This paper presents a comparative analysis of career gatekeeping processes in two cultural fields. Drawing on data on appointment procedures in German academia and booking processes in North American stand-up comedy, we compare how gatekeepers in two widely different contexts evaluate and select candidates for established positions in their respective field and validate their decisions. Focusing on three types of gatekeeping practices that have been documented in prior research—typecasting, comparison, and legitimization—our analysis reveals major differences in how gatekeepers perform these practices across our two cases: (1) typecasting based on ascriptive categories versus professional criteria, (2) comparisons that are ad-hoc and holistic versus systematic and guided by performance criteria, and (3) legitimation by means of ritualization versus transparency. We argue that these differences are related to the social and organizational context in which gatekeepers make selection decisions, including differences in the structure of academic and creative careers and the organization of the respective labor markets in which these careers unfold. These findings contribute to scholarship on gatekeeping in cultural fields by providing comparative insights into the work of career gatekeepers and the social organization of career gatekeeping processes.

中文翻译：

---

文化领域的职业看门人

本文对两个文化领域的职业守门过程进行了比较分析。利用德国学术界的任命程序和北美单口喜剧的预订流程数据，我们比较了两种截然不同的背景下的看门人如何评估和选择各自领域既定职位的候选人并验证他们的决定。专注于先前研究中记录的三种类型的守门人实践——类型转换、比较和合法化——我们的分析揭示了在我们的两个案例中看门人如何执行这些实践的主要差异：（1）基于指定类别与专业标准的类型转换， (2) 以绩效标准为指导的临时性和整体性与系统性的比较，(3) 通过仪式化与透明化的合法化。我们认为，这些差异与看门人做出选择决定的社会和组织背景有关，包括学术和创造性职业结构的差异以及这些职业展开的各个劳动力市场的组织。这些发现通过提供对职业守门人的工作和职业守门人过程的社会组织的比较见解，有助于文化领域的守门人学术研究。包括学术和创造性职业结构的差异以及这些职业在其中展开的各自劳动力市场的组织。这些发现通过提供对职业守门人的工作和职业守门人过程的社会组织的比较见解，为文化领域的守门学者做出了贡献。包括学术和创造性职业结构的差异以及这些职业在其中展开的各自劳动力市场的组织。这些发现通过提供对职业守门人的工作和职业守门人过程的社会组织的比较见解，有助于文化领域的守门人学术研究。