IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/mgtdec/v40y2019i7p823-837.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Academic scholarship, organization prestige, and the earnings of U.S. business school deans

Author

Listed:
  • João Ricardo Faria
  • Daniel M. Gropper
  • Franklin G. Mixon
  • Julissa Y. Santoyo

Abstract

This study models the market for business school deans as an outcome of a differential game between a university's central administration and the job candidates in the market for business school deans. In our model, the ability of a business school dean to advance the organization is enhanced by his or her own scholarly reputation, such that a job candidate chooses an optimal level of scholarship that relates to his or her marketability. In this way, the supply of scholarship (by job candidates) can be seen as the supply of job candidates in the market for business school deans, whereas the demand for scholarship can be seen as the demand for business school deans. The main features of our game‐theoretic model are tested using data from both national and regional business schools and colleges in the U.S. Econometric results indicate that each additional scholarly contribution by a business school dean generates a wage premium ranging from $1,000 to $1,200, whereas in the case of national institutions, each additional student enrolled at the doctoral (master's) level raises the wage by $671 ($56). Lastly, the production of between nine and 10 scholarly contributions is found to be necessary in order to face a 50% probability of holding a business school deanship at a national institution, whereas production of about 37 scholarly contributions leads to a 50% probability of holding a deanship with a named business school at a national institution.

Suggested Citation

  • João Ricardo Faria & Daniel M. Gropper & Franklin G. Mixon & Julissa Y. Santoyo, 2019. "Academic scholarship, organization prestige, and the earnings of U.S. business school deans," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 40(7), pages 823-837, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:mgtdec:v:40:y:2019:i:7:p:823-837
    DOI: 10.1002/mde.3048
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/mde.3048
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/mde.3048?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. João Ricardo Faria & Franklin G. Mixon, 2020. "The Peter and Dilbert Principles applied to academe," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 115-132, June.
    2. João Ricardo Faria & Steven B. Caudill & Daniel M. Gropper & Franklin G. Mixon, 2022. "Negotiation and bargaining power in the determination of administrative wages in academe," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 43(7), pages 2935-2940, October.

    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:wly:mgtdec:v:40:y:2019:i:7:p:823-837. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/7976 .

    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.