IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/indcch/v33y2024i1p172-193..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

New entrants, incumbents, and the search for knowledge: the role of job title ambiguity in the US information and communication technology industry, 2004–2014

Author

Listed:
  • Diego Zunino
  • Bruno Cirillo
  • Filippo Carlo Wezel
  • Stefano Breschi

Abstract

New entrants and incumbent firms rely on new knowledge to innovate and compete in the market. One way to acquire new knowledge is through the recruitment of new employees from competitors, a phenomenon popularly known as “poaching.†Digital labor platforms are widely used by firms for this aim. We argue that job titles represent the first and most visible public source of information about knowledge workers and thus play a key role in navigating the vast spectrum of competencies available in digital platforms. Our analyses of the career trajectories of 11,644 knowledge workers in the United States between 2004 and 2014 suggest that increases in the ambiguity of a job title claimed by an employee are negatively associated with the likelihood of the employee being hired by a new employer. This finding appears stronger in the case of transitions to incumbent firms rather than new entrants. In the concluding section of the paper, we take stock of the various analyses presented and reflect on the potential role of job titles in the strategic management of human capital.

Suggested Citation

  • Diego Zunino & Bruno Cirillo & Filippo Carlo Wezel & Stefano Breschi, 2024. "New entrants, incumbents, and the search for knowledge: the role of job title ambiguity in the US information and communication technology industry, 2004–2014," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 33(1), pages 172-193.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:indcch:v:33:y:2024:i:1:p:172-193.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/icc/dtad034
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:indcch:v:33:y:2024:i:1:p:172-193.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/icc .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.