International Journal of Information Management 51 (2020) 101987

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Information Management

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijinfomgt

Making a space for taste: Context and discourse in the specialty coffee scene T
James Lannigan
University of Toronto, 725 Spadina Avenue, Toronto, ON, M5S 2J4, Canada

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: Connoisseur consumption is continuing to grow in popularity, with more niche retailers and specialty firms
Taste servicing increasingly discerning consumers. Despite the wealth of consumer data from social media platforms,
Specialty there has been little empirical focus on how consumers make sense of their experiences after interacting with
Discourse cultural interlocutors from niche industries with highly specialized knowledge. In order to scrutinize the process
Discourse network analysis
of distinction making in practice and reception, this study employs a mixed methods approach to triangulate the
Content analysis
Text mining
production, reception, and practice of taste-making at four coffee fairs held in Toronto, Ontario, and Hamilton,
Ontario. Through ethnographic fieldwork, conventional content analysis, and a discourse network analysis of
social media usage from attendees, this study finds that there are important contextual differences that affect
which discourses are present in-person and appear online.

1. Discourse and specialty industries niche.

Discourse is a key component of both interactions and commu-
nication (Saint-Charles & Mongeau, 2018) between retailers and their
audience. The growing literature on the role of social media platforms
shows the many benefits that retailers receive when they engage with
their consumers online (Kumar, Bezawada, Rishika, Janakiraman, &
Kannan, 2016; Laroche, Habibi, & Richard, 2013; Rapp, Beitelspacher,
Grewal, & Hughes, 2013; Sashi, 2012). While literature has focused on
analyzing how large chain operations use social media (Habibi,
Laroche, & Richard, 2014; He, Zha, & Li, 2013; Schivinski & Dabrowski,
2016), studies on the usage of social media platforms by smaller in-
dependent retailers is underdeveloped. This paucity is especially re-
levant in discursive battles for legitimacy such as those in the growing
specialty industries, who attempt to distinguish themselves from both
lowbrow and bourgeois competitors (Bourdieu, 1993).
The rise of the specialty industry has coincided with both an in-
crease in urban growth and the regular appearance of affordable
luxuries (Mundel, Huddleston, & Vodermeier, 2017). Consumers are
becoming increasingly discerning and desiring unique consumption
experiences that both satisfy aesthetically and elevate taste. The rise of
the ‘foodie’ (Johnston & Baumann, 2014), has allowed for the devel-
opment of this niche market of food and beverage consumption, how-
ever, this trend is for the most part, in its relative infancy. As a result,
retailers in craft industries tend to adopt a rising-tides approach to their
business model and avoid cut-throat capitalist style competition (Ocejo,
2017) to sustain the collective specialty scene. Each consumer that
begins to develop her taste toward specialty producers is a win for the
Outlets like blogTO for the Canadian city Toronto and even social
media platforms like Instagram and Twitter give both producers and
consumers a chance to participate in the discourse of production and
reception respectively. These encounters are primary influences for
audience engagement from prospective customers (e.g. in the case of
Yelp, Google Reviews) and from other retailers who attempt to keep an
eye on their competitors. This form of communication is not only useful
to prospective customers or practitioners however, since they are
published in the public sphere, researchers can gather these artifacts in
order to examine boundary making processes in practice.
Boundaries are essential for the craft industry to thrive since their
appeal draws heavily on discursive themes of quality, alternative pro-
duction practices (e.g. fair trade, organic), and even an emphasis on
local community connections, or the ‘smallness’ of their operation.
Without these symbolic boundaries, specialty retailers would be in di-
rect instrumental competition with their competitors, which would
significantly lower their chances of survival. By competing on the level
of values, niche industries can justify their existence against competi-
tors, but this requires consumers to buy in to their philosophy, both in
narrative and in praxis, toward the product in question. Small-scale
retailers must educate consumers why their product demands a higher
price, an increased level of appreciation, and how it is qualitatively
different from the offerings of their competitors.
2. At the frontier of consumer interactions
Managers and industry leaders should pay close attention to the

E-mail address: james.lannigan@mail.utoronto.ca.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.07.013
Received 29 December 2018; Received in revised form 20 July 2019; Accepted 23 July 2019
Available online 09 August 2019
0268-4012/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
J. Lannigan
recent analytical developments at the burgeoning nexus of text mining
and social network analysis (Antonacci, Fronzetti Colladon, Stefanini, &
Gloor, 2017; Fronzetti Colladon & Vagaggini, 2017; Fronzetti Colladon
& Gloor, 2018; Gandormi & Haider, 2015; Gloor, Fronzetti Colladon,
Grippa, & Giacomelli, 2017) given its potential to be used as a novel
source for both extracting and analyzing consumer interactions and
perceptions of brands. In particular, the unequivocal adoption of social
media by both consumers and retailers has allowed for the ability to
enhance two-way communication between firms and customers
(AlAlwan, Rana, Dwivedi, & Algharabat, 2017).
Social media can be broadly defined as consisting of various user-
driven platforms that facilitate the diffusion of content, allow for the
creation of dialogue, and afford a space for networking to occur at
different levels (Kapoor et al., 2018). These platforms have proven to be
extremely important for the exchange of ideas, thoughts, opinions and
information, even to the point of influencing the outcome of elections
(Grover, Kar, Dwivedi, & Janssen, 2018). Each social media platform
has unique affordances which allow retailers and consumers to ex-
change visual, verbal, and textual content with each other and collec-
tively construct branded experiences (AlAlwan et al., 2017; Gruzd,
Lannigan, & Quigley, 2018). Customers now interact with other cus-
tomers and brands instantaneously and share their own experiences
about firms, their products, and brands to many audiences (AlAlwan
et al., 2017). Importantly, increased social media visibility by organi-
zations has been shown to correlate with higher levels of sales and
exposure, and can be tailored to specific demographics for a more
customized marketing approach (Kapoor et al., 2018).
In this regard, social media applications are largely considered by
firms worldwide to contribute to both customers’ experiences and
customer relationship management (AlAlwan et al., 2017; Singh et al.,
2017). This is a result of a thorough research agenda developed toward
a deeper understanding of the usage patterns of social media platforms,
which can help organisations formulate a clear idea about customers’
perceptions and behaviour towards these organisations and their brand
identities (AlAlwan et al., 2017).
We know that consumers' interactions among themselves and with
companies can influence prospective customers, firm performance and
development of future products, so it is increasingly relevant to in-
vestigate the opinions of consumers and other stakeholders without
biasing their answers and experiences (Fronzetti Colladon, 2018;
Kapoor et al., 2018; Singh et al., 2017). Since social media is so crucial
for marketers, brands could easily be negatively affected if there is a
mismatch between consumer expectations and product characteristics
(Shirdastian, Laroche, & Richard, 2017), or if unskilled service provi-
ders are employed to manipulate how platforms process their in-
formation (Aswani, Kar, Ilavarasan, & Dwivedi, 2018), underlining the
importance of talk and discourse – how experiences are shared, and
how brands are discussed.
3. The role of taste in communities
The specialty coffee industry exists based on the consecration (Allen
& Germov, 2011) of selected roasts through repeated subjective eva-
luations. Considering that only approximately 10% of the world’s coffee
could be qualified as specialty coffee, these roasts are relatively rare
since their production practices yield considerably less than traditional
coffee crops, and their associated prices carve out a fraction of the
coffee-drinking market, making it risky for producers.
The specialty coffee industry is an epistemic community (Gherardi,
2009), that articulates what it means to be specialty through repeated
experiments and measures of subjective evaluations. The taste wheel
that is featured predominately in the vocabulary helps amateurs, bar-
istas, and roasters navigate potential olfactory responses elicited
through the experience of taste (e.g. floral, sour, nutty, medicinal).
Inevitably, developing, and consequently shaping one’s taste is a com-
plex affair, and as a result, the ensuing practice is multi-faceted, based
2
International Journal of Information Management 51 (2020) 101987
on a relationship between a cultural interlocutor (in this case a barista)
and a consumer. It requires a fluency in field-specific cultural capital
(Bourdieu, 1984) that connects both embodied sensations and abstract
ideas through a guided process of development. Learning how to ‘taste’
is accomplished through a long process of consumption, reflection, and
learning, eventually leading to connoisseurship (Torres Quintão &
Zamith Brito, 2015). This approach to taste emphasizes how each step
from origin to preparation impacts the olfactory sensation of the con-
sumer.
Holding evaluative coffee fairs for the public is one means for
producers to establish legitimacy within their field (Allen & Germov,
2011). Allowing consumers that are both familiar and unfamiliar with
specialty coffee the opportunity to taste a variety of roasts that could be
considered specialty not only re-establishes boundaries between the
specialty niche and the broader coffee retail industry, but also attempts
to establish familiarity between consumers and the growing industry.
These events are essential for the local retailers given that their dis-
tinctiveness from chain retailers is paramount to their success
(Thompson & Arsel, 2004).
This study extends on the process of cooperative scaffolding (Maciel
& Wallendorf, 2016), wherein cultural interlocutors interact with con-
sumers in order to further develop their cultural competence (Schwarz,
2013). The interaction between baristas and amateurs allows in-
dividuals to detect taste differences through an elaboration of proce-
dures that put taste to the test, which requires both sensory and dis-
cursive knowledge (Hennion, 2007). While the literature has developed
theories on the relationship between amateurs and interlocutors (cul-
tural experts in a given field – e.g. wine sommeliers) (Allen & Germov,
2011; Maciel & Wallendorf, 2016; Thurnell-Read, 2018), there have not
been comparative empirical evaluations of how this discourse can
change depending on the means of interaction, and how it changes by
role. Since tasting the product and articulating the experience are
crucial in the specialty coffee industry, it might be more strategic for
retailers to focus online content primarily on promotion over educa-
tional messages which are best communicated in person. Employing a
comparative approach would allow researchers the opportunity to
study whether discourse and praxis is shaped by the context in which
the interaction occurs.
4. The coffee scene in Canada
The independent Canadian coffee scene is in a relative infancy
compared to scenes in Italy, Australia and the United States. Aside from
some early proponents of freshly roasted coffee that operated primarily
in Vancouver, British Columbia, and a few small boutique cafés in
Montréal, the early Canadian scene was relatively dominated by a ‘first-
wave’ approach to coffee, emphasizing convenience over quality. This
approach is demonstrated by the Canadian chain Tim Hortons which
has, until recently, dominated coffee sales in Canada (Ciolfe, 2017).
The two main specialty coffee chains that currently operate in
Canada are Starbucks and Second Cup. In the late 1970s, Second Cup
was one of the first Canadian chain operations to develop with a focus
on specialty coffee. Evolving from a distributor of freshly roasted beans,
Second Cup scaled to a national-level chain, and is a part of the macro-
level specialty scene in Canada. Starbucks is another main competitor at
the chain level, which slowly emerged out of the Seattle, WA scene and
began to permeate throughout Canada. These chain operations are part
of the ‘second wave’ of coffee which proliferated espresso-based bev-
erages and customized coffee options (Parker, Austin, & Allhoff, 2011).
The newest trend in Canadian coffee is toward independent, small-
scale retailers, which have thrived in multiple Canadian metropolitan
cities. These independent cafes are qualitatively different from prior
offerings such as the Italian coffeehouse or the French café, both aes-
thetically and through their branding approach. They focus on practices
and discourses around single-origin coffee sources and small batch
roasting, eventually coming to identify themselves with terms like
J. Lannigan International Journal of Information Management 51 (2020) 101987

artisanal and local while connecting themselves with other “home Table 1
baristas”, (i.e. customers that approach the consumption of coffee as a Descriptive summary of posts analyzed by platform and event.
serious leisure pursuit and have access to various methods of coffee Event
preparation in their homes) in their community (Manzo, 2015). Known
as the ‘third wave of coffee’, these retailers claim that they strive for the Platform HCF BS TCTE HSCSa Total
highest quality coffee and artisanal techniques, especially when com-
Facebook 15 70 37 0 122
pared with second wavers that tend to focus on delivering consistency Instagram 239 445 102 61 847
through a bounded repertoire of beverages, including non-traditional Twitter 45 123 16 0 184
coffee drinks (ex. The Frappuccino, but for a thorough analysis of the Total 299 638 155 61 1153
use of discourses around heritage from Starbucks, see Shirdastian et al., a
This event did not feature a Twitter page, and the Facebook page did not
2017). Since the ‘second wave’ began to elevate the taste and produc-
feature any posts.
tion of coffee to mass consumers, the third wave was able to capitalize
on jaded consumers that felt that Starbucks began to lose touch with its
held in Hamilton in 2018).
artisan and ethical roots (Parker et al., 2011; Simon, 2011). As such,
many new retailers capitalize on the cultural repertoire of these con-
sumers and attempt to further develop the cultural competencies of
5.2. Content analysis
consumers (Maciel & Wallendorf, 2016) toward specialty coffee
through both differences in taste and consumption experience
After the events were finished, I obtained Facebook, Instagram, and
(Table 1).
Twitter data focusing on the content from the official accounts of each
Instead of drawing only on in situ discussions between retailers and
fair, as well the use of the relevant hashtags. I obtained Twitter data
consumers at these events, this study examines how discourse in face-
using Twitter’s official API, Facebook data using Facebook’s Graph API,
to-face interaction differs from discursive expressions through social
and Instagram data by manually searching the hashtag on the platform
media platforms. This approach is fundamentally different than inten-
and copying posts.
tional connoisseurship practices since entrance is open to the public,
Only after attending all the events and developing a familiarity with
and in some cases, free. Additionally, by including cultural artefacts
the prevalent discourses from my experiences in-person with retailers
(Bail, 2014) rather than direct interviews with participants, bias toward
and attendees did I proceed to manually analyze the online content. In
eliciting socially desirable or ‘status-based’ responses based on cultural
order to analyze these posts, I employed an inductive conventional
competency is reduced. Finally, since there is no assumption of prior
qualitative content analysis (Elo & Kyngäs, 2008; Hsieh & Shannon,
ties or even contact between actors, the loose sense of shared commu-
2005). After removing special characters and deleting irrelevant posts
nity may maintain some theoretical resemblance to established virtual
(i.e. posts using the hashtag that did not relate to the event), 1153 posts
communities (VCs) through the use of a shared language and emo-
were coded using a specialized spreadsheet (see Table 2 for an example
tionality in discourse (Antonacci et al., 2017).
of the phrases that were coded from posts). In order to extract a mul-
tiplicity of meanings from each post, posts could be coded for more than
5. Methods
one phrase (and consequently theme) at a time (e.g. A post that talks
about both how great the event was, and how insightful one of the
The three methods employed in this paper are ethnographic field-
educational events was). After the initial round of coding, I iteratively
work, qualitative coding, and discourse network analysis. The combi-
examined my inductive schema and collapsed similar themes into meta-
nation of these methods is essential to fully understand how discourse is
thematic codes. I then looked for discursive cohesion across retailers,
practiced, produced, and received by different types of actors since
events, organizer accounts, and attendees. While my manual coding
discourse is intrinsically related to power and position-taking within
method might introduce some bias over conventional automated topic
various cultural fields (Crowe, 2005; Hodges, Kuper, & Reeves, 2008;
modelling, or techniques such as LDA (Latent Dirichlet Allocation)
Redwood, 1999).
(Afful-Dadzie and Afful-Dadzie, 2017), my familiarity with the dis-
courses allows for greater semantic precision (Tables 3–4).
5.1. Fieldwork

I employed ethnographic fieldwork to capture the discourses on-the-

5.3. Discourse network analysis
ground from each fair, discussing similarities and differences. This
method was essential for understanding my research questions, and the
Finally, I used ORA1, a social network analysis software program for
field in general, given the emphasis on the sensory nature of distinction
discourse network analysis. I assessed connections among retailers and
between specialty and non-specialty coffee. It provided a richer sense of
the various coffee fairs, and I used discourse network analysis to vi-
how each of the coffee fairs were presented physically (the space, the
sualize how attendees (individuals, press, retailers, and organizers) are
amount of people attending, how the vendors were situated) and af-
connected to the various discursive themes that they employed online.
forded the opportunity to taste products, and chat with retailers. My
This application differs from other applications of discourse network
fieldwork primarily consisted of four separate entrances into the field,
analysis given that the coding is done manually (Stoddart &
lasting approximately four hours each. At each field site, I acted as a
Nezhadhossein, 2016) rather than computer-assisted (Dowell, Graesser,
keen attendee (full participant) by asking retailers questions, sampling
& Cai, 2016), and the approach here is to link actors to discursive
specialty coffees, taking pictures of the event, listening to retailers in-
themes rather than linking up words (as is the case with many socio-
teract with consumers, and talking briefly to other attendees. While in
semantic studies). The resulting network is therefore a 2-mode affilia-
the field, I took brief notes on my mobile phone, obtained and analyzed
tion network, with a consequent one mode projection of the major
pamphlets (four), and attended panel discussions with retailers when
discursive themes.
possible. These four events were selected as they centred on consumer
interaction with specialty coffee rather than spectating coffee compe-
tition (e.g. the Canadian Barista Competition). The four events are – the
Hamilton Coffee Fair (HCF, held in Hamilton in 2017), Beanstock (BS,
held in Toronto in 2018), the Toronto Coffee and Tea Expo (TCTE, held 1
Carley (2001). ORA [Software] Available from http://casos.cs.cmu.edu/
in Toronto in 2018), and the Hamilton Specialty Coffee Show (HSCS, projects/ora/software.php.

3
J. Lannigan International Journal of Information Management 51 (2020) 101987

Table 2
Examples of phrases found in posts coded within the ten discursive themes.
Example 1 Example 2 Example 3 Example 4 Example 5

Coffee community hamilton hamilton coffee coffee scene Canadian specialty coffee coffee pass
Emotional/reactive fun praise excitement interest buzzing
Instrumental-utilitarian free coffee lots of coffee coffee offer lot of coffee unlimited coffee
Educational learning education no need to be educated panel tutorial
Coffee specific technology espresso machines caffeine fix roasting fresh
Connoisseur-craft nerd enthusiast serious coffee enthusiast coffee nerd
Event specific contact coverage music age line
Retailer purchase mention of retailer ad for retailer Starbucks conversation w/retailer
Competition latte art won latte art aeropress competition barista competition coffee competition
Environment/ environment sustainability sustainable environmental ethical beans
sustainability

Table 3
Number of nodes and posts in dataset by role (percentage of column total indicated in brackets and rounded to the nearest whole number).
Role Number of nodes Number of posts Average number of posts per user (number of posts divided by Discursive variance
in dataset in dataset number of entities) (number of codes divided by number of posts see Table 4
below)

Consumer 264 (73%) 414 (36%) 414/264 = 1.57 posts 659/414 = 1.59
Press 13 (4%) 29 (3%) 29/13 = 2.23 posts 43/29 = 1.48
Organizer 6 (2%) 462 (40%) 462/6 = 77 posts 730/462 = 1.58
Retailer 79 (22%) 248 (22%) 248/79 = 3.13 posts 408/248 = 1.64
TOTAL 362 1153 1153/362 = 3.18 posts 1840/1153 = 1.60

Table 4
Distribution of discursive themes by platform, event, and role of attendee. Percentage of column total indicated in brackets (rounded to nearest whole number).
By Platform By Event By Role Total

Discursive Themes Facebook Twitter Instagram HCF HSCS TCTE BS Consumer Press Organizer Retailer

Coffee community 17 (8%) 18 (7%) 88 (6%) 54 (11%) 3 (3%) 5 (2%) 61 (6%) 45 (7%) 4 (9%) 45 (6%) 29 (7%) 123 (7%)
Emotional/reactive 22 (10%) 56 (21%) 306 (23%) 126 (27%) 13 (12%) 43 (17%) 202 (20%) 195 (30%) 7 (16%) 104 (14%) 78 (19%) 384 (21%)
Instrumental-utilitarian 6 (3%) 11 (4%) 22 (2%) 10 (2%) 2 (2%) 2 (1%) 25 (2%) 19 (3%) 1 (2%) 10 (1%) 9 (2%) 39 (2%)
Educational 8 (4%) 6 (2%) 57 (4%) 6 (1%) 8 (8%) 8 (3%) 49 (5%) 24 (4%) 2 (5%) 26 (4%) 19 (5%) 71 (4%)
Coffee specific 32 (15%) 38 (14%) 230 (17%) 94 (20%) 15 (14%) 12 (5%) 179 (18%) 113 (17%) 9 (21%) 104 (14%) 74 (18%) 300 (16%)
Connoisseur-craft 8 (4%) 0 (0%) 31 (2%) 15 (3%) 1 (1%) 1 (0%) 22 (2%) 23 (3%) 0 (0%) 11 (2%) 5 (1%) 39 (2%)
Event specific 100 (46%) 107 (41%) 421 (31%) 134 (28%) 39 (37%) 126 (51%) 329 (33%) 163 (25%) 17 (40%) 337 (46%) 111 (27%) 628 (34%)
Retailer 21 (10%) 21 (8%) 183 (13%) 30 (6%) 23 (22%) 40 (16%) 132 (13%) 66 (10%) 3 (7%) 79 (11%) 77 (19%) 225 (12%)
Competition 3 (1%) 1 (0%) 13 (1%) 5 (1%) 1 (1%) 2 (1%) 9 (1%) 8 (1%) 0 (0%) 8 (1%) 1 (0%) 17 (1%)
Environment/ 2 (1%) 6 (2%) 6 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (1%) 9 (4%) 4 (0%) 3 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (1%) 5 (1%) 14 (1%)
sustainability
TOTAL 219 264 1357 474 106 248 1012 659 43 730 408 1840

Table 5 6. Findings
Centrality-total degree measure (normalized sum of each nodes in-degree and
out-degree) of the one-mode projection of discursive themes. The top value is 6.1. Discourse on the ground – ethnographic insights
greater than one standard deviation of the mean, the bottom value is lower than
one standard deviation below the mean, and the remaining eight values are Each of the fairs that I attended were distinct and unique in their
within one standard deviation of the mean.
approach to presenting retailers and providing consumers with a nar-
Rank Discursive theme Value Unscaled rative that links together the specialty coffee scene. For instance, the
Hamilton Coffee Fair was comprised of only independent retailers from
1 Event specific 0.180 1,129
Hamilton, featuring a coffee map with 14 coffee retailers. This map,
2 Coffee specific 0.113 707
3 Emotional/reactive 0.110 691 while made for the purpose of promoting local coffee, actively com-
4 Retailer 0.081 506 municates to consumers, and other retailers, who fits and who does not
5 Coffee community 0.050 315 within the parameters of specialty coffee. The primary motive for this
6 Educational 0.029 184
event was to showcase independent retailers in the local coffee scene.
7 Instrumental-utilitarian 0.020 123
8 Connoisseur-craft 0.019 117
The Hamilton Specialty Coffee Show was the second specialty coffee
9 Competition 0.006 36 event in Hamilton. Compared to the first event which was held in a
10 Environment/sustainable 0.003 20 trendy North-end bohemian venue, the Hamilton Specialty Coffee Show
had a more trade show feel to it, being held in the Hamilton Convention
Centre. The motive was to again feature local coffee specialty coffee
shops and provide education to consumers, but the venue, while much
more spacious than the Hamilton Coffee Fair did not provide the same
ambiance. It featured eight retailers from Hamilton, ON and three
roasters with retail shops from neighbouring cities.

4
J. Lannigan
The Toronto Coffee and Tea Expo was held outside at the Evergreen
Brick Works Pavilion over a frigid Canadian weekend. This event was
well-attended and featured an Instagrammable backdrop for attendees
to take selfies. Like the Hamilton Specialty Coffee Show, the Toronto
Coffee and Tea Expo felt like a trade show, but without the local vibe,
and more retailers (37 coffee, tea, and related products, only 14 coffee
retailers were utilized in the analysis).
Finally, Beanstock had the most energetic ambiance despite its en-
ormity. It featured specialty coffee retailers from many different
Canadian cities and was extremely well attended. It was held inside at
the Amsterdam BrewHouse, a large venue that was packed with at-
tendees, heads of the Canadian chapter of the Specialty Coffee
Association, and 35 retailers and roasters.
While the two Hamilton shows captured a local scene’s retail spe-
cialty coffee scene, Beanstock was a landmark event illustrating the
broad developing specialty coffee scene in Canada, and the Toronto
Coffee and Tea Expo focused more on the ‘home barista’ since the
majority of the featured retailers sold products for use at home (e.g.
Coffee grinders, whole coffee beans, brewing machines).
6.1.1. What is specialty?
One of the recurring discourses mentioned at the events was the
meaning of specialty coffee. Here, I feature an excerpt from a document
that was circulated at one of the Hamilton coffee fairs, which defines
specialty coffee as:
A small part of the global coffee industry that focuses on the highest
quality coffee beans, and the qualities that make every individual coffee
unique – or special, [which] depends on the origin, varietal, and pro-
cessing method of the coffee. The discovery of these unique flavours is
heavily dependent on quality work from farmers. Paying more for higher
quality work helps to sustainably increase coffee quality, making
farmers, roasters, and baristas partners in the pursuit of creating a high-
quality, specialty product.
Extract 1. Specialty coffee definition from HCF2K17 pamphlet
When asking retailers at a small panel held during the Hamilton
Coffee Fair about what it means to be ‘specialty coffee’, the consensus
was that production practices, like organic certification and fair-trade
certification were no longer necessary to establish a coffee with the
label of ‘specialty’. While transparency was mentioned as a key theme
in specialty coffee, the production practice of direct trade and sourcing
was deemed more important for retailers than establishing certification
standards, in the form of ‘fair trade’ or ‘organic, from farmers. Quality is
paramount for specialty coffee retailers, with SCAA (Specialty Coffee
Association of America) ratings having legitimizing dominion over
what is considered specialty or not. This notion of legitimation behind
the naming practice is further highlighted by the emphasis that retailers
place on educating consumers about production, roasting, and tasting
practices.
At Beanstock, I attended a panel discussion with experts from the
roasting and sourcing aspect of the industry. Members of the panel
claimed that specialty coffee farming practices need to be centred
around direct trade relationships between farmers and purchasers, with
a concern for the sustainability of production and the quality of life for
the farmer. They mentioned that most farmers tend to dedicate most of
their fertile land to developing coffee for mass production. Since spe-
cialty coffee has a much higher standard, and market prices fluctuate
depending on the ranking of that crop farmers prefer to segment their
land to maximize profitability.
Going down the chain of production are roasters, who need to
purchase top quality green coffee beans and add a signature flavour to
them. The panel discussed that it is the roaster’s job to bring out certain
taste notes from the coffee beans to highlight the underlying gustatory
dimensions. Roasters compete amongst themselves to provide beans to
shop owners, with many roasteries operating both a distribution system
and their own storefronts, which may allow for further profitability for
5
International Journal of Information Management 51 (2020) 101987
roasters given the sharp margins in the coffee market.
6.1.2. Education and the future of specialty coffee
This educational dynamic was also present in interactions between
producers and consumers, who appeared to remain largely passive
during interactions. Interactions with producers tended to be casual,
aside from formalized interjections around taste profiles and sourcing
practices. Specifically, producers showcased their products by high-
lighting uniqueness from other offerings at the fair and from non-spe-
cialty coffee. These interactions form a cooperative scaffold (Maciel &
Wallendorf, 2016) between producer and consumer which allow the
consumer to develop a sensory appreciation for the product and
heighten their ability to distinguish it from others. As such, the con-
sumer moves from passivity through to engagement through three
unique stages – tasting, tasting difference, and vocalizing that differ-
ence. This type of engagement is highly prized in serious leisure pur-
suits and is a key component in the survival of this niche industry.
When asked about how the specialty coffee scene will continue to
thrive and survive against external competition, the panel argued for a
three-pronged approach emphasizing education, baristas, and the need
for more entrepreneurs to take a chance on developing more cafes. In
terms of education, events like Beanstock allow the general public a
chance to learn about how specialty coffee differs from chain operations
like Tim Hortons and Starbucks. Discovering the taste wheel, sourcing
practices, and differences in quality could increase consumer desire to
consume this ‘affordable luxury’ (Mundel et al., 2017) daily. Another
panelist claimed that baristas are the most important point of interac-
tion between consumers and the enterprise of specialty coffee since
they can be the purveyors of knowledge behind the preparation prac-
tices and convey the entirety of the production practice to consumers.
Being a barista is complicated since one must possess superior cultural
and technical knowledge while working in an elevated ‘blue-collar’ job
(Ocejo, 2017) that espouses consumer comfort. Finally, there is a need
for more cafes for the scene to flourish, with strength in numbers al-
lowing for interplay between the two markets and the potential for
further penetration into the niche.
The notion of the ‘independent’ scene was crucial to three events –
both Hamilton events, and Beanstock. The Hamilton Coffee Fair was
described as “a public event dedicated to promoting specialty coffee
and Hamilton’s local, independent coffee community” and an oppor-
tunity to engage with the many unique shops in the city. The Hamilton
Specialty Coffee Show featured primarily Hamilton-based retailers, but
also included a roaster and a café from Oakville (a nearby suburban
city), and a roaster from Toronto. Retailers mentioned how the unique
climate of Hamilton allows for an interesting intersection between
value-seeking consumers and individuals intent on building commu-
nity. Beanstock gave a platform for the growing independent coffee
community across Canada, while the Toronto Coffee and Tea Expo fo-
cused on products for the ‘home barista’, which I explore in further
detail below.
6.1.3. The ‘home barista’
There was a striking difference between the TCTE show and the
other shows in three distinct ways – both coffee and tea vendors were
present, the coffee vendors that were present were not primarily in-
volved in the preparation of coffee at a retail storefront (e.g. they were
mainly roasters, offered products online, or developed tech to assist
home baristas), and only a handful of coffee vendors offered free
samples (most had a small cost). These distinctions are important since
they change how participants interact with vendors and how they
perceive the coffee industry.
Retailers with storefronts that serve coffee are primarily concerned
with the development of a ‘third space’ of consumption, which effec-
tively replaces the function of the ‘second wave’ coffee house with a
local place for developing coffee connoisseurship. This contrast is
especially relevant when it comes to retailers that have storefronts
J. Lannigan International Journal of Information Management 51 (2020) 101987

dedicated to in-home consumption of coffee (‘home baristas’), which

function primarily as a space to acquire and discuss technological in-
novations and purchase new means of producing coffee. The TCTE had
the highest proportion of retailers that catered to home baristas. It
seems that merging these two products is counterproductive to the
development of specialty coffee, considering that tea does not have a
unique body to adjudicate specialty products, unlike coffee which has
the Specialty Coffee Association of America. Another reason why this
distinction is important is because it factors in to how the retailer
portrays their identity – are they a purveyor of tech to assist with
would-be connoisseur baristas, or are they craft employees focused on
service (Ocejo, 2017)?

6.2. Online discourse

Moving on from the discourses employed on-the-ground at the

coffee fairs, I now turn to an investigation of the discursive themes seen
on various social media platforms through each of the events.
These ten different discursive themes account for the entirety of Fig. 1. A discourse network featuring discursive themes (square blue nodes),
semantic expressions relayed on the three different social media plat- connected by consumers (small circular blue nodes), press (green nodes), re-
tailers (yellow nodes), and organizers (red nodes) (For interpretation of the
forms. Overall, we see that the major discourses that were seen on so-
references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web
cial media platforms centred around posts that were event specific (e.g.
version of this article).
Advertisement for tickets, mentioning the event) and posts that elicited
an emotional or reactive response. The prevalence of this discourse is in
stark contrast to the discourses that were emphasized on the ground at
the actual events which centred around issues of education and con-
noisseurship. Additionally, there does not seem to be glaring differences
among platforms in terms of the prevalence of different types of dis-
course, aside from ‘emotional’ and ‘event specific’, in which there are
differences up to 15% in terms of posts. In terms of events however, the
main differences occur with the TCTE featuring ‘event-specific’ dis-
courses in over 50% of posts, and only 5% of posts as coffee-specific.
Event organizers dominated the online communication, with ap-
proximately 77 posts on average per organizer account, compared to
1.5 posts on average per individual account. Despite this, both in-
Fig. 2. A one-mode projection of the themes of the above affiliation network
dividual and retailer accounts have more discursive variance on
(Colours indicate different communities as detected by the Louvain community
average, meaning that on average, they feature more themes per post detection algorithm) (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure
than organizers. When combining the insights from the two tables to- legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article).
gether, press accounts have the least variation in discourses when
compared to individuals, retailers, and organizers. However, the most
were the most central discursive themes, this illustrates the prominence
insightful finding here for industry practitioners is that there is a con-
of promoting the event and communicating substantively simplistic
tinuation of discourse through the similar distributions found in the
messages on social media (Fig. 2 Table 5).
discursive categories of ‘coffee-specific’, ‘educational’ and ‘connoisseur-
In sum, this analysis shows that much of the messages that were
craft’. Since these posts are not replies to producers, this similarity
communicated through social media were focused on hyping up the
shows that consumers are internalizing these discourses. Instructively,
event, and after the event was finished, emphasizing how successful the
this suggests that retailers should alter their communications strategies
event was. This strategy illustrates a keen form of information man-
online if they want to attempt to further shape discourse, however, this
agement on the part of specialty retailers, given that online platforms
is especially difficult in this industry given its focus on sensory ex-
cannot effectively assist in changing tastes, but only in reiterating what
perience.
interactions have already occurred. This strategy is unique to experi-
ence-based industries whose advantages are based in a cognitive and
6.3. Discourse network analysis
evaluative framework that needs complex explanation and justification.
Overall, this implies that taste-changing practices and discourses sur-
Fig. 1 is a discourse network that links up the posts from individuals
rounding connoisseurship are best employed in face-to-face settings,
to the discourses that they employ on social media platforms. Each
which again reiterates the personal nature of the interaction between
discursive theme is a means for connection between individuals, de-
interlocutors and amateurs (Allen & Germov, 2011; Maciel &
pending on the content of their post. This discourse network reveals
Wallendorf, 2016; Thurnell-Read, 2018).
that organizers, for the most part, occupied the most central positions in
the network. This is important to note since organizers may actively
attempt to influence discourse online. The discourse network also in- 7. Discussion
dicates that most consumers clustered around specific discourses over
others. Consumers tend to engage in more simplistic one-dimensional 7.1. Implications for studies of taste
discourses to engage others in their social networks. The very ‘In-
stagrammable’ “Just Brew It” backdrop at the Toronto Coffee and Tea Educating consumers to appreciate what differentiates specialty
Expo was one such instance where consumers could engage in event- coffee from non-specialty coffee is a complex endeavour. It demands
specific discourse online, merely by highlighting where they were that intricate communication and coordination between interlocutors and
weekend. Finally, since event specific and coffee specific discourses consumers in the form of sensory experience and a shared vocabulary to

6
J. Lannigan
understand these differences. This study shows that this is accom-
plished in face-to-face encounters between retailers and individuals,
and that this field-specific cultural capital does not get communicated
to the same extent through social media platforms. These interactions
are crucial for specialty retailers as they help to legitimize the differ-
ences, which hinge on the ability for baristas to communicate the un-
ique elements of the beverage, and for consumers to taste and vocalize
them. Taste is not just in the individual, even though this is where the
combination of olfactory and discursive elements (to explain sensory
input) resides. There exists legitimized collective taste and the means to
partake in refined taste, which may at first confront the expectations of
the individual (Allen & Germov, 2011), but changing tastes is a defining
moment for an individual which can substantially impact her identity,
goals and desires (Torres Quintão & Zamith Brito, 2015).
In contrast to Bourdieu’s (1984) thesis of disposition development
occurring in the home or school to reinforce class boundaries and
structure, taste can be reiterated or reshaped through tasting practices
and object-specific education. Bourdieu (1984) does discuss the prac-
tice of auto-didactic learning practices, however, these fairs illustrate
key opportunities where tasting repertoires are made explicit and ter-
minology is available for consumers to acquire based on cooperative
scaffolding from the barista (Maciel & Wallendorf, 2016). While upper
class participants may dominate in attendance, specialty industries
have increasingly democratized their accessibility to different classes,
both in terms of consumption and diversity of employment (Johnston &
Baumann, 2014; Ocejo, 2017). The cooperative scaffolding exchanges
cultural capital between the barista and consumer, as the barista at-
tempts to educate and illuminate differences, while the consumer at-
tempts to taste and vocalize these differences using the tools (e.g. the
Taste Wheel). While the practice is not framed as a ‘highbrow’ activity,
given that it is accessible to the general public, by arming the consumer
with a vocabulary and a story, each retailer participates in the peda-
gogy and strengthening of the consumer’s ability to discern and can
consequently aide in the further development of the specialty coffee
industry as a whole.
7.2. Discourse and context
The differences that exist between face-to-face conversation and
digital engagement overall illustrate the intricacies of taste-shaping
practices, but also the need for employing a mixed methods approach to
collecting textual and situational data. From the combination of eth-
nographic fieldwork and three different social media platforms, this
study was able to uncover key similarities and discrepancies between
the production of taste on-the-ground, how individuals and press dis-
cuss the event, and discursive themes that are employed by organizers
and retailers. Not only do these discrepancies show researchers how
discourse becomes fragmented and disrupted when transferring med-
iums, but also that industry leaders should take heed to understand how
their events and talk are received. This added layer of data collection
helps to illustrate the contextual nature of discourse, specifically around
how communication occurs and what is mentioned in different settings,
as well as the difficulty evident in trying to communicate experiential
intricacies online.
Discourses are intrinsically linked to influence and boundaries. In-
person, we see that retailers exercise their expertise when discussing
their products using a specific vocabulary, and at educational and panel
events, they illustrate the multiple dependencies of the production
chain. This creates a clear distinction between amateurs/consumers and
those with high levels of fluency in the specialty coffee industry.
However, we see that this power is not exercised online since there is no
clear discrepancy in the number of discursive themes that are pro-
mulgated by role. Retailers, organizers, consumers, and press do not
distinguish themselves in terms of the discourses that they employ
online. This could be due to the democratic nature of social media
platforms; however, a more plausible explanation is due to the nature of
7
International Journal of Information Management 51 (2020) 101987
consumption in this setting, which is based on sensory input and a
vocabulary to both separate and define that experience from non-spe-
cialty coffee. Since this response is olfactory, it must be directly com-
municated in-person, and since the medium for communication has
changed, that experience cannot be conveyed. Instead, when discussing
issues of connoisseurship and education, the knowledge is in an ab-
stracted form, disembodied from the praxis of consumption.
7.3. Coffee and industry-related insights
This type of research is invaluable for businesses given the ability to
track the continuation of talk both in-person with consumers and their
unsolicited reaction(s) online, (Fronzetti Colladon, 2018; Shirdastian
et al., 2017). These spontaneous and voluntary descriptions provide
important insights into how consumers frame their experiences (Singh
et al., 2017) with brands and products which is especially relevant in
the specialty service industries, like artisanal coffee and craft breweries
where consumer experience and a penchant for quality is paramount.
For practitioners in the specialty coffee industry, this research
provides three crucial insights that can be put into practice to engage
existing clients and potential consumers. The first step is to develop a
social media presence online, ideally using the big three consumer
platforms – Instagram, Facebook and Twitter. In this industry,
Instagram tends to have the broadest appeal given its aesthetic nature
and user demographic. The second insight is to hold public exhibitions
where retailers within the industry can collaborate and help collectively
establish a niche within your locale (Ocejo, 2017), and present pro-
spective consumers with sensory experiences as well as a knowledge of
comprehension. Finally, practitioners should employ user-driven in-
sights from your customers through both in-person feedback and un-
solicited online feedback to establish how well your message comes
across to customers especially after interactions.
Future research in this vein could further substantively investigate
the environment and conditions that give rise to discourse. There are
two streams of research that could deepen this area – investigations into
the pre-existing connections, and strength of ties, between retailers, as
well as how discourse evolves over time in a niche market. Research
that looks at the connections of retailers and explores similarities based
on geographical proximity would help illustrate how discourse may be
localized to neighbourhoods, areas, or cities. Looking at the strength of
connections between retailers would substantiate how discourse might
be affected by the frequency of interaction between retail owners,
whether they have gone in together on orders, or even if they are aware
of another retailer’s existence. This stream of research would further
elucidate theoretical and empirical issues surrounding ‘what’ flows
through the conduits of social ties. Finally, investigating discourse over
time in a niche market would involve collecting aggregated data on
what themes are important, how they change over time, and which
actors employ them. This stream of research would be amenable to both
discourse and social network analysis as it could usefully track central
discourses, how they evolve or die out, as well as the influence of or-
ganizations in spreading them.
References
Afful-Dadzie, E., & Afful-Dadzie, A. (2017). Liberation of public data: Exploring central
themes in open government data and freedom of information research. International
Journal of Information Management, 37(6), 664–672.
AlAlwan, A., Rana, N. P., Dwivedi, Y. K., & Algharabat, R. (2017). Social media in
marketing: A review and analysis of the existing literature. Telematics and Informatics,
34(7), 1177–1190.
Allen, M. P., & Germov, J. (2011). Judging taste and creating value: The cultural con-
secration of Australian wines. Journal of Sociology, 47(1), 35–51.
Antonacci, G., Fronzetti Colladon, A., Stefanini, A., & Gloor, P. (2017). It is rotating
leaders who build the swarm: Social network determinants of growth for healthcare
virtual communities of practice. Journal of Knowledge Management, 21(5),
1218–1239.
Aswani, R., Kar, A. K., Ilavarasan, P. V., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2018). Search engine marketing
is not all gold: Insights from Twitter and SEOClerks. International Journal of
J. Lannigan
Information Management, 38(1), 107–116.
Bail, C. A. (2014). The cultural environment: Measuring culture with big data. Theory and
Society, 43(3-4), 465–482.
Bourdieu, P. (1993). The field of cultural production: Essays on art and literature. Columbia
University Press.
Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction. Translated by Richard Nice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
Ciolfe, T. (2017). The results are in: Tim Hortons is no longer Canada’s favourite coffee shop.
Published Oct. 22 2017Maclean’shttps://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/the-
results-are-in-tim-hortons-is-no-longer-canadas-favourite-coffee-shop/.
Crowe, M. (2005). Discourse analysis: Towards an understanding of its place in nursing.
Journal of Advanced Nursing, 51(1), 55–63.
Dowell, N. M., Graesser, A. C., & Cai, Z. (2016). Language and discourse analysis with
Coh-Metrix: Applications from educational material to learning environments at
scale. Journal of Learning Analytics, 3(3), 72–95.
Elo, S., & Kyngäs, H. (2008). The qualitative content analysis process. Journal of advanced
nursing, 62(1), 107–115.
Fronzetti Colladon, A. (2018). The semantic brand score. Journal of Business Research, 88,
150–160.
Fronzetti Colladon, A., & Gloor, P. A. (2018). Measuring the impact of spammers on e-
mail and Twitter networks. International Journal of Information Management In press.
Fronzetti Colladon, A., & Vagaggini, F. (2017). Robustness and stability of enterprise
intranet social networks: The impact of moderators. Information Processing &
Management, 53(6), 1287–1298.
Gandormi, A., & Haider, M. (2015). Beyond the hype: Big data concepts, methods, and
analytics. International Journal of Information Management, 35(2), 137–144.
Gherardi, S. (2009). Practice? It’s a matter of taste!. Management Learning, 40(5),
535–550.
Gloor, P. A., Fronzetti Colladon, A., Grippa, F., & Giacomelli, G. (2017). Forecasting
managerial turnover through e-mail based social network analysis. Computers in
Human Behavior, 71, 343–352.
Grover, P., Kar, A. K., Dwivedi, Y. K., & Janssen, M. (2018). Polarization and ac-
culturation in the 2016 US presidential election: Can Twitter analytics predict
changes in voting preferences? Technological Forecasting & Social Change. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.09.009.
Gruzd, A., Lannigan, J., & Quigley, K. (2018). Examining government cross-platform
engagement in social media: Instagram vs Twitter and the big lift project. Government
Information Quarterly, 35(4), 579–587.
Habibi, M. R., Laroche, M., & Richard, M. O. (2014). Brand communities based in social
media: How unique are they? Evidence from two exemplary brand communities.
International Journal of Information Management, 34(2), 123–132.
He, W., Zha, S., & Li, L. (2013). Social media competitive analysis and text mining: A case
study in the pizza industry. International Journal of Information Management, 33(3),
464–472.
Hennion, A. (2007). Those things that hold us together: Taste and sociology. Cultural
Sociology, 1(1), 97–114.
Hodges, B. D., Kuper, A., & Reeves, S. (2008). Discourse analysis. British Medical Journal,
337, 570–572.
Hsieh, H., & Shannon, S. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis.
Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288.
Johnston, J., & Baumann, S. (2014). Foodies. Taylor & Francis.
Kapoor, K. K., Tamilmani, K., Rana, N. P., Patil, P., Dwivedi, Y. K., & Nerur, S. (2018).
International Journal of Information Management 51 (2020) 101987
Advances in social media research: Past, present and future. Information Systems
Frontiers, 20(3), 531–558.
Kumar, A., Bezawada, R., Rishika, R., Janakiraman, R., & Kannan, P. K. (2016). From
social to sale: The effects of firm-generated content in social media on customer
behavior. Journal of Marketing, 80(1), 7–25.
Laroche, M., Habibi, M. R., & Richard, M. O. (2013). To be or not to be in social media:
How brand loyalty is affected by social media? International Journal of Information
Management, 33(1), 76–82.
Maciel, A. F., & Wallendorf, M. (2016). Taste engineering: An extended consumer model
of cultural competence constitution. Journal of Consumer Research, 43(5), 726–746.
Manzo, J. (2015). “Third-wave” coffeehouses as venues for sociality: On encounters be-
tween employees and customers. The Qualitative Report, 20(6), 746–761.
Mundel, J., Huddleston, P., & Vodermeier, M. (2017). An exploratory study of consumers’
perceptions: What are affordable luxuries? Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services,
35, 68–75.
Ocejo, R. E. (2017). Masters of craft: Old jobs in the new urban economy. Princeton
University Press.
Parker, S. F., Austin, M. W., & Allhoff, F. (2011). Coffee: Grounds for debate. Wiley-
Blackwell.
Rapp, A., Beitelspacher, L. S., Grewal, D., & Hughes, D. E. (2013). Understanding social
media effects across seller, retailer, and consumer interactions. Journal of the
Academy of Marketing Science, 41(5), 547–566.
Redwood, R. (1999). Caring control: Methodological issues in a discourse analysis of
water birth texts. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 29(4), 914–921.
Saint-Charles, J., & Mongeau, P. (2018). Social influence and discourse similarity net-
works in workgroups. Social Networks, 52, 228–237.
Sashi, C. M. (2012). Customer engagement, buyer-seller relationships, and social media.
Management Decision, 50(2), 253–272.
Schivinski, B., & Dabrowski, D. (2016). The effect of social media communication on
consumer perceptions of brands. Journal of Marketing Communications, 22(2),
189–214.
Schwarz, O. (2013). Bending forward, one step backward: On the sociology of tasting
techniques. Cultural Sociology, 7(4), 415–430.
Shirdastian, H., Laroche, M., & Richard, M. O. (2017). Using big data analytics to study
brand authenticity sentiments: The case of Starbucks on Twitter. International Journal
of Information Management.
Simon, B. (2011). Everything but the coffee: Learning about America from Starbucks. Univ of
California Press.
Singh, J. P., Irani, S., Rana, N. P., Dwivedi, Y. K., Saumya, S., & Roy, P. K. (2017).
Predicting the “helpfulness” of online consumer reviews. Journal of Business Research,
70, 346–355.
Stoddart, M. C. J., & Nezhadhossein, E. (2016). Is nature-oriented tourism a pro-en-
vironmental practice?: Examining tourism-environmentalism alignments through
discourse networks and intersectoral relationships. The Sociological Quarterly, 57,
544–568.
Thompson, C. J., & Arsel, Z. (2004). The Starbucks brandscape and con-
sumers’(anticorporate) experiences of glocalization. Journal of Consumer Research,
31(3), 631–642.
Thurnell-Read, T. (2018). The embourgeoisement of beer: Changing practices of ‘Real Ale’
consumption. Journal of Consumer Culture, 18(4), 539–557.
Torres Quintão, R., & Zamith Brito, E. P. (2015). Connoisseurship taste ritual. Consumer
culture theory. Emerald Group Publishing Limited255–273.