Status Evolution and Competition: Theory and Evidence

By Marvin Washington, Edward J. Zajac. 2005

627 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Gender Studies, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f4279e32520b6fc81c71ef2a7e3f85c9975401c3

How researchers see this paper

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

In Economics and Econometrics

In Gender Studies

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Unmixed signals: How reputation and status affect alliance formation (2014, background): “This distinction is important because, as Washington and Zajac (2005) have noted, while often conflated in prior studies, the two concepts are analytically distinct.”
Can you have your Cake and Eat it too? Structural Holes' Influence on Status Accumulation and Market Performance in Collaborative Networks (2008, background): “Washington and Zajac (2005) explained that the deployment of status generates privilege-based, rather than merit-based rewards and that status can have effects on competition that may be unrelated to actual performance.”
Viewing usage of counterfeit luxury goods: Social identity and social hierarchy effects on dilution and enhancement of genuine luxury brands (2016, background): “One study of organizations found that companies benefitted more from being associated with high- (than low-) status producers when other companies were uncertain about the company's product value (Stuart, Hoang, & Hybels, 1999; see also, Washington & Zajac, 2005).”
The Strength of Strong Ties in an Emerging Industry: Experimental Evidence of the Effects of Status Hierarchies and Personal Ties in Venture Capitalist Decision Making: The Strength of Strong Ties (2015, neutral): “Venture capital firms evaluating a deal may infer information about the quality of the investment based on the network position or reputation of the venture capital firm (Hochberg et al., 2007; Hsu, 2004; Lynn, Podolny, and Tao, 2009; Washington and Zajac, 2005).”
Network Evolution: The Origins of Structural Holes (2009, background): “Scholars have distinguished status from the economic notion of Network Evolution 7/ASQ, March 2009 reputation, the latter being tied much more directly to the performance of the focal actor itself (Shapiro, 1983; Washington and Zajac, 2005).”
Getting What You Need: How Reputation and Status Affect Team Performance, Hiring, and Salaries in the NBA (2013, background): “Along this line, Washington and Zajac (2005) find that once NCAA basketball teams have been invited to a postseason tournament (i.e., become high-status), they are more likely to be invited to postseason tournaments independently of their performance in the current year and in the previous four…”
Keeping up Appearances (2013, background): “Field hierarchies have become highly quantified in recent years through the creation of reputational rankings and other status markers (Washington and Zajac, 2005).”
Marks of Distinction (2015, background): “Our interest in status stems from the observation that actors do not deploy their framing efforts on an equal playing field: some actors are better positioned than others because of their higher status and enjoy benefits in terms of existing appreciation that make audience members predisposed to pos”
The Psychology of Rivalry: A Relationally Dependent Analysis of Competition (2010, background): “…studies have provided insight on wide range of organizational topics, including equity theory (Harder, 1992), sunk costs (Staw & Hoang, 1995), leadership (Day, Sin, & Chen, 2004; Pfeffer & Davis- Blake, 1986), organizational status (Washington & Zajac, 2005), and risk taking (Bothner et al., 2007).”
Getting on the Front Page: Organizational Reputation, Status Signals, and the Impact of U.S. News and World Report on Student Decisions (2009, background): “field like higher education (Washington and Zajac 2005).”
Alliance partners and firm performance: resource complementarity and status association (2009, background): “We believe that this gap may be better filled by incorporating the institutional perspective.”
Home-Country Networks and Foreign Expansion (2016, neutral): “Reputation is based on the past performance of a focal actor and is a more direct indicator of quality (e.g., Jensen & Roy, 2008; Washington & Zajac, 2005; Wilson, 1985).”
Why 'Good' Firms Do Bad Things: The Effects of High Aspirations, High Expectations and Prominence on the Incidence of Corporate Illegality (2010, neutral): “…exemplar status (Rindova et al., 2007); reputations for particular types of behaviors; reputations with particular stakeholder groups (e.g., consumers); or other types of social evaluations, such as firm celebrity (e.g., Rindova, Pollock, & Hayward, 2006) or status (e.g., Washington & Zajac, 2005).”