Abstract

Firms regularly attend to a candidate’s status signals, preferring high-status (star) candidates to lower status candidates. Insofar as hiring is a two-sided evaluation process between firms and candidates, we theorize that the relationship between a candidate’s status and hiring outcomes is driven by the perspective taken: the demand-side’s (firm’s) star pursuit versus the supply-side’s (candidate’s) star selectivity. We test our theory using data from Venture for America, a program that helps match job candidates and startup employers. Without accounting for the direction of outreach between candidates and startups, we find that stars exhibit a lower likelihood of connecting with startups than non-stars—a pattern that is inconsistent with status research. But when isolating the firm perspective, we find that high-quality startups are more likely to pursue stars than non-stars. In contrast, when isolating the candidate perspective, we find that stars are more selective when searching for job opportunities—primarily through avoiding low-quality startups—than non-stars. As a result, observed connections reflect the net effect of star pursuit and star selectivity. We also show how subsequent hiring outcomes differ by candidate status.