Category Stretching: Reorienting Research on Categories in Strategy, Entrepreneurship, and Organization Theory

Durand, Rodolphe; Paolella, Lionel

doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2011.01039.x

Cited by 289 publications

(429 citation statements)

References 73 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

398

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As regards future applications of the framework, recent research has highlighted the potential value of the EW framework for advancing central questions in organizational and management theory related to categorization processes (Durand & Khaire, 2016;Durand & Paolella, 2013;Glynn & Navis, 2013), organizational paradoxes (Fairhurst et al, 2016;Smith & Lewis, 2011), materiality in organizations (Hussenot & Missonier, 2010;Leonardi & Barley, 2008;Nicolini, Mengis, & Swan, 2012), strategy practice (Jarzabkowski & Spee, 2009;Vaara & Whittington, 2012), social movement theory (Benford & Snow, 2000;Tilly, 2004) and corporate social responsibility (CSR) related issues more generally, including critical CSR (Fleming & Jones, 2013).…”

Section: Concluding Thoughts: Where To From Here?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Justification, Evaluation and Critique in the Study of Organizations: An Introduction to the Volume

Cloutier¹,

Gond²,

Léca³

2017

Research in the Sociology of Organizations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This is the accepted version of the paper.This version of the publication may differ from the final published version. Permanent repository link and evaluation in organizations by reconsidering the notion of worth, and finally 4) push the boundaries of the framework itself by questioning and fine tuning some of its core assumptions. Taken as a whole, this volume not only carves a path for a deeper embedding of the EW approach into contemporary thinking about organizations, it also invites readers to refine and expand it by confronting it with a wider range of diverse empirical contexts of interest to organizational scholars.Keywords: economies of worth; justification; critique; evaluation; French Pragmatist Sociology.3 Despite early acknowledgement of the relevance of the EW framework for studying organizations (Denis, Langley, & Rouleau, 2007;Livian & Herreros, 1994), and a recognition that it provides "a highly original perspective stressing the importance of processes of critique and justification for the production of organizational order and change" (Jagd, 2011, p. 344 (Patriotta, Gond, & Schultz, 2011;Ramirez, 2013;Taupin, 2012). JUSTIFICATION, EVALUATION AND CRITIQUE IN THE STUDY OF ORGANIZATIONS: AN INTRODUCTION TO THE VOLUMEWhile demonstrating the "generative" potential of the EW framework by combining it with other theories is both interesting and useful, there are many missed opportunities in failing to embrace the EW framework as a theory that is worthy for its own sake, one that can be particularly helpful, for example, for uncovering some of the normative contradictions that underlie institutional life by investigating how individual actors engage with a plurality of moral orders.Some of this potential can be seen in studies that have mobilized the EW framework to address topics such as intra-organizational dynamics of justification (Jagd, 2011), the strategic management of pluralistic organizations (Daigle & Rouleau, 2010;Denis et al., 2007) decision-making in public management contexts (Dodier & Camus, 1998 It is in light of the above observations and the opportunities they gave rise to that we settled on the following four objectives for the volume: (1) clarify how individuals manage the contradictions and compromises inherent in organizational pluralism by considering the daily moral life of actors inhabiting institutions; (2) look at organizations critically by unpacking the rhetorical foundations of critiques, and pragmatically examining the roles of rhetoric and justification in the critical operations that organizational actors engage in; (3) reconsider the notion of worth beyond its purely economic sense and consider the multiple facets that constitute and produce value in organizational life and (4) push the boundaries of the EW framework itself and by so doing, help further embed notions such as justification, critique and valuation in our contemporary analysis and understanding of organizations.Collectively, the set of contributions proposed in this volume address these four key objec...

show abstract

Section: Concluding Thoughts: Where To From Here?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Justification, Evaluation and Critique in the Study of Organizations: An Introduction to the Volume

Cloutier¹,

Gond²,

Léca³

2017

Research in the Sociology of Organizations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In organizational settings, audiences are likely to develop goal-based or ad hoc categories for decision making in domains such as purchasing, investing, or boycotting, as part of the process of identifying producers with whom to engage (Durand and Paolella 2012). In these contexts, audience members do not necessarily pre-possess an image of a prototypical organization with which they seek to transact.…”

Section: Emergence Of Classificatory Schemasmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Eventually, much like other processes of institutionalization, the rationale that originally generated the categorical schema may eventually recede into the background, leaving the resultant list of features in the foreground, unquestioned (Durand and Paolella 2012).…”

Section: Entrenchment Of Classificatory Schemasmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diffusion as Classification

Etzion

2014

Organization Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An overlooked aspect of the diffusion of a practice in a population is the emergence of a de facto classificatory schema, distinguishing between actors that adopt a practice and those that do not. To investigate diffusion as classification, I develop a simulation model that highlights the conditions under which limited diffusion of practices leads to the emergence and entrenchment of classificatory schemas. The model depicts classification as a systemic phenomenon resulting from the interplay of actor-level micromotives and field-level macrobehaviors that jointly drive diffusion. Whereas extant theory on the origin of classificatory schemas emphasizes the role of agency, results from the model suggest that classificatory schemas can emerge somewhat unintentionally as practices diffuse. Moreover, by conceptualizing diffusion as classification, I suggest a means for disentangling the closely related and often conflated concepts of diffusion and institutionalization

show abstract

“…The characteristics that lead to market success are numerous and have complex interactions-an organization may succeed or fail due to its own internal capabilities, the idiosyncratic tastes of its customers, or even random events (Levinthal 1997). Success may stem from audience categorization too, but such categorizations may be ad-hoc and shift from person to person (Durand and Paolella 2013). Similar organizations, though, will likely face similar pressures.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…An extensive empirical literature has grown up around this initial proposition (Hannan 2010;Durand and Paolella 2013;Vergne and Wry 2014). This literature largely relies on empirical work observing that poorly-labelled firms and products in fact suffer relative to well-labelled peers.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Producer Exploration can Generate Categories without Audiences

Vashevko¹

2016

AMPROC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Category theory finds that markets tend to partition producers into categories and that producers who do not fit one specific category-or who span multiple categories-perform worse than their single-category peers. The major thread of category theory argues that categorizations stem from the bounded rationality of market audiences, who are forced to impose categorizations and ignore miscategorized producers in order to efficiently interact with the market. I present an alternative model in which producers in a market segregate into categories and experience a miscategorization penalty without any reliance on an audience process: working in an uncertain world, producers tend to imitate past successful peers, and an ex-post rationalization process identifies such clusters as categories. Categories reflect, but do not cause, producer success. This model of dynamic exploration of an uncertain world not only accounts for the basic findings of category theory but further explains how categories shift and emerge over time, in ways consistent with recent extensions of the literature. In all cases, miscategorization results not from the limited knowledge of the audience but the limited knowledge of producers. I establish these results in a formal model and simulation.

show abstract

Category Stretching: Reorienting Research on Categories in Strategy, Entrepreneurship, and Organization Theory

Cited by 289 publications

References 73 publications

Justification, Evaluation and Critique in the Study of Organizations: An Introduction to the Volume

Justification, Evaluation and Critique in the Study of Organizations: An Introduction to the Volume

Diffusion as Classification

Producer Exploration can Generate Categories without Audiences

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About