I am not saying this is true, but a possibility would be that it gives you a more useful analytical model with which to ascertain other people's motivations and incentives which could further guide your own interactions with them.

Status theory doesn't really add any new mechanisms for human behavior, it just extends them from cases where they're obvious to cases where they're less than obvious. Concepts like "coolness", "popularity", "prestige", "high-class" are all basically synonyms for high-status, and systems of status are often explicitly codified in society, such as with titles of nobility or caste systems. And theories of fashion and other "positional" good are already status-based. So it's already a mechanism responsible for quite a bit of social interaction.

Status theory, as best I can tell, is really just saying that these particular cases aren't unique, and that all social interaction has an element of status-jockeying embedded in it. Armed with this explanation, large chunks of otherwise weird behavior (karma systems, etiquette, insults, giving non-monetary awards) begin to make sense.

I've been reading Keith Johnstone's book on drama which has some great examples of this. Highly recommended. Since then, from time to time I ask, "What would a high-status person do here?" and do it. Sometimes I want to lower my status and reverse the question.