2020
DOI: 10.1177/0019793919896755
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Hiring Your Friends: Evidence from the Market for Financial Economists

Abstract: The authors study connections in academic hiring in a sample of finance doctoral graduates. Departments hire PhD graduates with school connections to other recently hired faculty at a significantly greater rate than models predict. Similarly, schools exhibit an elevated propensity to hire individuals with names that indicate a similar ethnic background to incumbent department members. School-connected hires tend to publish at significantly elevated rates, a finding that is robust to a large number of model mod… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 48 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Due to confidentiality rules, we could not retrieve information about individual scientific productivity; the "Robustness tests" section explored the possibility of a systematic productivity gap between mobile and non-mobile, foreign and national researchers, and found little support in this respect. Other relevant factors, such as personal ties (e.g., Fisman et al, 2018;Hadlock & Pierce, 2021) or institutional prestige and ties (Burris, 2004), were not explored. Moreover, future research needs to shed more light on differences within the group of mobile and foreign scientists, based, for instance, on the prestige of institution of origin and the strength of scientific relationships between two countries, as well as explore more in depth the reasons underpinning the effect of important variables such as gender, and type of funding support, which are beyond the scope of this study.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Due to confidentiality rules, we could not retrieve information about individual scientific productivity; the "Robustness tests" section explored the possibility of a systematic productivity gap between mobile and non-mobile, foreign and national researchers, and found little support in this respect. Other relevant factors, such as personal ties (e.g., Fisman et al, 2018;Hadlock & Pierce, 2021) or institutional prestige and ties (Burris, 2004), were not explored. Moreover, future research needs to shed more light on differences within the group of mobile and foreign scientists, based, for instance, on the prestige of institution of origin and the strength of scientific relationships between two countries, as well as explore more in depth the reasons underpinning the effect of important variables such as gender, and type of funding support, which are beyond the scope of this study.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition to the fact that search committee members cannot know all there is to know about the candidates under consideration, it is also the case that search committee members do not give every bit of information they do collect equal attention. For example, search committee members accord particular weight to similarities they perceive between themselves and certain candidates (Rivera, 2012(Rivera, , 1001Hadlock & Pierce, 2021). Search committee members may also focus more heavily on some pieces of information or some candidate characteristics than others, at times relying on cognitive shortcuts to make hiring decisions.…”
Section: Search Committee Members and Information Gatheringmentioning
confidence: 99%