Embeddedness and Price Formation in the Corporate Law Market

By Brian Uzzi, Ryon Lancaster. 2004

294 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Accounting, Economics and Econometrics, Strategy and Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/d5a03088cf2e51ebb6ec6df28080521bc1c6a897

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Accounting

In Economics and Econometrics

In Strategy and Management

Citations in the corpus

Do International Networks and Foreign Market Knowledge Facilitate SME Internationalization? Evidence from the Czech Republic (2014, background): “In addition, networks are likely to be beneficial in the reduction of transaction costs associated with the acquisition and ascertaining of market knowledge (Uzzi & Lancaster, 2004).”
Where Do Prices Come From? Sociological Approaches to Price Formation (2011, methodology): “An application of this theory is offered by Uzzi and Lancaster (2004), who observe in their study on pricing strategies of law firms that such firms often sit on the board of companies.”
Economization, part 2: a research programme for the study of markets (2010, background): “Work exploring the relationship between social networks and pricing (Baker, 1984; Uzzi & Lancaster, 2004) confronts this question albeit indirectly.”
Betrayal as Market Barrier: Identity-Based Limits to Diversification among High-Status Corporate Law Firms1 (2013, background): “As discussed in re- cent work on “status advantage” in markets ðCorrell et al. 2012; cf. Jensen 2006; Uzzi and Lancaster 2004Þ, the key reason high-status professional firms or high-status brands are desirable is because everyone knows ðthat everyone knows that . . . etc.Þ these are the most…”
Tracking the numbers: Across accounting and finance, organizations and markets (2009, background): “While structural and institutional approaches in economic sociology (e.g. Carruthers & Stinchcombe, 2001; Smith 1989; Uzzi & Lancaster, 2004) see numerical data as endowed with meaning and trust by the authoritative nature of the channels through which they circulate, by formal rules, and by…”
Cooperation in Microcredit Borrowing Groups: Identity, Sanctions, and Reciprocity in the Production of Collective Goods (2005, background): “…of diverse collective goods including, informal economic exchange (DiMaggio and Louch 1998), firm survival (Uzzi 1996), coordination of political action among corporate actors (Mizruchi 1989), even decreasing price volatility in financial markets (Baker 1984, see also Uzzi and Lancaster 2004).”
Gender-role Incongruity and Audience-based Gender Bias: An Examination of Networking among Entrepreneurs (2020, background): “Decision makers often rely on status orderings in these cases based on the belief that most other people prefer higher-status options (Uzzi and Lancaster, 2004; Adut, 2005; Espeland and Sauder, 2007; Correll et al., 2017).”
It’s the Conventional Thought That Counts (2017, background): “…SEI model in suggesting that high-status firms are favored because they are perceived to be higher quality, but a different logic may also be at work (see Jensen 2006; Uzzi and Lancaster 2004), whereby the appeal of a high-status firm is that it provides a surer basis for projecting accountability.”
Category Spanning, Evaluation, and Performance: Revised Theory and Test on the Corporate Law Market (2016, unknown): “In the context of professional service firms where quality is difficult to observe directly, clients rely on indirect indicators (Greenwood et al., 2005), which point to evaluation-related benefits (Benjamin & Podolny, 1999; Uzzi & Lancaster, 2004).”