Search results

This article suggests that both producers and analysts are strategic about categorization. Producers use categorization to maintain a balance of differentiation and legitimacy, whereas analysts seek to influence categorization and clarify boundaries. Ideas are explored for software producers and Gartner, the preeminent high-technology analyst. Findings show evidence of strategic categorization. Producers move to proximate market categories in response to competition. Gartner reports on large categories and those that receive investment and stops reporting on categories that have fuzzy boundaries. Compared to analysts, producers may be more influential in category creation than previous research has acknowledged.

The popularity of research into categories has grown in recent decades and shows no sign of abating. This introductory article takes stock of the research into two facets of categorization, addressing it both as a cognitive and a social process. We advocate a rebalance toward the social process of categorization, paying more heed to the entity to be categorized, the actors involved, their acts, and the context and timing, which informs these activities. We summarize the contributions to the volume in relation to these dimensions and briefly discuss avenues for future research.

Organizations create their environments by constructing interpretations and then acting on them as if they were true. This study examines the cognitive spatial boundaries that managers of Manhattan hotels impose on their competitive environment. We derive and estimate a model that specifies how the attributes of managers’ own hotels and potential rival hotels influence their categorization of competing and non-competing hotels. We show that similarity in geographic location, price, and size are central to managers’ beliefs about the identity of their competitors, but that the weights they assign to these dimensions when categorizing competitors diverge from their influence on competitive outcomes, and indicate an overemphasis on geographic proximity. Although such categorization is commonly conceived as a rational process based on the assessment of similarities and differences, we suggest that significant distortions can occur in the categorization process and examine empirically how factors including managers’ attribution errors, cognitive limitations, and (in)experience lead them to make type I and type II competitor categorization errors and to frame competitive environments that are incomplete, erroneous, or even superstitious. Our findings suggest that understanding inter-firm competition may require greater attention being given to the cognitive foundations of competition.

In our chapter we describe the analysis of categorisations as an important part of narrative criminology. Categorisations of people (as offenders, victims, witnesses, etc.) are a central component of the communicative construction and processing of crime. Categories are associated with assumptions about actions and personal characteristics. Therefore, categorisations play a prominent role in the question of whether and how someone should be dealt with or punished. Narratives essentially consist of categorisations as well as the representation of a temporal course of interactions and actions. Analysing categorisations can therefore provide decisive insights for narrative criminology. With the research method of ‘Membership Categorisation Analysis’, categorisations can be reconstructed in detail. We describe this potential by reconstructing how the defendant ‘Dave’ categorised himself in the context of his main trial and how he was categorised by others in order to justify a judgement against him. Our analysis shows that categorisations, which are socially impactful and often controversial, must be established by particular narrative manoeuvres.

Social categorization processes may lead work groups to form different types of group norms. We present a model of norm formation and suggest that group norms may emerge immediately following the group’s inception. Further, the content of such norms may be influenced by group members’ demographic heterogeneity. We outline a profile of work group norms and describe how social categorization processes influence norm formation. We also develop a series of testable propositions related to these norms. Finally, we discuss the implications of our social categorization model for future research on work groups in organizations.

Although some researchers have recognized that context can play an important role in explaining the mixed findings of past diversity research, to date a comprehensive framework for specifying these contextual influences has been lacking. In order to address this gap, we propose a framework for future research that incorporates contextual variables at extra-organizational, organizational, and team levels. We consider how these various aspects of diversity influence categorization-based or elaboration-based diversity outcomes. We also present findings of a literature review that identifies aspects of diversity context that have received attention directly or indirectly in research conducted between 1999 and 2007.

Bitcoin is difficult to categorize and indeed has been associated with 112 different labels in the British media (e.g., “private money,” “commodity”) – most of which poorly describe bitcoin. Specifically, our analyses of 674 media articles, focusing on the relationship between labeling and categorization, identify classification inconsistencies at three levels: within clusters of labels, between labels and categories, and between category attributes. These inconsistencies hamper categorization based on attribute similarity, audience goals, and causal models, respectively. We identify four factors that nurture this categorical anarchy and conclude with a call for research on the socioeconomic revolution heralded by blockchain technology.

Within social and organizational psychology and the other social sciences the concept of identity is now widely embraced. Two theories that are increasingly being applied to help make sense of group and organizational identification are social identity theory and self-categorization theory (Tajfel, 1978; Turner, 1982; Turner, Hogg, Oakes, Reicher & Wetherell, 1987). These theories, jointly referred to as the social identity perspective, recognise that people’s individual characteristics and their group memberships play a significant role in shaping attitudes, values, beliefs, and behavior. Given this focus, interest in these theories mirrors the growing popularity of group-based management techniques applied to topics such as group decision-making, team building, group performance, organizational culture and organizational change.

Social networks provide the architecture to facilitate important socio-emotional and task related exchanges within groups. However, researchers have just begun to explore how relationships form in groups comprised of individuals who differ on one or more dimensions. This paper investigates the role of social categorization and social network theories on the formation of social networks within diverse groups. We suggest that each perspective offers an alternative, but incomplete, understanding of how relationships may arise in diverse groups. Specifically, we integrate these two perspectives to provide a more complete understanding of how different types of diversity impact tie formation and allow individuals in diverse groups to achieve their socio-emotional and task-related objectives.