This essay discusses the future of research on group status using a multilevel perspective. Although status is inherently multilevel, researchers in this domain have not fully leveraged this perspective in their empirical studies. We identify three ways group status can, and should, be represented as a multilevel phenomenon: when status ratings are obtained from multiple observers, when individual member status ratings are used to compose group status perceptions or hierarchies, and when status changes dynamically over time. We hope this essay encourages scholars to more fully embrace a multilevel approach, which is essential for advancing research on status in small groups and beyond.
Abi-EsberN.GreerL. L.De HooghA. H. (2025). Team hierarchical adaptability: Benefits for team coordination and performance. Academy of Management Journal. Advance online publication.
2.
AndersonC.JohnO. P.KeltnerD.KringA. M. (2001). Who attains social status? Effects of personality and physical attractiveness in social groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(1), 116–132.
3.
AndersonC.KilduffG. J. (2009). Why do dominant personalities attain influence in face-to-face groups? The competence-signaling effects of trait dominance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(2), 491–503.
4.
BenderskyC.HaysN. A. (2012). Status conflict in groups. Organization Science, 23(2), 323–340.
5.
BenderskyC.PaiJ. (2018). Status dynamics. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 5(1), 183–199.
6.
BettencourtB.CharltonK.DorrN.HumeD. L. (2001). Status differences and in-group bias: A meta-analytic examination of the effects of status stability, status legitimacy, and group permeability. Psychological Bulletin, 127(4), 520–542.
7.
BladerS. L.YuS. (2017). Are status and respect different or two sides of the same coin?Academy of Management Annals, 11(2), 800–824.
8.
BlieseP. D.ChanD.PloyhartR. E. (2007). Multilevel methods: Future directions in measurement, longitudinal analyses, and nonnormal outcomes. Organizational Research Methods, 10(4), 551–563.
9.
BrandtM. J. (2013). Do the disadvantaged legitimize the social system? A large-scale test of the status–legitimacy hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104(5), 765–785.
10.
BundersonJ. S.Van der VegtG. S.CantimurY.RinkF. (2016). Different views of hierarchy and why they matter: Hierarchy as inequality or as cascading influence. Academy of Management Journal, 59(4), 1265–1289.
11.
BundersonJ. S.Van der VegtG. S.SparroweR. T. (2014). Status inertia and member replacement in role-differentiated teams. Organization Science, 25(1), 57–72.
12.
ChanD. (1998). Functional relations among constructs in the same content domain at different levels of analysis: A typology of composition models. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(2), 234–246.
13.
ChenG.MathieuJ. E.BlieseP. D. (2005). A framework for conducting multi-level construct validation. In YammarinoF. J.DansereauF. (Eds.), Multi-level issues in organizational behavior and processes (pp. 273–303). Emerald Group.
14.
ChenY. R.PetersonR. S.PhillipsD. J.PodolnyJ. M.RidgewayC. L. (2012). Introduction to the special issue: Bringing status to the table—Attaining, maintaining, and experiencing status in organizations and markets. Organization Science, 23(2), 299–307.
15.
DavisJ. (1966). The campus as a frog pond: An application of the theory of relative deprivation to career decisions of college men. American Journal of Sociology, 72(1), 17–31.
16.
DoyleS. P.LountR. B.Jr. (2023). Rising above vs. falling below: When and why status change affects interpersonal helping in workgroups. Organization Science, 34(3), 1157–1183.
17.
FernandesC. R.YuS.HowellT. M.BrooksA. W.KilduffG. J.PettitN. C. (2021). What is your status portfolio? Higher status variance across groups increases interpersonal helping but decreases intrapersonal well-being. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 165, 56–75.
18.
GouldR. V. (2002). The origins of status hierarchies: A formal theory and empirical test. American Journal of Sociology, 107(5), 1143–1178.
19.
GrayS. M.BundersonJ. S.Van der VegtG. S.RinkF.GedikY. (2023). Leveraging knowledge diversity in hierarchically differentiated teams: The critical role of hierarchy stability. Academy of Management Journal, 66(2), 462–488.
20.
HaysN. A.BenderskyC. (2015). Not all inequality is created equal: Effects of status versus power hierarchies on competition for upward mobility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 108(6), 867–882.
21.
HindsR.ValentineM.DeCellesK.BergJ. M. (2026). Virtually even: Status equalizing in distributed organizations. Organization Science, 37(1), 132–156.
22.
KakkarH.SivanathanN.PettitN. C. (2019). The impact of dynamic status changes within competitive rank-ordered hierarchies. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(46), 23011–23020.
23.
KilduffG. J.WillerR.AndersonC. (2016). Hierarchy and its discontents: Status disagreement leads to withdrawal of contribution and lower group performance. Organization Science, 27(2), 373–390.
24.
KleinK. J.KozlowskiS. W. (2000). From micro to meso: Critical steps in conceptualizing and conducting multilevel research. Organizational Research Methods, 3(3), 211–236.
25.
LiH. J.ChenY. R.BladerS. L. (2016). Where is context? Advancing status research with a contextual value perspective. Research in Organizational Behavior, 36, 185–198.
26.
MageeJ. C.GalinskyA. D. (2008). Social hierarchy: The self-reinforcing nature of power and status. Academy of Management Annals, 2(1), 351–398.
27.
MarrJ. C.ThauS. (2014). Falling from great (and not-so-great) heights: How initial status position influences performance after status loss. Academy of Management Journal, 57(1), 223–248.
28.
NeeleyT. B.DumasT. L. (2016). Unearned status gain: Evidence from a global language mandate. Academy of Management Journal, 59(1), 14–43.
29.
PettitN. C.DoyleS. P.KimH. Y.HurwitzA. (2022). Rank extrapolation: Asymmetric forecasts of future rank after rank change. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 169, 104129.
30.
PettitN. C.DoyleS. P.LountR. B.Jr. (2024). Underdogs and favorites: Past, present, and future. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 18(6), e12973.
31.
PettitN. C.MarrJ. C. (2020). A trajectories-based perspective on status dynamics. Current Opinion in Psychology, 33, 233–237.
32.
PiazzaA.CastellucciF. (2014). Status in organization and management theory. Journal of Management, 40(1), 287–315.
33.
PratoM.ErtugG.CastellucciF.ZouT. (2024). The status of status research: A review of the types, functions, levels, and audiences. Journal of Management, 50(6), 2266–2308.
34.
RidgewayC. L. (2019). Status: Why is it everywhere? Why does it matter?Russell Sage Foundation.
35.
SchoutenM. E.van KnippenbergD.GreerL. L. (2024). Hierarchy conflict: Causes, expressions, and consequences. Organization Science, 35(4), 1535–1551.
36.
XuT.EvansM. B.BensonA. J. (2024). The nature of status: Navigating the varied approaches to conceptualizing and measuring status. Organizational Psychology Review, 14(2), 204–237.
37.
YuS.GreerL. L.HalevyN.Van BunderenL. (2019). On ladders and pyramids: Hierarchy’s shape determines relationships and performance in groups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 45(12), 1717–1733.
38.
YuS.KilduffG. J.WestT. (2023). Status acuity: The ability to accurately perceive status hierarchies reduces status conflict and benefits group performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 108(1), 114–137.
