This manuscript provides guidance to Deans and other academic decision makers in the hiring process and dispels the validity of a widely held assumption commonly used as a decision factor in the selection process. This paper investigates: (a) whether graduates of prestigious information systems (IS) doctoral programs (graduates with high-status academic origins) are more likely to be successful in their academic careers (as measured by research productivity) than graduates of less prestigious programs, (b) whether IS faculty who are employed by esteemed universities (faculty with high-status academic affiliations) are more productive researchers than IS faculty employed by lower-status institutions, and (c) examines faculty productivity in terms of Lotka's Law [LOTKA, 1926]. The findings indicate that in the IS field, productivity does not follow a Lotka distribution. Moreover, our study also shows that academic affiliation is a significant determinant of research productivity in terms of quantity (as measured by publication counts) and quality (as measured by citation counts). Contrary to common expectations, however, the analysis shows that the status of a faculty member's academic origin is not a significant determinant of research productivity in the field of information systems. Therefore, continued reliance on academic pedigree as a primary criterion for hiring decisions may not be justified in the IS discipline.Research productivity, usually measured by the number of articles published in quality journals, is a primary criterion for evaluating faculty at research-oriented business schools, particularly with respect to merit raises and promotion and tenure