Power and Conflicts of Interest in Professional Firms: Evidence from Investment Banking
- 1 March 1998
- journal article
- research article
- Published by JSTOR in Administrative Science Quarterly
- Vol. 43 (1) , 1-22
- https://doi.org/10.2307/2393589
Abstract
We study the resolution of conflicts of interest that arise when actors in professional firms represent separate parties with competing interests, using models of power and reputation to predict the resolution of such conflicts. We tested models on an initial sample of over 8,000 security analysts' ratings of corporate equity securities. Results show that analysts rate their clients' securities more favorably than other analysts rating the same securities. This positive bias is moderated by the reputation of the analyst and his or her department. Implications and extensions for organizational theory, multiservice professional firms, and security market regulation are discussed.This publication has 10 references indexed in Scilit:
- Concealment of Negative Organizational Outcomes: An Agency Theory PerspectiveThe Academy of Management Journal, 1994
- Brokering Mergers: An Agency Theory Perspective on the Role of RepresentativesThe Academy of Management Journal, 1994
- The Context of Interunit Influence AttemptsAdministrative Science Quarterly, 1993
- Strategic Responses to Institutional ProcessesAcademy of Management Review, 1991
- What's in a Name? Reputation Building and Corporate StrategyThe Academy of Management Journal, 1990
- Politics of Strategic Decision Making in High-Velocity Environments: Toward a Midrange TheoryThe Academy of Management Journal, 1988
- The Stigma of Bankruptcy: Spoiled Organizational Image and Its ManagementThe Academy of Management Journal, 1987
- Greenmail: A Study of Board Performance in Corporate GovernanceAdministrative Science Quarterly, 1987
- Pathways to Top Corporate ManagementAmerican Sociological Review, 1986
- The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational FieldsAmerican Sociological Review, 1983