This study aims to examine how theoretical coherence is produced and maintained within an organisational field as theoretical diversity expands. It introduces canon path dependence to explain how dominant frameworks may persist through processes of extension without substi-tution, stabilising coherence while structuring the conditions under which new contributions become visible and legitimate.
Using a longitudinal data set of family business research (1990–2025), the study adopts a diagnostic, multi-layered design to analyse how coherence is organised at the field level.
The findings indicate that the field examined evolved through a patterned process of exten-sion without substitution rather than paradigmatic replacement. Established frameworks remained central organising reference structures as new contributions accumulated around them. This continuity was reflected in temporal retention, cognitive centrality and recurrent institutional publication pathways. While supporting evaluative coherence, this architecture also structured the conditions under which new contributions became visible and legitimate.
The analysis is based on a single empirical field, which limits direct generalisation. The study nevertheless develops a processual framework that may inform comparative analyses of co-herence and legitimacy across other knowledge-producing fields.
Evaluative infrastructures shape what becomes visible and legitimate, highlighting the need for reflexive engagement with dominant frameworks.
This paper contributes to organisational analysis by showing how field-level knowledge sys-tems organise coherence, evaluation and legitimacy. It extends strategy process concepts beyond the organisational boundary while repositioning fields as organised systems of evalu-ation and sensemaking.
