This article explores the status-attainment process of entrepreneurial firms in emerging categories. Previous literature emphasizes that in emerging categories, being perceived as the exemplars is important to attain status. We emphasize that clear symbolic boundaries around emerging categories can increase the possibility of exemplar perception and argue that entrepreneurial firms and influential stakeholders of existing categories can affect the status-attainment process by changing such perception. Specifically, contrast and distinctiveness rhetorical claims employed by entrepreneurial firms and negative responses from influential stakeholders differently affect status by delineating symbolic boundaries around the emerging category to varying degrees. We find support for our arguments in Korean online newspapers. The utilization of contrast claims compared with print media or receiving conciliations from print media’s influential stakeholders increased the status of online newspapers, measured by news-source citations. However, distinctiveness claims compared with other online newspapers negatively affect status, albeit mitigated by negative responses from influential stakeholders.
AnsariSGarudRKumaraswamyA (2016) The disruptor’s dilemma: TiVo and the US television ecosystem. Strategic Management Journal37(9): 1829–1853.
2.
AversaPHuygheABonadioG (2021) First impressions stick: Market entry strategies and category priming in the digital domain. Journal of Management Studies58(7): 1721–1760.
3.
BaronJN (2004) Employing identities in organizational ecology. Industrial and Corporate Change13(1): 3–32.
CarrollRFengMLe MensG, et al. (2010) Organizational evolution with fuzzy technological formats: Tape drive producers in the world market, 1951-1998. Research in the Sociology of Organization31: 203–234.
6.
CattaniGFerrianiSLanzaA (2017) Deconstructuring the outsider puzzle: The ligitimation journey of novelty. Organization Science28(6): 965–992.
7.
ChandlerDHaunschildPRRheeM, et al. (2013) The effects of firm reputation and status on interorganizational network structure. Strategic Organization11(3): 217–244.
8.
ChangW-Y (2005) Online civic participation, and political empowerment: Online media and public opinion formation in Korea. Media Culture and Society27(6): 925–935.
9.
ChoiJ (2011) Chosun Ilbos lawsuit against Pressian. Chosun Ilbo, 1April, p. 12.
10.
ChoiMChoY (2007) The News Creation Process and Consumption of Online Newspapers. Seoul: Korea Press Foundation.
11.
CorleyKGGioiaDA (2004) Identity ambiguity and change in the wake of a corporate spin-off. Administrative Science Quarterly49(2): 173–208.
12.
CorrellSJRidgewayCLZuckermanEW, et al. (2017) It’s the conventional thought that counts: How third-order inference produces status advantage. American Sociological Review82(2): 297–327.
13.
DavidRJSineWDHavemanHA (2013) Seizing opportunity in emerging fields: How institutional entrepreneurs legitimated the professional form of management consulting. Organization Science24(2): 356–377.
14.
DurandRKhaireM (2017) Where do market categories come from and how? Distinguishing category creation from category emergence. Journal of Management43(1): 87–110.
15.
DurandRGranqvistNTyllströmA (2017) From categories to categorization: Studies in sociology, organizations, and strategy at the crossroads. Research in the Sociology of Organization51: 3–30.
16.
FernandezJW (2000) Peripheral wisdom. In: CohenAP (ed.) Signifying Identities: Anthropological Perspectives on Boundaries and Contested Values. New York: Routledge, pp. 117–144.
FrenchHW (2003) Online newspaper shakes Korean politics. New York Times, 6March, p. A3.
19.
GeorgallisPDowellGDurandR (2019) Shine on me: Industry coherence and policy support for emerging industries. Administrative Science Quarterly64(3): 503–541.
20.
GouldRV (2002) The origins of status hierarchies: A formal theory and empirical test. American Journal of Sociology107(5): 1143–1178.
21.
HannanMTPólosLCarrollGR (2007) Logics of Organization Theory: Audiences, Codes, and Ecologies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
22.
HigginsMCGulatiR (2003) Getting off to a good start: The effects of upper echelon affiliations on underwriter prestige. Organization Science14(3): 244–263.
23.
HilbeJM (2007) Negative Binomial Regression. New York: Cambridge University Press.
24.
HsuGGrodalS (2021) The double-edged sword of oppositional category positioning: A study of the U.S. e-cigarette category, 2007–2017. Administrative Science Quarterly66(1): 86–132.
25.
HsuGNegroGKoçakÖ (2010) Categories in markets: Origins and evolution. Research in the Sociology of Organization31: 3–35.
26.
HuangZWashingtonM (2015) Assimilation or contrast? Status inequality judgment of product quality and product choices in markets. Organization Science26(6): 1752–1768.
27.
JensenMKimBKimH (2011) The importance of status in markets: A market identity perspective. In: PearceJL (ed.) Status Organization and Management. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 87–117.
28.
KennedyMT (2008) Getting counted: Markets media and reality. American Sociolocial Review73(2): 270–295.
29.
KennedyMTLoJYLounsburyM (2010) Category currency: The changing value of conformity as a function of ongoing meaning construction. Research in the Sociology of Organization31: 369–397.
30.
KimB (2020) Normative uncertainty and middle-status innovation in the US daily newspaper industry. Strategic Organization18(3): 377–406.
31.
KimE-GHamiltonJW (2006) Capitulation to capital? OhmyNews as alternative media. Media Culture and Society28(4): 541–560.
32.
KimY (2015) Negotiation Mediation Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution Methods. Seoul: Ewha Women University Press.
33.
KingBGClemensESFryM (2011) Identity realization and organizational forms: Differentiation and consolidation of identities among Arizona’s charter schools. Organization Science22(3): 554–572.
KovachBRosenstielT (2007) The Elements of Journalism: What Newspeople Should Know and the Public Should Expect. 2nd ed.New York: Random House LLC.
36.
KovácsBHannanMT (2010) The consequences of category spanning depend on contrast. Research in the Sociology of Organization31: 175–202.
37.
LamontMMolnárV (2002) The study of boundaries in the social sciences. Annual Review of Sociology28(1): 167–195.
38.
McKendrickDGJaffeeJCarrollGR, et al. (2003) In the bud? Disk array producers as a (possibly) emergent organizational form. Administrative Science Quarterly48(1): 60–93.
39.
MathiasBDHuygheAWilliamsDW (2020) Selling your soul to the devil? The importance of independent ownership to identity distinctiveness for oppositional categories. Strategic Management Journal41(13): 2548–2584.
40.
MeziasSJBoyleE (2005) Blind trust: Market control legal environments and the dynamics of competitive intensity in the early American film industry 1893–1920. Administrative Science Quarterly50(1): 1–34.
41.
MilanovHShepherdDA (2013) The importance of the first relationship: The ongoing influence of initial network on future status. Strategic Management Journal34(6): 727–750.
42.
MurphyGL (2002) The Big Book of Concepts. Boston, MA: MIT Press.
43.
NavisCGlynnMA (2010) How new market categories emerge: Temporal dynamics of legitimacy identity and entrepreneurship in satellite radio 1990–2005. Administrative Science Quarterly55(3): 439–471.
44.
NavisCGlynnMA (2011) Legitimate distinctiveness and the entrepreneurial identity: Influence on investor judgments of new venture plausibility. Academy of Management Review36(3): 479–499.
45.
NegroGHannanMTRaoH (2010) Categorical contrast and audience appeal: Niche width and critical success in winemaking. Industrial and Corporate Change19(5): 1397–1425.
46.
OhYH (2004) The Speciality of Korea: Ohmynews. Seoul: Humanist.
47.
PavlikJV (2008) Media in the Digital Age. New York: Columbia University Press.
48.
PhillipsACouldryNFreedmanD (2010) An ethical deficit? Accountability, norms and the material conditions of contemporary journalism. In: FentonN (ed.) New Media, Old News. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 51–67.
49.
PodolnyJM (2005) Status Signals: A Sociological Study of Market Competition. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
50.
PollockTGGulatiR (2007) Standing out from the crowd: The visibility-enhancing effects of IPO-related signals on alliance formation by entrepreneurial firms. Strategic Organization5(4): 339–372.
51.
Press Arbitration Commission (PAC) (2016) Press arbitration commission brochure. Available at: https://www.pac.or.kr/eng/main/ (accessed 5 May 2017).
52.
RaoHMoninPDurandR (2003) Institutional change in Toque Ville: Nouvelle cuisine as an identity movement in French gastronomy. American Journal of Sociology108(4): 795–843.
53.
RheeEYLoJYKennedyMT, et al. (2017) Things that last? Category creation, imprinting, and durability. Research in the Sociology of Organization51: 295–325.
54.
SantosFMEisenhardtKM (2009) Constructing markets and shaping boundaries: Entrepreneurial power in nascent fields. Academy of Management Journal52(4): 643–671.
55.
ShimS-T (2015) Alternative Cedia in Korea: From OhmyNews to Newstapa. Understanding Journalism in Korea. Seoul: Communication Books, pp. 115–143.
56.
ShimS-T (2016) Understanding the Press Act in Korea. Seoul: Culturelook.
57.
SineWDDavidRJMitsuhashiH (2007) From plan to plant: Effects of certification on operational start-up in the emergent independent power sector. Organization Science18(4): 578–594.
58.
StuartTE (2000) Interorganizational alliances and the performance of firms: A study of growth and innovation rates in a high-technology industry. Strategic Management Journal21(8): 791–811.
59.
StuartTEHoangHHybelsRC (1999) Interorganizational endorsements and the performance of entrepreneurial ventures. Administrative Science Quarterly44(2): 315–349.
60.
VerhaalJCHoskinsJDLundmarkLW (2017) Little fish in a big pond: Legitimacy transfer authenticity and factors of peripheral firm entry and growth in the market center. Strategic Management Journal38(12): 2532–2552.
YoungerSFisherG (2020) The exemplar enigma: New venture image formation in an emergent organizational category. Journal of Business Venturing35(1): 105897.
63.
ZhaoEY (2022) Optimal Distinctiveness: A New Approach to the Competitive Positioning of Organizations and Markets. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
64.
ZhaoEYIshiharaMJenningsPD, et al. (2018) Optimal distinctiveness in the console video game industry: An exemplar-based model of proto-category evolution. Organization Science29(4): 588–611.
65.
ZuckermanEW (1999) The categorical imperative: Securities analysts and the illegitimacy discount. American Journal of Sociology104(5): 1398–1438.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
