Thesis advisor: Hans de Wit / Do employers prioritize the signal associated with the name of the university someone graduated from above an applicant’s skills in the employment process? Using a field experiment of the labor market, 2,400 fictitious applications were submitted to job openings in three countries: United States, United Kingdom, and Australia. The resumes belonged to fictitious citizens with full working rights, both female and male, that have attended universities of varying prestige in the United States, United Kingdom, and Australia respectively. Two skill-intensive sectors of the labor market were chosen: information and communication technology and accounting.  For each sector of the labor market, two resumes were designed. One resume had a high skills match with the generic requirements of entry level jobs in each sector. A second resume had a low skills match with the same requirements. For each country, one high-ranked university and one non-high-ranked university were selected to signal prestige. The name of the university the applicant graduated from and the sex of the applicant were randomly assigned on otherwise identical resumes. This study distinguished between the effects of human capital (Becker, 1975; Mincer, 1974; Schultz, 1959; 1961) and the signaling effect of university prestige in the labor market (Spence, 1973), while controlling for networking effects (Bayer, Ross, & Topa, 2005; Petersen, Saporta, & Seidel, 2000). The results suggest that human capital—as measured through the high and low skills match resumes—was statistically significant in predicting callbacks. Applications in the high skills match condition were 79% more likely to receive a callback than applications in the low skills match condition. The prestige condition and the interaction between university prestige and match were not statistically significant. This experiment detected no statistically significant differences in callback rates based on the sex of the applicant. These findings suggest that human capital, and not university prestige, predicts recruitment outcomes for applicants with a bachelor’s degree only. These results support a call for skill building and human capital consolidation at higher education institutions. / Thesis (PhD) — Boston College, 2019. / Submitted to: Boston College. Lynch School of Education. / Discipline: Educational Leadership and Higher Education.

Annual university rankings produced by mainstream sources, such as U.S. News and World Report, are very popular and viewed as important by a variety of university stakeholders. Consequently, universities expend a great deal of effort in an attempt to ensure they appear in the best possible light. One major component of these ranking systems is the Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education, which is partly based on the research expenditures reported by the university. This system provides incentives for administrators at institutions of higher education to make strategic accounting choices, with respect to the classification of research expenditures, to improve the prestige of the university. I first measure the amount of accounting discretion within a university's classification of research expenditures and then test whether discretionary research expenditures impact the prestige of a university. Results indicate that discretionary research expenditures are positively associated with university prestige. Specifically, universities within my sample that have positive discretionary research expenditures have an increased probability of subsequently being classified as a Doctoral University with moderate to high research activity by 5% and 7% respectively. In addition, universities within my sample that had positive discretionary research expenditures experienced increases in their ranking of federal funding received relative to other universities by an average of 20.4 positions. These results are consistent with the concept that universities can make certain discretionary accounting choices which can help improve the prestige of the institution with the goal of obtaining additional sources of funding. / Ph. D. / Annual university rankings produced by mainstream sources, such as U.S. News and World Report, are very popular and viewed as important by a variety of university stakeholders. Consequently, universities expend a great deal of effort in an attempt to ensure they appear in the best possible light. One major component of these ranking systems is the Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education, which is partly based on the research expenditures reported by the university. This system provides incentives for administrators at institutions of higher education to make strategic accounting choices, with respect to the reporting of research expenditures, to improve the prestige of the university. I first measure the amount of accounting choice (i.e. accounting discretion) within a university’s report of research expenditures and then test whether accounting discretion impacts the prestige of a university. Results indicate that accounting discretion is positively associated with university prestige. I also find a positive association between university accounting discretion and subsequent increases in federal funding received relative to other universities. These results are consistent with the concept that universities can make certain accounting choices which can help improve the prestige of the institution with the goal of obtaining additional sources of funding.