Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Betrayal as Market Barrier: Identity-Based Limits to Diversification among High-Status Corporate Law Firms 1
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Betrayal as Market Barrier: Identity-Based Limits to Diversification among High-Status Corporate Law Firms 1
Do you wish to request the book?
Betrayal as Market Barrier: Identity-Based Limits to Diversification among High-Status Corporate Law Firms 1
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Betrayal as Market Barrier: Identity-Based Limits to Diversification among High-Status Corporate Law Firms 1
2013
Overview
Why are some diversified market identities problematic but others are not? We examine this question in the context of high-status corporate law firms, which often diversify into one low-status area of work—family law (FL)—but face a barrier (strong disapproval from existing clients) that prevents diversification into another such area—plaintiffs’ personal injury law (PIL). Drawing on a qualitative study of the Boston legal market, we argue that this barrier reflects a situation where loyalty norms have been violated, and it surfaces because service to individual plaintiffs is tantamount to betraying the interests of corporate clients. Our analysis clarifies identity-based limits to diversification, indicating that they are rooted in concerns about the firm’s commitments as well as its capabilities, and suggests a more general refinement of theory on status and conformity.
Publisher
University of Chicago Press
Subject
