Social Capital at the Top: Effects of Social Similarity and Status on Ceo Compensation.

Executive compensation in Asia: A critical review and outlook

“…Social network approach This approach argues that executive compensation is also influenced by the social capital of a firm's CEO and the chair of its compensation committee (Belliveau, O'Reilly, & Wade, 1996), where social capital refers to the resources available through the social network and elite institutional ties. For example, firms tend to pay more to CEOs with greater external directorate networks, particularly under diversification strategy (Geletkanycz, Boyd, & Finkelstein, 2001).…”

Jeong exchange and collective leadership in Korean organizations

“…Individuals mobilize guanxi to achieve their goals, or to Bbetter their own situations^ (Leana, & Van Buren, 1999: 539) by exploiting social capital. Social network theory positions it as a private good, which primarily benefits the individuals who are in a social structure (Belliveau, O'Reilly, & Wade, 1996;Burt, 1992Burt, , 1997Kostova, & Roth, 2003;Useem, & Karabel, 1986). Although ties are a crucial feature of social capital (Adler, & Kwon, 2002), guanxi emphasizes personal benefits, rather than benefits to the collective.…”

When and why hierarchy steepness is related to team performance

“…They argue that awareness about each other's status position within a team provides role clarity and helps avoid costly fights that can harm the achievement of collective team goals (Magee & Galinsky, 2008;Sirot, 2000;Sneddon, Hawkesworth, Braithwaite, & Yerbury, 2006). Yet, other scholars emphasize that in teams with steeper status hierarchies, members at the top can exert too much influence over team decisions (Bales, Strodtbeck, Mills, & Roseborough, 1951;Berger, Rosenholtz, & Zelditch, 1980) and receive more recognition for their task contributions than those lower in the hierarchy (Belliveau, O'Reilly, & Wade, 1996; Van der Vegt, Bunderson, & Oosterhof, 2006). As this disparity can create feelings of unfairness and suppresses the potentially useful voice of low-status members, steeper hierarchies should instigate conflict and, hence, compromise team performance (cf.…”