Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

When we unite, not divide: status homophily, group average status, and group performance in the Korean film industry

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Asian Business & Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study examines how status conflicts serve as a mechanism underlying the negative impact of status homophily on group performance. In short-term project groups without well-established local status hierarchies, status homophily among members can lead to status conflicts, thereby diminishing group performance. However, we argue that the intensity of these status conflicts differs based on the average status of group members. A group of middle status, which on average comprises members of this status, focuses on both global and local status attainments and, as a result, experiences fewer status conflicts compared to high- and low-status groups, whose members predominantly concentrate on local status attainments. We tested our hypotheses in the Korean film industry from 2004 to 2017. The statistical findings indicate that status homophily among performers was negatively related to commercial success. However, films mainly featuring middle-status performers witnessed a positive effect of status homophily.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

The data of this study are available from the corresponding author, BK, upon reasonable request.

Notes

  1. One of the authors conducted a few informal interviews with directors and executive producers during our research period. All interviewees agreed that although the dominance of major distributors has increased in the Korean film industry, directors still have the most significant influence on film production, especially in comparison to situation in Hollywood.

  2. Two directors are likely to be connected if one of them works on a film by the other director as a producer, writer, or assistant director. As the filmography data includes all film experiences, it is also possible that two directors are connected through a film which neither of them directed.

References

  • Acharya, A. G., & Pollock, T. (2021). Too many peas in a pod? How overlaps in directors’ local and global status characteristics influence board turnover in newly public firms. Academy of Management Journal, 64(5), 1472–1496.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, C., Hildreth, J. A. D., & Howland, L. (2015). Is the desire for status a fundamental human motive? A review of the empirical literature. Psychological Bulletin, 141(3), 574–601.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, C., Srivastava, S., Beer, J. S., Spataro, S. E., & Chatman, J. A. (2006). Knowing your place: Self-perceptions of status in face-to-face groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91(6), 1094–1110.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bakker, R. M., DeFillippi, R. J., Schwab, A., & Sydow, J. (2016). Temporary organizing: Promises, processes, problems. Organization Studies, 37(12), 1703–1719.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bechky, B. A. (2006). Gaffers, gofers, and grips: Role-based coordination in temporary organizations. Organization Science, 17(1), 3–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bendersky, C., & Hays, N. A. (2012). Status conflict in groups. Organization Science, 23(2), 323–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bendersky, C., & Shah, N. P. (2012). The cost of status enhancement: Performance effects of individuals’ status mobility in task groups. Organization Science, 23(2), 308–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blau, P. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cattani, G., & Ferriani, S. (2008). A core/periphery perspective on individual creative performance: Social networks and cinematic achievements in the Hollywood film industry. Organization Science, 19(6), 824–844.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cattani, G., Ferriani, S., & Allison, P. D. (2014). Insiders, outsiders, and the struggle for consecration in cultural fields: A core-periphery perspective. American Sociological Review, 79(2), 258–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cowen, A. P. (2012). An expanded model of status dynamics: The effects of status transfer and interfirm coordination. Academy of Management Journal, 55(5), 1169–1186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delmestri, G., & Greenwood, R. (2016). How Cinderella became a queen: Theorizing radical status change. Administrative Science Quarterly, 61(4), 507–550.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dong, M., Jiao, J., & Xia, J. (2022). Consequences of homophily: Does social status similarity enhance project performance? Asian Business & Management, 21, 58–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duguid, M. M., Loyd, D. L., & Tolbert, P. S. (2012). The impact of categorical status, numeric representation and work group prestige on preference for demographically similar others: A value threat approach. Organization Science, 23(2), 386–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Durand, R., & Jourdan, J. (2012). Jules or Jim: Alternative conformity to minority logics. Academy of Management Journal, 55(6), 1295–1315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ertug, G., Brennecke, J., Kovács, B., & Zou, T. (2022). What does homophily do? A review of the consequences of homophily. Academy of Management Annals, 16(1), 38–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Faulkner, R. R., & Anderson, A. B. (1987). Short-term projects and emergent careers: Evidence from Hollywood. American Journal of Sociology, 92(4), 879–909.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fiske, S. T. (2011). Envy up, scorn down: How status divides us. Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frank, R. H. (1985). Choosing the right pond: Human behavior and the quest for status. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gould, R. V. (2002). The origins of status hierarchies: A formal theory and empirical test. American Journal of Sociology, 107(5), 1143–1178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gould, R. V. (2003). Collision of wills: How ambiguity about social rank breeds conflict. University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Greene, W. H. (2003). Econometric analysis. Pearson Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Groysberg, B., Polzer, J. T., & Elfenbein, H. A. (2011). Too many cooks spoil the broth: How high-status individuals decrease group effectiveness. Organization Science, 22(3), 722–737.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Han, I., & Chuang, C. M. (2015). The antecedents and consequences of local embeddedness: A framework based on the rice industry in Taiwan. Asian Business & Management, 14, 195–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Han, J. H., & Pollock, T. G. (2021). The two towers (or somewhere in between): The behavioral consequences of positional inconsistency across status hierarchies. Academy of Management Journal, 64(1), 86–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jehn, K. A., & Mannix, E. A. (2001). The dynamic nature of conflict: A longitudinal study of intragroup conflict and group performance. Academy of Management Journal, 44(2), 238–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M., Kim, B., & Kim, H. (2011). The importance of status in markets: A market identity perspective. In J. L. Pearce (Ed.), Status in management and organizations (pp. 87–117). Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M., & Kim, H. (2020). Reaching for the stars: The importance of reputational rank in creative career development. Poetics, 80, 101396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M., Kim, H., & Kim, B. (2012). Meeting expectations: A role-theoretic perspective on reputation. In M. L. Barnett & T. G. Pollock (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of corporate reputation (pp. 140–159). Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jin, D. Y. (2019). Transnational Korean Cinema: Cultural politics, film genres, and digital technologies. Rutgers University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, C., Hesterly, W. S., & Borgatti, S. P. (1997). A general theory of network governance: Exchange conditions and social mechanisms. Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 911–945.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jourdan, J., Durand, R., & Thornton, P. H. (2017). The price of admission: Organizational deference as strategic behavior. American Journal of Sociology, 123(1), 232–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaufmann, K. M. (2007). Immigration and the future of black power in US cities. Du Bois Review: Social Science Research on Race, 4(1), 79–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kilduff, G. J., Willer, R., & Anderson, C. (2016). Hierarchy and its discontents: Status disagreement leads to withdrawal of contribution and lower group performance. Organization Science, 27(2), 373–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, B. (2020). Normative uncertainty and middle-status innovation in the US daily newspaper industry. Strategic Organization, 18(3), 377–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, H., & Kim, B. (2022). To be in Vogue: How mere proximity to high-status neighbors affects aspirational pricing in the US fashion industry. Strategic Management Journal, 43(6), 1208–1230.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, S. (2013). Uncertainty management strategies and the export performance of cultural goods: The case of the Korean movie industry from 2000 to 2004. Journal of Management & Organization, 19(6), 689–705.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, S., & Shin, D. (2011). Uncertainty-reduction strategies and performances of Korean movies. Journal of Strategic Management, 14(2), 1–28.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, T., & Rhee, M. (2017). Structural and behavioral antecedents of change: Status, distinctiveness, and relative performance. Journal of Management, 43(3), 716–741.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • KOFIC. (2019). Korean movie industry summary. Retrieved February 13, 2020, from https://www.kofic.or.kr/kofic/business/board/selectBoardDetail.do?boardNumber=2&boardSeqNumber=49961

  • Loch, C. H., Huberman, B. A., & Stout, S. (2000). Status competition and performance in work groups. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 43(1), 35–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ma, D., Rhee, M., & Yang, D. (2013). Power source mismatch and the effectiveness of interorganizational relations: The case of venture capital syndication. Academy of Management Journal, 56(3), 711–734.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Magee, J. C., & Galinsky, A. D. (2008). Social hierarchy: The self-reinforcing nature of power and status. Academy of Management Annals, 2(1), 351–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mannor, M. J., Shamsie, J., & Conlon, D. E. (2016). Does experience help or hinder top managers? Working with different types of resources in Hollywood. Strategic Management Journal, 37(7), 1330–1340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mao, K., Lu, H., & Sullivan, B. N. (2023). The paradox of political legitimacy: The political inclusion and entrepreneurs’ firm strategies. Asian Business & Management, 22, 1–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., & Cook, J. M. (2001). Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology, 27(1), 415–444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merton, R. K. (1968). The Matthew effect in science. Science, 159, 56–63.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Motion Picture Association (MPA). (2019). A comprehensive analysis and survey of the theatrical and home/mobile entertainment market environment for 2019. https://www.motionpictures.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/MPA-THEME-2019.pdf

  • O’Leary-Kelly, A. M., Martocchio, J. J., & Frink, D. D. (1994). A review of the influence of group goals on group performance. Academy of Management Journal, 37(5), 1285–1301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ono, H. (2018). Career mobility in the embedded market: A study of the Japanese financial sector. Asian Business & Management, 17(5), 339–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Overbeck, J. R., Correll, J., & Park, B. (2005). Internal status sorting in groups: The problem of too many stars. In M. C. Thomas-Hunt (Ed.), Status and groups (pp. 169–199). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Perretti, F., & Negro, G. (2006). Filling empty seats: How status and organizational hierarchies affect exploration versus exploitation in team design. Academy of Management Journal, 49(4), 759–777.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, D. J., & Zuckerman, E. W. (2001). Middle-status conformity: Theoretical restatement and empirical demonstration in two markets. American Journal of Sociology, 107(2), 379–429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Podolny, J. M. (1993). A status-based model of market competition. American Journal of Sociology, 98(4), 829–872.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Podolny, J. M. (1994). Market uncertainty and the social character of economic exchange. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39(3), 458–483.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Podolny, J. M. (2005). Status signals: A sociological study of market competition. Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reagans, R., & McEvily, B. (2003). Network structure and knowledge transfer: The effects of cohesion and range. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(2), 240–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rhee, M., Yang, D., & Yoo, T. (2013). National culture and friendship homophily in the multinational workplace. Asian Business & Management, 12(3), 299–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rhoades, S. A. (1993). The Herfindahl-Hirschman index. Federal Reserve Bulletin, 79, 188.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ridgeway, C. (2019). Status: Why is it everywhere? Why does it matter? Russell Sage Foundation.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ridgeway, C. L., & Nakagawa, S. (2017). Is deference the price of being seen as reasonable? How status hierarchies incentivize acceptance of low status. Social Psychology Quarterly, 80(2), 132–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rossman, G., Esparza, N., & Bonacich, P. (2010). I’d like to thank the Academy, team spillovers, and network centrality. American Sociological Review, 75(1), 31–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwab, A., & Miner, A. S. (2008). Learning in hybrid-project systems: The effects of project performance on repeated collaboration. Academy of Management Journal, 51(6), 1117–1149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shin, D., Lee, K., & Lee, H. (2014). Neoliberal marketization of art worlds and status multiplexity: Price formation in a Korean art auction, 1998–2007. Poetics, 43, 120–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yue-Ming, S. W. (2005). Inter-organizational network and firm performance: The case of the bicycle industry in Taiwan. Asian Business & Management, 4, 67–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zaheer, A., & Soda, G. (2009). Network evolution: The origins of structural holes. Administrative Science Quarterly, 54(1), 1–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Professor Dongyoub Shin and Professor Hongseok Oh for their valuable comments on the earlier version of this paper. Bo Kyung Kim acknowledges partial financial support from the Yonsei University Research Fund of 2022 (#2022-22-0027).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Johnson Graduate School of Management, Cornell University, 114 E Ave, Ithaca, NY, 14853, USA

    Youchung Kwon

  2. Yonsei School of Business, Yonsei University, 50 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 03722, Korea

    Bo Kyung Kim

Authors
  1. Youchung Kwon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bo Kyung Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bo Kyung Kim.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kwon, Y., Kim, B.K. When we unite, not divide: status homophily, group average status, and group performance in the Korean film industry. Asian Bus Manage 23, 9–31 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41291-023-00258-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41291-023-00258-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation