The Double-edged Sword of Oppositional Category Positioning: A Study of the U.S. E-cigarette Category, 2007–2017

To gain attention and build support for new categories, market entrepreneurs often define a new category through its contrast with related, established offerings. Existing research has largely focused on the benefits of this oppositional categorical positioning. In this study, we explore how this strategy might be a double-edged sword. Through a longitudinal inductive study of the e-cigarette category in the U.S. (2007–2017), we develop theory on the risks of associating with an already established category. In our empirical case, we document how value-based distinctions between cigarettes and e-cigarettes became eroded and the e-cigarette category grew increasingly stigmatized. We then propose several mechanisms through which the symbolic and social boundaries between a new and an established category can weaken and the stigma associated with an existing category can become diffused, intensified, and generalized—both across organizational features and across organizations in the new category. This case allows us to investigate the processes by which strategies to legitimize categories may backfire and to consider the role that a diverse set of core and peripheral stakeholders—who enter the market with pre-existing knowledge and motivations—play in category stigmatization processes.