The DOI matches its Crossref record; 31 of the 31 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The “Publicness Puzzle” in Organization Theory: A Test of Alternative Explanations of Differences between Public and Private Organizations*
Abstract
“Publicness” is defined as a characteristic of an organization which reflects the extent the organization is influenced by political authority. The concept, operationalized as a series of interval measures, is placed in direct competition with the traditional core definition of publicness as ownership (i.e., formal legal status). Using a sample of research and development laboratories, the two approaches are compared in terms of their ability to explain organizational outputs and process in the context of an explanatory model. The results suggest that both approaches tap unique characteristics of publicness and contribute to a more complete understanding of the role of publicness in the study of organizations.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Agency Theory: An Assessment and Review
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1989.4279003 · Cited by 13,338
The Economic Theory of Agency: The Principal's Problem.
Ross, S. A. (1973) · American Economic Review · Cited by 4,269
Dewey, J. (1927) · University of Michigan Library Repository · Cited by 4,147
Understanding and Managing Public Organizations
Cope, G. H., & Rainey, H. G. (1992) · Public Productivity & Management Review · doi:10.2307/3380636 · Cited by 1,811
Boundary Spanning Roles and Organization Structure
Aldrich, H. E., & Herker, D. (1977) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1977.4409044 · Cited by 1,574
Boundary spanning roles and organization structure
Aldrich, H., & Herker, D. (1977) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/257905 · Cited by 1,518
Alchian, A. A., & Demsetz, H. (1973) · The Journal of Economic History · doi:10.1017/s0022050700076403 · Cited by 1,398
(2014) · Encyclopedia of Education Economics & Finance · doi:10.4135/9781483346595.n291 · Cited by 919
The Public-Private Distinction in Organization Theory: A Critique and Research Strategy
Perry, J. L., & Rainey, H. G. (1988) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258571 · Cited by 911
Comparing Public and Private Organizations
Rainey, H. G., Backoff, R. W., & Levine, C. H. (1976) · Public Administration Review · doi:10.2307/975145 · Cited by 846
Cited by
INNOVATION IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND FUTURE RESEARCH AGENDA
DE VRIES, H., BEKKERS, V., & TUMMERS, L. (2016) · Public Administration · doi:10.1111/padm.12209 · Cited by 1,214
Rashman, L., Withers, E., & Hartley, J. (2009) · International Journal of Management Reviews · doi:10.1111/j.1468-2370.2009.00257.x · Cited by 394
Implementing Open Innovation in the Public Sector: The Case of Challenge.gov
Mergel, I., & Desouza, K. C. (2013) · Public Administration Review · doi:10.1111/puar.12141 · Cited by 334
Opportunism and Honest Incompetence—Seeking Explanations for Noncompliance in Public Procurement
Kauppi, K., & van Raaij, E. M. (2015) · Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory · doi:10.1093/jopart/mut081 · Cited by 101
Seo, J. (2020) · International Review of Administrative Sciences · doi:10.1177/0020852318778782 · Cited by 15
Metadata
- Venue
- Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1994-04
- ISSN
- 1053-1858 (ISSN-L)
- 1477-9803
- OpenAlex
- W2245043617
- Cited by
- 361
- References
- 31
- FWCI
- 8.73
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The “Publicness Puzzle” in Organization Theory: A Test of Alternative Explanations of Differences between Public and Private Organizations*. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a037204
- The paper
- The “Publicness Puzzle” in Organization Theory: A Test of Alternative Explanations of Differences between Public and Private Organizations*. (1994). Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a037204
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
