A New Take on the Categorical Imperative: Gatekeeping, Boundary Maintenance, and Evaluation Penalties in Science

Riccardo Fini (), Julien Jourdan (), Markus Perkmann () and Laura Toschi ()
Additional contact information
Riccardo Fini: Department of Management, University of Bologna, 40126 Bologna, Italy
Julien Jourdan: Department of Management and Human Resources, HEC Paris, 78350 Jouy-en-Josas, France
Markus Perkmann: Management & Entrepreneurship Department, Imperial College Business School, London SW7 2AZ, United Kingdom
Laura Toschi: Department of Management, University of Bologna, 40126 Bologna, Italy

Organization Science, 2023, vol. 34, issue 3, 1090-1110

Abstract: Extant theory suggests that candidates with an unfocused identity—those spanning different categories—suffer from a valuation penalty because evaluators are confused by their profile and concerned they lack the required skills. We argue that unfocused candidates may be penalized for another reason; they threaten established social boundaries. This happens in contexts where evaluators act as gatekeepers for social entities, such as professions. We test how the penalty applied to unfocused candidates varies in an academic accreditation process, a setting where evaluators decide on admitting candidates to an academic discipline and where candidates’ prior performance is observable. We find using data on the 2012 national scientific qualification in Italian academia that the valuation penalty applied to unfocused (multidisciplinary) candidates was most pronounced for the most high-performing candidates. High-performing yet ill-fitting candidates threaten the distinctiveness and knowledge domain of the discipline and are hence penalized by evaluators. High-performing multidisciplinary candidates suffered the greatest penalty in small and distinctive academic disciplines and when accreditors were highly typical members of their discipline. Our theory and findings suggest that the categorical imperative may be driven not only by cognitive or capability considerations as typically argued in the literature but also, by attempts to maintain social boundaries.

Keywords: category spanning; social valuation; social boundaries; boundary work; multidisciplinary research; science (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2023
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2022.1610 (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:inm:ororsc:v:34:y:2023:i:3:p:1090-1110

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Organization Science from INFORMS Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Asher ().