摘要：The study of legitimacy and legal/illegal boundaries has fascinated social scientists and other scholars for many years. What is considered legal and illegal, legitimate and illegitimate is at best a social construct and, arguably, at worst defined or imposed by socio-economic systems such as capitalism or communism. The construct is a fluid one, open to definition by social groups and individuals, as well as being enshrined in laws and regulations designed to protect and preserve economic systems. It is curious, therefore, that researchers of organizations and management have paid relatively little attention to both the definitions and the activities of what might be considered illegal or illegitimate organizations.To explore this topic, we need first to clarify the field under study in terms of economic activity and actors. Economic activity cannot be conceptualized as black or white. Grey areas exist. That is why numerous concepts have been used to define the scope of activities considered to be law-breaking or socially unacceptable, including the shadow economy or underground economy, illicit business, illegal activities, and the informal economy. The OECD (2002), in an attempt to achieve complete coverage of national economic production, tried to establish some order and introduced "non-observed economy", a construct encompassing three defined components: underground production, illegal production and informal sector production. But the OECD acknowledged that the distinction between components remains confusing, at least in that underground and informal production overlap. Webb et al. (2009) offer a more comprehensive framework for defining socially or legally forbidden activities1. They draw upon entrepreneurial process and institutional theory to distinguish three categories of entrepreneurial activity (or economic territory):
