Starstruck: How Hiring High-Status Employees Affects Incumbents’ Performance

References

• Acemoglu D, Autor D, Lyle D (2004) Midcentury women, war, and wages: The effect of female labor supply on the wage structure at midcentury. J. Political Econom. 112(3):497–551.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Acharya AG, Pollock TG (2013) Shoot for the stars? Predicting the recruitment of prestigious directors at newly public firms. Acad. Management J. 56(5):1396–1419.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Agrawal A, McHale J, Oettl A (2017) How stars matter: Recruiting and peer effects in evolutionary biology. Res. Policy 46(4):853–867.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aguinis H, O’Boyle E (2014) Star performers in twenty-first century organizations. Personnel Psych. 67(2):313–350.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
• Almirall D, Griffin BA, McCaffrey DF, Ramchand R, Yuen RA, Murphy SA (2014) Time-varying effect moderation using the structural nested mean model: Estimation using inverse-weighted regression with residuals. Statist. Medicine 33(20):3466–3487.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Azoulay P, Graff-Zivin J, Wang J (2010) Superstar extinction. Quart. J. Econom. 125(2):549–589.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Azoulay P, Stuart T, Wang Y (2014) Matthew: Effect or fable? Management Sci. 60(1):92–109.Link, Google Scholar
• Barber B, Lehavy R, Trueman B (2007) Comparing the stock recommendation performance of investment banks and independent research firms. J. Financial Econom. 85(2):490–517.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bendersky C, Hays NA (2012) Status conflict in groups. Organ. Sci. 23(2):323–340.Link, 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
• Bidwell M (2011) Paying more to get less: The effects of external hiring versus internal mobility. Admin. Sci. Quart. 56(3):369–407.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bidwell M, Won S, Barbulescu R, Mollick E (2015) I used to work at Goldman Sachs! How firms benefit from organizational status in the market for human capital. Strategic Management J. 36(8):1164–1173.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Blau P (1964) Exchange and Power in Social Life (Wiley, New York).Google Scholar
• Bothner M, Kang J, Stuart T (2007) Competitive crowding and risk taking in a tournament: Evidence from NASCAR racing. Admin. Sci. Quart. 52(2):208–247.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bothner M, Kim Y, Smith E (2012) How does status affect performance? Status as an asset vs. status as a liability in the PGA and NASCAR. Organ. Sci. 23(2):416–433.Link, Google Scholar
• Bothner M, Podolny J, Smith E (2011) Organizing contests for status: The Matthew effect vs. the Mark effect. Management Sci. 57(3):439–457.Link, Google Scholar
• Bowers AH, Greve HR, Mitsuhashi H, Baum JAC (2014) Competitive parity, status disparity, and mutual forbearance: Securities analysts’ competition for investor attention. Acad. Management J. 57(1):38–62.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bowers A, Prato M (2017) The structural origins of unearned status: How arbitrary changes in categories affect status position and market impact. Admin. Sci. Quart., ePub ahead of print August 18, http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0001839217727706.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bunderson JS, Reagans RE (2011) Power, status, and learning in organizations. Organ. Sci. 22(5):1182–1194.Link, Google Scholar
• Burt RS (2007) Second hand brokerage: Evidence on the importance of local structure for managers, bankers, and analysts. Acad. Management J. 50(1):119–148.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carhart M (1997) On persistence in mutual fund performance. J. Finance 52(1):57–82.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Casciaro T, Lobo MS (2014) Affective primacy in intraorganizational task networks. Organ. Sci. 26(2):373–389.Link, 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
• Castilla E (2008) Gender, race, and meritocracy in organizational careers. Amer. J. Sociol. 113(6):1479–1526.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Castilla E, Benard S (2010) The paradox of meritocracy in organizations. Admin. Sci. Quart. 55(4):543–676.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cattani G, Ferriani S, Mariani MM, Mengoli S (2013) Tackling the “Galácticos” effect: Team familiarity and the performance of star-studded projects. Indust. Corporate Change 22(6):1629–1662.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
• Clement M (1999) Analyst forecast accuracy: Do ability, resources, and portfolio complexity matter? J. Accounting Econom. 27(3):285–303.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Collins R (2004) Interaction Ritual Chains (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Crossref, Google Scholar
• D’Aveni R (1996) A multiple-constituency, status-based approach to interorganizational mobility of faculty and input-output competition among top business schools. Organ. Sci. 7(2):166–189.Link, Google Scholar
• De Vaan M, Stark D, Vedres B (2015) Game changer: The topology of creativity. Amer. J. Sociol. 120(4):1–51.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Doyle S, Lount R, Wilk S, Pettit N (2016) Helping others most when they’re not too close: Status distance as a determinant of interpersonal helping in organizations. Acad. Management Discoveries 2(2):155–174.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Emerson RM (1962) Power-dependence relations. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 27(1):31–41.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Emery DR, Li X (2009) Are the Wall Street analyst rankings popularity contests? J. Financial Quant. Anal. 44(2):1–27.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ertug G, Castellucci F (2013) Getting what you need: How reputation and status affect team performance, hiring, and salaries in the NBA. Acad. Management J. 56(2):407–431.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fama EF, French KR (1993) Common risk factors in the returns on stocks and bonds. J. Financial Econom. 33(1):3–56.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Faries DE, Kadziola ZA (2010) Analysis of longitudinal observational data using marginal structural models. Faries DE, Leon AC, Haro JM, Obenchain RL, eds. Analysis of Observational Health Care Data Using SAS (SAS Institute, Cary, NC), 211–229.Google Scholar
• Fewell Z, Wolfe F, Choi H, Hernán MA, Tilling K, Sterne JAC (2004) Controlling for time-dependent confounding using marginal structural models. Stata J. 4(4):402–420.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gasparino C (2005) Blood on the Street: The Sensational Inside Story of How Wall Street Analysts Duped a Generation of Investors (Simon and Schuster, New York).Google Scholar
• Gould E (2002) The origins of status hierarchies: A formal theory and empirical test. Amer. J. Sociol. 107(5):1143–1178.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Graffin SD, Ward AJ (2010) Certifications and reputation: Determining the standard of desirability amidst uncertainty. Organ. Sci. 21(2):331–346.Link, Google Scholar
• Groysberg B (2010) Chasing Stars: The Myth of Talent and the Portability of Performance (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Groysberg B, Healy PM (2013) Wall Street Research: Past, Present, and Future (Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Groysberg B, Healy PM, Maber D (2011) What drives sell-side analyst compensation at high-status investment banks? J. Accounting Res. 49(4):969–1000.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Groysberg B, Lee LE, 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
• Groysberg B, Polzer JT, Elfenbein HA (2011) Too many cooks spoil the broth: How high-status individuals decrease group effectiveness. Organ. Sci. 22(3):722–737.Link, Google Scholar
• Groysberg B, Healy PM, Serafeim G, Shanthikumar D (2013) The stock selection and performance of buy-side analysts. Management Sci. 59(5):1062–1075.Link, Google Scholar
• Hays NA, Bendersky C (2015) Not all inequality is created equal: Effects of status versus power hierarchies on competition for upward mobility. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 108(6):867–882.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hernán M, Brumback B, Robins JM (2001) Marginal structural models to estimate the joint causal effect of nonrandomized treatments. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 96(454):440–448.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hong H, Kacperczyk M (2010) Competition and bias. Quart. J. Econom. 125(4):1683–1725.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hong H, Kubik JD, Solomon A (2000) Security analysts’ career concerns and herding of earnings forecasts. RAND J. Econom. 31(1):121–144.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Institutional Investor (1996) Andrew Melnick, director of global equity research at Merrill Lynch, “25th All America Research Team” (October):52.Google Scholar
• Jasso G (2013) Studying status: An integrated framework. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 66(1):96–124.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jensen M, Kim H (2015) The real Oscar curse: The negative consequences of positive status shifts. Organ. Sci. 26(1):1–21.Link, 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
• Kehoe R, Tzabbar D (2015) Lighting the way or stealing the shine? An examination of the duality in star scientists’ effects on firm innovative performance. Strategic Management J. 36(5):709–727.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kenny DA, Kashy DA, Cook WL (2006) Dyadic Data Analysis (Guilford Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Kim JW, King BG (2014) Seeing stars: Matthew effects and status bias in Major League Baseball umpiring. Management Sci. 60(11):2619–2644.Link, Google Scholar
• Kovács B, Sharkey A (2014) The paradox of publicity: How awards can negatively affect the evaluation of quality. Admin. Sci. Quart. 59(1):1–33.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lynn FB, Podolny JM, Tao L (2009) A sociological (de)construction of the relationship between status and quality. Amer. J. Sociol. 115(3):755–804.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Magee JC, Galinsky AD (2008) Social hierarchy: The self reinforcing nature of power and status. Acad. Management Ann. 2(1):351–398.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Malter D (2014) On the causality and cause of returns to organizational status: Evidence from the grands crus classés of the Médoc. Admin. Sci. Quart. 59(2):271–300.Crossref, Google Scholar
• March JG (1962) The business firm as a political coalition. J. Politics 24(4):662–678.Crossref, Google Scholar
• March JG, Simon HA (1958) Organizations (Wiley, New York).Google Scholar
• Merton RK (1968) The Matthew effect in science. Science 159(3810):56–63.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Merton RK (1988) The Matthew effect in science, II: Cumulative advantage and the symbolism of intellectual property. Isis 79(4): 606–623.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mikhail M, Walther B, Willis R (1999) Does forecast accuracy matter to security analysts? Accounting Rev. 74(2):185–200.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Moliterno TP, Beck N, Beckman CM, Meyer M (2014) Knowing your place: Social performance feedback in good times and bad times. Organ. Sci. 25(6):1684–1702.Link, Google Scholar
• Naimi AI, Moodie EE, Auger N, Kaufman JS (2014) Constructing inverse probability weights for continuous exposures: A comparison of methods. Epidemiology 25(2):292–299.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Oettl A (2012) Reconceptualizing stars: Scientist helpfulness and peer performance. Management Sci. 58(6):1122–1140.Link, Google Scholar
• Pettit NC, Lount RB (2010) Looking down and ramping up: The impact of status differences on effort in intergroup contexts. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 46(1):9–20.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pettit NC, Yong K, Spataro SE (2010) Holding your place: Reactions to the prospect of status gains and losses. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 46(2):396–401.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pfeffer J (1992) Managing with Power: Politics and Influence in Organizations (Harvard Business School Press, Boston).Google Scholar
• Pfeffer J (2001) Fighting the war for talent is hazardous to your organization’s health. Organ. Dynam. 29(4):248–259.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Phillips DJ (2001) The promotion paradox: 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
• Piazza A, Castellucci F (2013) Status in organization and management theory. J. Management 20(10):1–29.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
• Rao H (1994) The social construction of reputation: Certification contests, legitimation, and the survival of organizations in the American automobile industry: 1895–1912. Strategic Management J. 15(S1):29–44.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Reingold D, Reingold J (2009) Confessions of a Wall Street Analyst: A True Story of Inside Information and Corruption in the Stock Market (HarperCollins, New York).Google Scholar
• Reschke BP, Azoulay P, Stuart TE (2017) Status spillovers. Admin. Sci. Quart., ePub ahead of print September 20, http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0001839217731997.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ridgeway CL (2014) Why status matters for inequality. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 79(1):1–16.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. 101(3):147–151.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Robins JM, Hernán M, Brumback B (2000) Marginal structural models and causal inference in epidemiology. Epidemiology 11(5): 550–560.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Robins JM, Hernán MA, Rotnitzky A (2007) Invited commentary on “history-adjusted marginal structural models to estimate time-varying effect modification.” Amer. J. Epidemiology 166(9):994–1002.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rosenkopf L, Almeida P (2003) Overcoming local search through alliances and mobility. Management Sci. 49(6):751–766.Link, Google Scholar
• Rousseau D, Ho V, Greenberg J (2006) I-Deals: Idiosyncratic terms in employment relationships. Acad. Management Rev. 31(4): 977–994.Crossref, 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, Espeland W (2009) The discipline of rankings: Tight coupling and organizational change. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 74(1):63–82.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sauder M, Lancaster R (2006) Do rankings matter? The effects of US news and world report rankings on the admissions process of law schools. Law Soc. Rev. 40(1):105–134.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sauder M, Lynn F, Podolny JMJ (2012) Status: Insights from organizational sociology. Annual Rev. Sociol. 38(1):267–283.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Scheepers D, Ellemers N (2005) When the pressure is up: The assessment of social identity threat in low and high status groups. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 41(2):192–200.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schmalbeck R (1998) The durability of law school reputation. J. Legal Ed. 48(4):568–590.Google Scholar
• Scully G (1999) Free agency and the rate of monopsonistic exploitation in baseball. Jeanrenaud C, Kesenne S, eds. Competition Policy in Professional Sports: Europe After the Bosman Case (Antwerp, Belgium), 59–69.Google Scholar
• Simcoe T, Waguespack D (2010) Status, quality, and attention: What’s in a (missing) name? Management Sci. 57(2):274–290.Link, Google Scholar
• Slavova K, Fosfuri A, De Castro JO (2016) Learning by hiring: The effects of scientists’ inbound mobility on research performance in academia. Organ. Sci. 27(1):72–89.Abstract, Google Scholar
• Smith E, Menon T, Thompson L (2012) Status differences in the cognitive activation of social networks. Organ. Sci. 23(1):67–82.Link, Google Scholar
• Song J, Almeida P, Wu G (2003) Learning-by-hiring: When is mobility more likely to facilitate interfirm knowledge transfer? Management Sci. 49(4):351–365.Link, Google Scholar
• Sorenson O (2014) Status and reputation: Synonyms or separate concepts? Strategic Organ. 12(1):62–69.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Staw BM, Sandelands LE, Dutton JE (1981) Threat-rigidity effects in organizational behavior: A multilevel analysis. Admin. Sci. Quart. 26(3):501–524.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stuart TE, Ding W (2006) When do scientists become entrepreneurs? The social structural antecedents of commercial activity in the academic life sciences. Amer. J. Sociol. 112(1):97–144.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stuart TE, Hoang H, Hybels RC (2011) Interorganizational endorsements and the performance of entrepreneurial ventures. Admin. Sci. Quart. 44(2):315–349.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Thoemmes F, Ong AD (2016) A primer on inverse probability of treatment weighting and marginal structural models. Emerging Adulthood 4(1):40–59.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Thomas-Hunt M, Ogden TY, Neale MA (2003) Who’s really sharing? Effects of social and expert status on knowledge exchange within groups. Management Sci. 49(4):464–477.Google Scholar
• Thompson J (1967) Organizations in Action (McGraw-Hill, New York).Google Scholar
• Tzabbar D (2009) When does scientist recruitment affect technological repositioning? Acad. Management J. 52(5):873–896.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tzabbar D, Vestal A (2015) Bridging the social chasm in geographically distributed R&D teams: The moderating effects of relational strength and status asymmetry on the novelty of team innovation. Organ. Sci. 26(3):811–829.Link, Google Scholar
• Tzabbar D, Silverman BS, Aharanson BS (2015) Learning by hiring or hiring to avoid learning? J. Managerial Psych. 30(5):550–564.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Van de Rijt A, Shor E, Ward C, Skiena S (2013) Only 15 minutes? The social stratification of fame in printed media. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 78(2):266–289.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Van der Vegt G, Bunderson J, Oosterhof A (2006) Expertness diversity and interpersonal helping in teams: Why those who need the most help end up getting the least. Acad. Management J. 49(5): 877–893.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Van der Vegt GS, de Jong SB, Bunderson JS, Molleman E (2010) Power asymmetry and learning in teams: The moderating role of performance feedback. Organ. Sci. 21(2):347–361.Link, Google Scholar
• Wade JB, Porac JF, Pollock TG, Graffin SD (2006) The burden of celebrity: The impact of CEO certification contests on CEO pay and performance. Acad. Management J. 49(4):643–660.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
• Wodtke GT, Almirall D (2017) Estimating moderated causal effects with time-varying treatments and time-varying moderators: Structural nested mean models and regression with residuals. Sociol. Methodology 47(1):212–245.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wodtke GT, Elwert F, Harding DJ (2016) Neighborhood effect heterogeneity by family income and developmental period. Amer. J. Sociol. 121(4):1168–1222.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wodtke GT, Harding DJ, Elwert F (2011) Neighborhood effects in temporal perspective. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 76(5):713–736.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yue LQ, Luo J, Ingram P (2013) The failure of private regulation. Admin. Sci. Quart. 58(1):37–68.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zucker L, Darby M, Armstrong J (2002) Commercializing knowledge: University science, knowledge capture, and firm performance in biotechnology. Management Sci. 48(1):138–153.Link, Google Scholar