IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/somere/v51y2022i4p1681-1720.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Language-Based Method for Assessing Symbolic Boundary Maintenance between Social Groups

Author

Listed:
  • Anjali M. Bhatt
  • Amir Goldberg
  • Sameer B. Srivastava

Abstract

When the social boundaries between groups are breached, the tendency for people to erect and maintain symbolic boundaries intensifies. Drawing on extant perspectives on boundary maintenance, we distinguish between two strategies that people pursue in maintaining symbolic boundaries: boundary retention—entrenching themselves in pre-existing symbolic distinctions—and boundary reformation—innovating new forms of symbolic distinction. Traditional approaches to measuring symbolic boundaries—interviews, participant-observation, and self-reports are ill-suited to detecting fine-grained variation in boundary maintenance. To overcome this limitation, we use the tools of computational linguistics and machine learning to develop a novel approach to measuring symbolic boundaries based on interactional language use between group members before and after they encounter one another. We construct measures of boundary retention and reformation using random forest classifiers that quantify group differences based on pre- and post-contact linguistic styles. We demonstrate this method's utility by applying it to a corpus of email communications from a mid-sized financial services firm that acquired and integrated two smaller firms. We find that: (a) the persistence of symbolic boundaries can be detected for up to 18 months after a merger; (b) acquired employees exhibit more boundary reformation and less boundary retention than their counterparts from the acquiring firm; and (c) individuals engage in more boundary retention, but not reformation, when their local work environment is more densely populated by ingroup members. We discuss implications of these findings for the study of culture in a wide range of intergroup contexts and for computational approaches to measuring culture.

Suggested Citation

  • Anjali M. Bhatt & Amir Goldberg & Sameer B. Srivastava, 2022. "A Language-Based Method for Assessing Symbolic Boundary Maintenance between Social Groups," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 51(4), pages 1681-1720, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:somere:v:51:y:2022:i:4:p:1681-1720
    DOI: 10.1177/00491241221099555
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00491241221099555
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/00491241221099555?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Doyle , Gabriel & Srivastava, Sameer B. & Goldberg, Amir & Frank, Michael C., 2017. "Alignment at Work: Using Language to Distinguish the Internalization and Self-Regulation Components of Cultural Fit in Organizations," Institute for Research on Labor and Employment, Working Paper Series qt3z83b0x0, Institute of Industrial Relations, UC Berkeley.
    2. Israel Drori & Amy Wrzesniewski & Shmuel Ellis, 2013. "One Out of Many? Boundary Negotiation and Identity Formation in Postmerger Integration," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(6), pages 1717-1741, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gaižauskienė Laura & Tunčikienė Živilė, 2018. "Organizational Level Factors of Knowledge Worker-Workplace Fit: Identifying the Key Drivers," Open Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 1(1), pages 167-178, December.
    2. Xiao, Jing, 2018. "Post-acquisition dynamics of technology start-ups: drawing the temporal boundaries of post-acquisition restructuring process," Papers in Innovation Studies 2018/12, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    3. Diana W.P. Kwok, 2018. "Boundary spanning and subordinate—leader trust: A tale of two acquisitions in a multicultural emerging economy," Post-Print hal-01744451, HAL.
    4. Ivan Pavlyutkin, 2014. "University Merger And Sensemaking At The Threshold: Understanding Radical Organizational Change In Higher Education," HSE Working papers WP BRP 16/EDU/2014, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    5. Helene Loe Colman & Birgitte Grøgaard & Inger G. Stensaker, 2022. "Organizational identity work in MNE subsidiaries: Managing dual embeddedness," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 53(9), pages 1997-2022, December.
    6. Kim, Dennie & Funk, Russell & Zaheer, Aks, 2020. "Structure in Context: A Morphological View of Whole Network Performance," SocArXiv x6q7g, Center for Open Science.
    7. Hong Zhu & Qi Zhu, 2016. "Mergers and acquisitions by Chinese firms: A review and comparison with other mergers and acquisitions research in the leading journals," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 33(4), pages 1107-1149, December.
    8. Kwok, Diana W.P. & Meschi, Pierre-Xavier & Bertrand, Olivier, 2020. "In CEOs we trust: When religion matters in cross-border acquisitions. The case of a multifaith country," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 29(4).
    9. Michelle Gander, 2019. "Let the right one in: A Bourdieusian analysis of gender inequality in universities’ senior management," Gender, Work and Organization, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(2), pages 107-123, March.
    10. Teerikangas, Satu & Colman, Helene Loe, 2020. "Theorizing in the qualitative study of mergers & acquisitions," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(1).
    11. Helene Loe Colman & Audrey Rouzies, 2018. "Postacquisition Boundary Spanning: A Relational Perspective on Integration," Post-Print hal-03279605, HAL.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:somere:v:51:y:2022:i:4:p:1681-1720. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.