How stars matter: Recruiting and peer effects in evolutionary biology

Ajay Agrawal; John McHale; Alexander Oettl

doi:10.1016/j.respol.2017.02.007

How stars matter: Recruiting and peer effects in evolutionary biology

Ajay Agrawal
, John McHale
, Alexander Oettl

Research output: Contribution to a Journal (Peer & Non Peer) › Article › peer-review

59 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The peer-effects literature highlights several distinct channels through which colleagues may affect individual and organizational performance. Building on this, we examine the relative contributions of different channels by decomposing the productivity effect of a star's arrival on (1) incumbents and (2) new recruits. Using longitudinal, university-level data, we report that hiring a star does not increase overall incumbent productivity, although this aggregate effect hides offsetting effects on related (positive) versus unrelated (negative) colleagues. However, the primary impact comes from an increase in the average quality of subsequent recruits, an effect that is most pronounced at non-highly-ranked institutions. We discuss the implications of our results for star-focused strategies to improve organizational performance.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	853-867
Number of pages	15
Journal	Research Policy
Volume	46
Issue number	4
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2017.02.007
Publication status	Published - 1 May 2017
Externally published	Yes

Keywords

Innovation
Peer effects
Recruiting
Spillovers
Stars

Access to Document

10.1016/j.respol.2017.02.007

Cite this

@article{4daacee028e34277a79a2375f63a2186,

title = "How stars matter: Recruiting and peer effects in evolutionary biology",

abstract = "The peer-effects literature highlights several distinct channels through which colleagues may affect individual and organizational performance. Building on this, we examine the relative contributions of different channels by decomposing the productivity effect of a star's arrival on (1) incumbents and (2) new recruits. Using longitudinal, university-level data, we report that hiring a star does not increase overall incumbent productivity, although this aggregate effect hides offsetting effects on related (positive) versus unrelated (negative) colleagues. However, the primary impact comes from an increase in the average quality of subsequent recruits, an effect that is most pronounced at non-highly-ranked institutions. We discuss the implications of our results for star-focused strategies to improve organizational performance.",

keywords = "Innovation, Peer effects, Recruiting, Spillovers, Stars",

author = "Ajay Agrawal and John McHale and Alexander Oettl",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2017 Elsevier B.V.",

year = "2017",

month = may,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1016/j.respol.2017.02.007",

language = "English",

volume = "46",

pages = "853--867",

journal = "Research Policy",

issn = "0048-7333",

publisher = "Elsevier B.V.",

number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - How stars matter

T2 - Recruiting and peer effects in evolutionary biology

AU - Agrawal, Ajay

AU - McHale, John

AU - Oettl, Alexander

PY - 2017/5/1

Y1 - 2017/5/1

N2 - The peer-effects literature highlights several distinct channels through which colleagues may affect individual and organizational performance. Building on this, we examine the relative contributions of different channels by decomposing the productivity effect of a star's arrival on (1) incumbents and (2) new recruits. Using longitudinal, university-level data, we report that hiring a star does not increase overall incumbent productivity, although this aggregate effect hides offsetting effects on related (positive) versus unrelated (negative) colleagues. However, the primary impact comes from an increase in the average quality of subsequent recruits, an effect that is most pronounced at non-highly-ranked institutions. We discuss the implications of our results for star-focused strategies to improve organizational performance.

AB - The peer-effects literature highlights several distinct channels through which colleagues may affect individual and organizational performance. Building on this, we examine the relative contributions of different channels by decomposing the productivity effect of a star's arrival on (1) incumbents and (2) new recruits. Using longitudinal, university-level data, we report that hiring a star does not increase overall incumbent productivity, although this aggregate effect hides offsetting effects on related (positive) versus unrelated (negative) colleagues. However, the primary impact comes from an increase in the average quality of subsequent recruits, an effect that is most pronounced at non-highly-ranked institutions. We discuss the implications of our results for star-focused strategies to improve organizational performance.

KW - Innovation

KW - Peer effects

KW - Recruiting

KW - Spillovers

KW - Stars

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85014803457

U2 - 10.1016/j.respol.2017.02.007

DO - 10.1016/j.respol.2017.02.007

M3 - Article

SN - 0048-7333

VL - 46

SP - 853

EP - 867

JO - Research Policy

JF - Research Policy

IS - 4

ER -

How stars matter: Recruiting and peer effects in evolutionary biology

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this