williams J (2004) Confidence limits for the indirect effect: Distribution of the product and resampling methods. Multivariate Behav. Res. 39(1):99–128.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McPherson JM, Smith-Lovin L (1987) Homophily in voluntary organizations: Status distance and the composition of face-to-face groups. Amer. Soc. Rev. 52(3):370–379.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Park SH, Westphal JD (2013) Social discrimination in the corporate elite how status affects the propensity for minority CEOs to receive blame for low firm performance. Admin. Sci. Quart. 58(4):542–586.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Phillips DJ (2002) A genealogical approach to organizational life changes. Admin. Sci. Quart. 47(3):474–506.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Phillips D, Zuckerman E (2001) Middle status conformity: Theoretical restatement and empirical demonstration in two markets. Amer. J. Soc. 107(2):379–429.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Phillips DJ, Turco CJ, Zuckerman E (2013) Betrayal as market barrier: Identity-based limits to diversification among high-status corporate law firms. Amer. J. Soc. 118(4):1023–1054.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Phillips KW, Rothbard NP, Dumas TL (2009) To disclose or not to disclose? Status distance and self-disclosure in diverse environments. Acad. Management Rev. 34(4):710–732.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Podolny JM (1993) A status based model of market competition. Amer. J. Soc. 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. Soc. 107(1):33–60.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Podolny JM (2005) Status Signals: A Sociological Study of Market Competition (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Google Scholar
• Podolny JM, Phillips D (1996) The dynamics of organizational status. Indust. Corporate Change 5(2):453–471.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, 1986–1994. Acad. Management J. 45(3):491–507.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Reagans R, McEvily B (2003) Network structure and knowledge transfer: The effects of cohesion and range. Admin. Sci. Quart. 48(2):240–267.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Roberts PW, Khaire M, Rider C (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
• Sauder M, Lynn F, Podolny JM (2012) Status: Insights from organizational sociologists. Annual Rev. Soc. 38(August):267–283.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shipilov AV, Li SX, Greve HR (2011) The prince and the pauper: Search and brokerage in the initiation of status-heterophilous ties. Organ. Sci. 22(6):1418–1434.Link, Google Scholar
• Silver C (2007) Local matters: Internationalizing strategies for U.S. law firms. Indiana J. Global Legal Stud. 14(1):67–93.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stuart T, Hoang H, Hybels R (1999) Interorganizational endorsements and the performance of entrepreneurial ventures. Admin. Sci. Quart. 44(2):315–349.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Washington M, Zajac E (2005) Status evolution and competition: Theory and evidence. Acad. Management J. 48(2):282–296.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Weiner B (1995) Attribution theory in organizational behavior: A relationship of mutual benefit. Martinko M, ed. Attribution Theory: An Organizational Perspective (St. Lucie Press, Delray Beach, FL), 3–6.Google Scholar
• Wezel FC, Cattani G, Pennings JM (2006) Competitive implications of interfirm mobility. Organ. Sci. 17(6):691–709.Link, Google Scholar
• Zhao W, Zhou X (2011) Status inconsistency and product valuation in the California wine market. Organ. Sci. 22(6):1435–1448.Link, Google Scholar