Competing for Talents
Though individuals prefer to join groups with high quality peers, there are advantages to being high up in the pecking order within a group if higher ranked members of a group have greater access to the group's resources. When two organizations try to attract members from a ¯xed population of heterogeneous agents, how resources are distributed among the members according to their rank a®ects how agents choose between the organizations. Competition between the two organizations has implications for both the equilibrium sorting of agents and the way resources are distributed within each organization. To compete more intensely for the more talented agents, both organizations are selective and give no resources to their low ranks. In both organizations, higher ranks are rewarded with more resources, with a greater rate of increase in the organization that has a lower average quality in equilibrium.
|Date of creation:||17 Jan 2006|
|Date of revision:||17 Jan 2006|
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.economics.ubc.ca/|
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Edward P. Lazear, 1984. "Raids and Offermatching," NBER Working Papers 1419, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Moen, Espen R. & Rosén, Åsa, 2002.
"Does poaching distort training?,"
Working Paper Series
4/2002, Swedish Institute for Social Research.
- Ettore Damiano & Hao Li & Wing Suen, 2004.
"First in Village or Second in Rome,"
tecipa-221, University of Toronto, Department of Economics.
- Bruce Sacerdote, 2000.
"Peer Effects with Random Assignment: Results for Dartmouth Roommates,"
NBER Working Papers
7469, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Bruce Sacerdote, 2001. "Peer Effects with Random Assignment: Results for Dartmouth Roommates," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 116(2), pages 681-704.
- Epple, Dennis & Romano, Richard E, 1998. "Competition between Private and Public Schools, Vouchers, and Peer-Group Effects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(1), pages 33-62, March.
- Andrew Postlewaite, .
"The Social Basis of Interdependent Preferences,"
Penn CARESS Working Papers
6bd000503382ae2f0b90d25e3, Penn Economics Department.
- Dan Bernhardt & David Scoones, 1991.
"Promotion: Turnover and Preemptive Wage Offers,"
817, Queen's University, Department of Economics.
- Caillaud, Bernard & Jullien, Bruno, 2003. " Chicken & Egg: Competition among Intermediation Service Providers," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 34(2), pages 309-28, Summer.
- Cole, Harold L & Mailath, George J & Postlewaite, Andrew, 1992. "Social Norms, Savings Behavior, and Growth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 100(6), pages 1092-1125, December.
- Summers, Anita A & Wolfe, Barbara L, 1977. "Do Schools Make a Difference?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 67(4), pages 639-52, September.
- Tranaes, Torben, 2001. "Raiding Opportunities and Unemployment," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 19(4), pages 773-98, October.
- Edward P. Lazear, 2001. "Educational Production," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 116(3), pages 777-803.
- de Bartolome, Charles A M, 1990. "Equilibrium and Inefficiency in a Community Model with Peer Group Effects," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(1), pages 110-33, February.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ubc:pmicro:damiano-06-01-17-02-01-48. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Maureen Chin)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.