American Journal of Sociology
1950 1951 1953 1955 1958 1959 1960 1961 1963 1966 1968 1969 1970 1971 1973 1976 1981 1991 1994 1995 1996 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Promotion Paradox: Organizational Mortality and Employee Promotion Chances in Silicon Valley Firms, 1946-1996 [статья]
Опубликовано на портале: 29-05-2004Damon J. Phillips American Journal of Sociology. 2001. Vol. 106. No. 4. P. 1058-1098.
This article argues that there is a promotion paradox a negative relation between firm life chances and employee promotion chances. Author argues that this is due to a firms bargaining power, which increases with firms competitive strength. Author finds strong support using data on 50 years of Silicon Valley law firms and attorneys. Young, small, specialist, and low-status firms are more likely to fail but are also contexts with the highest promotion likelihood. Moreover, except for those firms that are "near death," an associate's promotion likelihood increases with the law firm's probability of failure.
Опубликовано на портале: 29-05-2004Olav Sorenson, Stuart E. Toby American Journal of Sociology. 1970. Vol. 106. No. 6. P. 1546-1588.
Sociological investigations of economic exchange reveal how institutions and social structures shape transaction patterns among economic actors. This article explores how interfirm networks in the U.S. venture capital (VC) market affect spatial patterns of exchange. Evidence suggests that information about potential investment opportunities generally circulates within geographic and industry spaces. In turn, the circumscribed flow of information within these spaces contributes to the geographic- and industry-localization of VC investments. Empirical analyses demonstrate that the social networks in the VC community built up through the industry's extensive use of syndicated investing diffuse information across boundaries and therefore expand the spatial radius of exchange. Venture capitalists that build axial positions in the industry's coinvestment network invest more frequently in spatially distant companies. Thus, variation in actors' positioning within the structure of the market appears to differentiate market participants' ability to overcome boundaries that otherwise would curtail exchange.