Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

Typecasting and Legitimation: A Formal Theory

Contents:

Author Info

  • Greta Hsu

    (University of California, Davis)

  • Michael T. Hannan

    (Stanford University)

  • Laszlo Polos

    (Durham Business School)

Registered author(s):

    Abstract

    We develop a unifying framework to integrate two of organizational sociology’s theory fragments on categorization: typecasting and form emergence. Typecasting is a producer-level theory that considers the consequences producers face for specializing versus spanning across category boundaries. Form emergence considers the evolution of categories and how the attributes of producers entering a category shapes its likelihood of gaining legitimacy among relevant audiences. Both theory fragments emerge from the processes audiences use to assign category memberships to producers. In this paper, we develop this common foundation and clearly outline the arguments that lead to central implications of each theory. We formalize these arguments using modal expressions to represent key categorization processes and the theory-building framework developed by Hannan, Polos, and Carroll (2007). Categorization in market contexts has attracted considerable interest in recent years, spurred in large part by Zuckerman’s (1999) seminal work in capital markets. Empirical work on this subject covers a range of topics, including category emergence, proliferation, and erosion (Carroll and Swaminathan 2000; Ruef 2000; Rao, Monin, and Durand 2005; Bogaert, Boone, and Carroll 2006; Pontikes 2008), the consequences of different categorical positions and category structures for individual producers (Zuckerman and Kim 2003; Hsu, 2006; Negro, Hannan, and Rao 2008; Hsu, Hannan, and Koçak 2008), and the role of audience members in structuring understanding of categories (Boone, Declerck, Rao, and Van Den Buys 2008; Koçak 2008; Koçak, Hannan, and Hsu 2008). This paper focuses on two theory fragments, typecasting and form emergence, which exemplify the different emphases in research approaches. Typecasting theory focuses on well-established categories and considers the implications for individual producers of specializing in versus generalizing across categorical boundaries (Zuckerman, Kim, Ukanwa, and von Rittman 2003). Research suggests that audiences have an easier time making sense of specialists but that a clear association with a single category restricts the range of future opportunities. Form-emergence theory considers how the attributes of producers associatedwith an emerging category shapes its likelihood of gaining legitimacy among relevant audiences (McKendrick and Carroll 2001; McKendrick, Jaffee, Carroll, and Khessina 2003). Work in this area finds that a category is more likely to become a well-established form when new entrants have focused identities (as in the case of de-novo entrants, the producers who begin as members of the category). These theory fragments have progressed largely independently of one another. This is not surprising given differences in levels of analysis and key outcomes. Yet, they are clearly conceptually connected. Both theory fragments address the positioning of producers in a space of categories and the effect of such positions on an audience’s understandings. In this paper, we flesh out these connections to clarify the processes that lie at heart of theories of categorization. In particular, demonstrate that a common foundation, a theory of partiality in memberships, gives rise to predictions central to both of these fragments. We use the formal theory-building tools and framework developed by Hannan, Pólos, and Carroll (2007) and extended by Pólos, Hannan, and Hsu (2008). These accounts developed modal constructions that allow for subtle formalization of key sociological concepts such as legitimation, identity, and social form, which revolve around the beliefs held by relevant audiences. As we aim to illustrate, this approach to theory building has

    Download Info

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
    File URL: http://dro.dur.ac.uk/10363
    File Function: main text
    Download Restriction: no

    Bibliographic Info

    Paper provided by Durham University Business School in its series Working Papers with number 2009_01.

    as in new window
    Length:
    Date of creation: 08 Jan 2009
    Date of revision:
    Handle: RePEc:dur:durham:2009_01

    Contact details of provider:
    Postal: Durham University Business School, Mill Hill Lane, Durham DH1 3LB, England
    Phone: +44 (0)191 334 5200
    Fax: +44 (0)191 334 5201
    Email:
    Web page: http://www.dur.ac.uk/business
    More information through EDIRC

    Related research

    Keywords:

    References

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
    as in new window
    1. Michael T. Hannan & László Pólos & Glenn R. Carroll, 2007. "Language Matters, from Logics of Organization Theory: Audiences, Codes, and Ecologies
      [Logics of Organization Theory: Audiences, Codes, and Ecologies]
      ," Introductory Chapters, Princeton University Press.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Lists

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:dur:durham:2009_01. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (IT Office).

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.