The purpose of this paper is to discuss the conceptualisation of bibliometric analyses in terms of the levels on which they are performed, adding contextual factors to the dimension where the size of the unit being analysed is considered. Based on empirical investigations of resource allocation systems and research evaluation practices, as well as the previous literature conceptualising bibliometric analyses, a framework based on Whitley’s (2000) notion of research fields as ‘reputational work organisations’, is discussed. The results suggest adding a contextual ‘reputational dimension’ to the size-based dimension distinguishing between micro-, meso- andmacro-level analyses. Furthermore, we propose that ‘evaluative landscapes’ (Brandter, 2017) might be a fruitful approach for further analysing how complex and multifaceted landscapes of research assessment affects the individual researcher.