I think this entire study is massively flawed. In the entire 28 pages you will not find the words: "family," "corruption," "corrupt," "connection," "generation," "political," "bribe," or "donation." "Influence" is only used (6 times) referring to non-political influence.

In my nearly 35 year career I've been lucky several times. Being in the right place at the right time. That really only gets you so far. If you can't deliver repeatedly, you're one and done.

However, that only applies if you are in an MIT study where political influence and connections play no role; i.e. in a fantasy world. In the real world companies who have the "right" connections, make the "right" donations, have the "right" name, will win projects over those who would produce better results based on merit.

Maybe the study authors meant by luck, "I was lucky my mom is on the board of the United Way with the president of IBM." That is how Bill Gates' tiny computer company Microsoft got the exclusive right to develop and license DOS for IBM. It was not because his company had established itself as a leader in the market at the time IBM was looking for a vendor.