It's a dense paper, but one of the conclusions is that when a academic moves from a low-rank to a high-rank institution, their papers do not change in 'impact'. I find this encouraging, as it implies that (at least in physics) papers are judged more by their intrinsic qualities than their originating institution.
The Economist offers a gloss entitled "Why climb the greasy pole? Getting a job at a top university will not make you a better researcher": http://www.economist.com/news/science-and-technology/2160181...