Abstract
Performance measurement stands in focus in the volume The Performance Complex: Competition and Competitions in Social Life, edited by David Stark. Top lists, university ratings, and competitions for different things; for example, talent, best chef, music awards, Nobel prize, and various sport activities, require metrics and performance metrics. The volume’s focal point is competition, which occurs in markets but also in many other spheres of life. The contributors address the growing role of performances in social life and grapple with the relationship between ratings, rankings, and competition. Most of the twelve substantive chapters draw on cultural sociology, sociology of valuation, and economic sociology, or some combination thereof. One of the volume’s key findings is that the numerical accounting of performances, as well as ratings and rankings, propel competition. Thus, competition is one, although not always necessarily intended, outcome of ratings and rankings. The competitions discussed in the volume are either the result of actors who mutually adjust to one another or the result of organization.
Stark’s introduction (Chapter 1) connects the other twelve chapters and outlines some of the book’s main ideas. The introduction, for example, distinguishes between “head-to-head” competition, that is, “direct and zero-sum” oriented competition (p. 4), which could alternatively be called duel or combat, and the classic triadic (Simmelian) competition. Competitions are seen as performative and create value by assigning value to the winner or the winning object, but value is also made by the outcomes of competition – what the winner is or does becomes valued.
Part one analyses the relationship between performance and competition. The performative dimension of competition is well demonstrated in Solaroli’s Chapter 3 on what is considered good press photography. Solaroli shows that what is deemed good press photography has changed over time, and this is partly defined by the winner of the World Press Photo Awards. Kreiner (Chapter 2) shows in his analysis of architecture competitions that there is an “interplay” between the competition’s criteria, the high-status jury, and the submitted proposals from which the winner is picked. This interplay is reflected in the justification of the winner, that draws on discursive repertoires that can be made legitimate to the audience, which is also made up of the competitors who did not win. McCormick’s Chapter 4 stresses that music competitions, while not objectively clear in what they measure, are embedded in a context of different possible interpretations. It represents an interesting study of how organized competitions are merely attempts to valorize certain phenomena. Such valorization operates on the condition of the audience, which either acclaims, denounces, or simply ignores the outcome.
Part two analyses the relations between ratings, rankings, and competitions. As Stark’s introduction observes “singularities are reduced to comparabilities” (p. 11), which is often done by ratings and rankings. One difference is that ratings are absolute, meaning that all those rated can get the best score, whereas rankings imply relative positioning of those ranked. With a chapter offering both context and theory, in addition to a more concrete discussion, Espeland (Chapter 5) shows how rankings create consequences for audiences; for example, applicants to law schools as well as those subject to ranking. Furthermore, rankings tend to promote competition between organizations, which may also lead to changed policies for those working in the organizations. Ranking activities do not have to be discrete. Instead, they can be ongoing frames of references, to which other activities are tied. In the book’s most theoretically elaborated chapter, Esposito and Stark (Chapter 6) examine ratings, rankings, and competitions as reference points for social actors. The outcomes, in terms of performance metrics, reduce the complexity of the world by ordering deeds and activities that are otherwise largely unordered due to value uncertainty. This chapter also problematizes ratings and rankings. In a clearly presented chapter, Velthuis and van Doorn (Chapter 8) show how sex workers worldwide, by offering their posing services online, compete for positions on platforms. These platforms use algorithms to rank those offering their services. Those who get higher scores also get more exposure on homepages, and thus more income-generating opportunities. Payne’s Chapter 7 shows how Zagat restaurant rankings are constructed, stressing the organized elements that condition performance measurements and the thereto connected competition that might evolve.
The final part includes five chapters, each elaborating on one or more dimensions of ratings, rankings, and competitions. Davies (Chapter 9) clarifies what competition means and relates it to platform capitalism, which is essentially about monopoly making. Cardon (Chapter 10) studies the problem of reputation in the virtual world, arguing that audience and network specifics limit its range. Bach’s Chapter 11 studies the political social experiment of “social credit” rating in China; a system that resembles Alfred Marshall’s ideas, although he never argued for forced implementation and inclusion of citizens. In his Chapter 12, Prey examines the consequences of ratings and rankings for musicians, and how they react and adjust to “likes” and other “performance metrics” to which they are exposed to, voluntarily or not. In the book’s last chapter, Muniesa (Chapter 13) explores the relationship between performance and value at business schools.
The book’s main advantage is that it points the searchlight to a sociological phenomenon that is of crucial social importance but has not yet been studied systematically. Although not all chapters contribute equally to the book’s overarching message, there is indeed a common theme. The empirical variation is considerable and shows the scope of the phenomenon. Many questions arise while reading this volume, some of which are already posed in Stark’s introduction. Given that the research field is young, the book’s theoretical contribution is neither particularly coherent nor advanced. Nevertheless, some key notions are discussed, such as market, rating, ranking, and competition. The notion of competition, particularly how it is organized, is, moreover, the theme of the forthcoming book, Competition: What it is and Why it Happens (in press) edited by Arora-Jonsson et al., which indicates a growing interest in the field of competition beyond the obvious case of “market competition”. Stark also identifies uncertainty as a more general issue that is addressed by ratings, rankings, and competitions, since the outcomes can reduce social actors’ uncertainty. Moreover, uncertainty is a concept that could bring economists and sociologists closer to together. This volume highlights the need for more coherent theorizing in this interesting field of research. Furthermore, it is a valuable contribution that has the potential to generate increased interest in competitions, especially related to how and why they come about.