IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ecl/stabus/3161.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Conflicting Social Codes and Organizations: Hygiene and Authenticity in Consumer Evaluations of Restaurants

Author

Listed:
  • Lehman, David W.
  • Kovacs, Balazs
  • Carroll, Glenn R.

    (Stanford University)

Abstract

Organization theory highlights the spread of norms of rationality in contemporary life. Yet rationality does not always spread without friction; individuals often act based on other beliefs and norms. We explore this problem in the context of restaurants and diners. We argue that consumers potentially apply either of two social codes when forming value judgments about restaurants: (1) an apparently rational science-based code of hygiene involving compliance with local health regulations or (2) a context-activated code of authenticity involving conformity to cultural norms. We propose that violations of the hygiene code recede in importance when the authenticity code is activated. This claim is supported by empirical analyses of 442,086 online consumer reviews and 52,740 governmental health inspections conducted from 2004 to 2011.

Suggested Citation

  • Lehman, David W. & Kovacs, Balazs & Carroll, Glenn R., 2014. "Conflicting Social Codes and Organizations: Hygiene and Authenticity in Consumer Evaluations of Restaurants," Research Papers 3161, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    • Handle: RePEc:ecl:stabus:3161
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.gsb.stanford.edu/faculty-research/working-papers/conflicting-social-codes-organizations-hygiene-authenticity-consumer
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kieran O’Connor & Glenn R Carroll & Balázs Kovács, 2017. "Disambiguating authenticity: Interpretations of value and appeal," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(6), pages 1-22, June.
    2. Robert Home & Bernadette Oehen & Anneli Käsmayr & Joerg Wiesel & Nicolaj Van der Meulen, 2020. "The Importance of Being Local: The Role of Authenticity in the Concepts Offered by Non-Themed Domestic Restaurants in Switzerland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-16, May.
    3. Kovács, Balázs & Lehman, David W. & Carroll, Glenn R., 2020. "Grade inflation in restaurant hygiene inspections: Repeated interactions between inspectors and restaurateurs," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    4. Daphne Demetry, 2019. "How Organizations Claim Authenticity: The Coproduction of Illusions in Underground Restaurants," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(5), pages 937-960, September.
    5. Hisayuki Yoshimoto & Andriy Zapechelnyuk, 2019. "Are There 'Ratatouille' Restaurants? On Anticorrelation of Food Quality and Hygiene," Discussion Paper Series, School of Economics and Finance 202001, School of Economics and Finance, University of St Andrews, revised 05 Mar 2020.
    6. Tamar Sagiv & Tal Simons & Israel Drori, 2020. "The Construction of Authenticity in the Creative Process: Lessons from Choreographers of Contemporary Dance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(1), pages 23-46, January.
    7. Oliver Hahl, 2016. "Turning Back the Clock in Baseball: The Increased Prominence of Extrinsic Rewards and Demand for Authenticity," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(4), pages 929-953, August.
    8. Nevena Radoynovska & Brayden G. King, 2019. "To Whom Are You True? Audience Perceptions of Authenticity in Nascent Crowdfunding Ventures," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(4), pages 781-802, July.
    9. Canavan, Brendan & McCamley, Claire, 2021. "Negotiating authenticity: Three modernities," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    10. Oliver Hahl & Jaekyung Ha, 2020. "Committed Diversification: Why Authenticity Insulates Against Penalties for Diversification," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(1), pages 1-22, January.
    11. Miron Avidan & Dror Etzion & Joel Gehman, 2019. "Opaque transparency: How material affordances shape intermediary work," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(2), pages 197-219, June.
    12. Maria R. Ibanez & Michael W. Toffel, 2020. "How Scheduling Can Bias Quality Assessment: Evidence from Food-Safety Inspections," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(6), pages 2396-2416, June.
    13. Justin Frake, 2017. "Selling Out: The Inauthenticity Discount in the Craft Beer Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(11), pages 3930-3943, November.
    14. Anthony Vashevko, 2019. "Does the Middle Conform or Compete? Quality Thresholds Predict the Locus of Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(1), pages 88-108, February.
    15. Jason Miller & Keith Skowronski & John Saldanha, 2022. "Asset ownership & incentives to undertake non‐contractible actions: The case of trucking," Journal of Supply Chain Management, Institute for Supply Management, vol. 58(1), pages 65-91, January.
    16. Buhr, Helena & Funk, Russell J. & Owen-Smith, Jason, 2021. "The authenticity premium: Balancing conformity and innovation in high technology industries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1).
    17. Todd Schifeling & Daphne Demetry, 2021. "The New Food Truck in Town: Geographic Communities and Authenticity-Based Entrepreneurship," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(1), pages 133-155, January.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ecl:stabus:3161. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/gsstaus.html .

    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.