Abstract
This study advances organizational legitimacy research by examining the microlevel mechanisms through which evaluators form propriety beliefs. Building on legitimacy-as-perception research, which posits that evaluators rely on validity cues to make judgments, we argue that individual evaluators draw on broader, more nuanced sets of information than previously acknowledged. Specifically, we theorize and show how coexisting, distinct validity cues (authorization and endorsement) combine with evaluators' microlevel perceptions of an organization's categorical fit to shape propriety beliefs. Across two factorial survey experiments (n = 1,866), perceived categorical fit emerges as the strongest and most consistent predictor of propriety beliefs. Validity cues shape propriety beliefs, but their effects are far from uniform. The findings also reveal that cue valence matters and that complex interplays of validity cues distinctly influence propriety beliefs. This research contributes to legitimacy-as-perception literature, and more specifically to microlevel legitimacy by offering a granular perspective on how propriety beliefs get constructed from diverse informational cues. By introducing categorical fit as a novel explanatory mechanism, we extend existing theory and encourage further investigations of how it influences microlevel legitimacy perceptions and how various combinations of validity cues can shape evaluations of organizational legitimacy.