From the Chronicle of Higher Education:
http://www.chronicle.com/article/Better-College-Better/240179
FYI, to get past the Chronicle’s paywall, one can access the article from the Chronicle’s Facebook feed.
I don’t completely agree with this. In the sciences, at least, the prestige of a department or program does not always follow the university as a whole. A university may be very highly regarded for a particular field. The neighboring higher ranked school may not compare at all at the department level. Positions may be more coveted at the lesser school in the better department.
^ A prof of mine (who I later found out was a giant in philosophy) once noted that the way to go was to achieve tenure someplace. Then, if you manage to make a name for yourself, you can jump around.
On the other hand, even assistant profs rejected for tenure by Yale tend to find tenure elsewhere.
The conventional wisdom among relatives and older Profs I’ve had was that if one gained an assistant Professorship at an HYP Ivy, the expectation is that in most cases s/he will be expected to leave before tenure time and get tenure elsewhere.
However, if s/he has an outstanding publications record in his/her field during his/her tenured career at the second university, there is a chance s/he will be invited back to that Ivy/peer elite as a tenured full/chair Prof in recognition of that record. This last part seemed to have been the career pattern followed by many senior/chair Profs at HYP and other peer elites.
Depending on the individual Prof, being at an LAC may not be nearly as fornlorn as the above may imply. One of my LAC Profs has been a subject of “poaching” campaigns by elite unis here and abroad and one of my classmates’ Profs finished his career at an Ivy.
In my field, Harvard used to be notorious for having a tenure rate of about 2%. Berkeley, which has been comparable in ranking, had a tenure rate more like 50%.
One of my friends who started an academic career at Yale observed that they were offering younger people “only rungless ladders.” Good way to find out whether someone can levitate. 
In most fields there are more than enuff good people to go around. The Ivy tenure thing always seemed weird. Most profs are very productive in the first 10-15 years. If ever. It does take a significant research infrastructure to be productive in most fields so some at the heavy teaching load schools won’t really develop as scholars. So it might be hard to say in 10 years they are still equals
In industry, even in fields like engineering, you’re never more than two weeks from your next job search.
I am sympathetic to the issue of tenure in academia. It isn’t that much different from anywhere else, apparently.
In academics, it is brutally meritocratic, not unlike professional sports. You stand on your own research output, whethter you are from Yale or a far flung school.
To some extent.
However, someone who has a PhD from an elite PhD program in one’s field…especially if done under an advisor who is a mover and shaker in that field/subfield will be able to get much further on the same/lesser results in terms of publications than someone with a PhD from a non-elite PhD program in one’s field…and moreso if s/he didn’t work with an influential advisor.
“In industry, even in fields like engineering, you’re never more than two weeks from your next job search.”
That’s right, though part of what makes academia more difficult logistically is how far-flung the available positions might be. Industry jobs are often (not always) clustered in certain locations, with very few in rural areas. Academic jobs are scattered like birdseed, with many in the middle of nowhere. You’re unlikely to find a new academic job without moving your spouse/family, and a ton of the available job locations won’t offer anything appropriate for your spouse.
“Lesser scholars routinely end up at elite places vying for tenure.”
This is completely BS.
If getting a tenure track job is hard, earning a tenure at elite schools is actually much harder.