2015•Academy of Management ProceedingsRequires access

Disentangling Legitimacy: Towards A Taxonomy Of Legitimacy States

Bjorn Paul Claes, Sonia S. Siraz, Julio O. DeCastro

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

In this paper, we advance the understanding of legitimacy by exploring the different states of legitimacy that could typify an actor at a given moment in time and the conclusions that can be drawn from that state that will guide the process to enhance or sustain legitimacy in the eyes of evaluators. We extend theory by 1) drawing attention to the presence of intermediate states of legitimacy and challenge the implicit notion of legitimacy as a dichotomous variable, 2) clarifying the notions of the object and the state of legitimacy, and 3) proposing a taxonomy of legitimacy states. We apply this taxonomy to a hypothetical data set and review a series of conceivable judgment distributions. In doing so, we identify two alternative states of legitimacy: polarized legitimacy and uniform distributed judgments. We finish this paper with a series of conclusions, discuss their implications for theory and practice and suggest avenues for further research.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

In this paper, we advance the understanding of legitimacy by exploring the different states of legitimacy that could typify an actor at a given moment in time and the conclusions that can be drawn from that state that will guide the process to enhance or sustain legitimacy in the eyes of evaluators. We extend theory by 1) drawing attention to the presence of intermediate states of legitimacy and challenge the implicit notion of legitimacy as a dichotomous variable, 2) clarifying the notions of the object and the state of legitimacy, and 3) proposing a taxonomy of legitimacy states. We apply this taxonomy to a hypothetical data set and review a series of conceivable judgment distributions. In doing so, we identify two alternative states of legitimacy: polarized legitimacy and uniform distributed judgments. We finish this paper with a series of conclusions, discuss their implications for theory and practice and suggest avenues for further research.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

In this paper, we advance the understanding of legitimacy by exploring the different states of legitimacy that could typify an actor at a given moment in time and the conclusions that can be drawn from that state that will guide the process to enhance or sustain legitimacy in the eyes of evaluators. We extend theory by 1) drawing attention to the presence of intermediate states of legitimacy and challenge the implicit notion of legitimacy as a dichotomous variable, 2) clarifying the notions of the object and the state of legitimacy, and 3) proposing a taxonomy of legitimacy states. We apply this taxonomy to a hypothetical data set and review a series of conceivable judgment distributions. In doing so, we identify two alternative states of legitimacy: polarized legitimacy and uniform distributed judgments. We finish this paper with a series of conclusions, discuss their implications for theory and practice and suggest avenues for further research.

Key concepts: Legitimacy, Taxonomy (biology), State (computer science), Set (abstract data type), Political science, Epistemology, Law and economics, Sociology

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source