The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Organizational size and knowledge flow: a proposed theoretical link
Abstract
Purpose: This paper seeks to present a theory clarifying the negative relationship between organizational unit size and knowledge flows referred to as Gita's Rule. Design/methodology/approach: This paper draws from the literature and develops a grounded theory. Various applications and propositions are suggested through this theoretical lens. Findings: It is suggested that, as the size of an organizational unit increases, the effectiveness of internal knowledge flows dramatically diminishes and the degree of intra‐organizational knowledge sharing decreases. Research limitations/implications: It is proposed that 150 employees represents a general breaking point, after which knowledge sharing reduces due largely to increased complexity in the formal structure, weaker interpersonal relationships and lower trust, decreased connective efficacy, and less effective communication. Practical implications: The research points to the key dimension of organizational size that must be considered when developing models and reviewing case studies. Originality/value: The research reported in this paper is among the first to explicitly tackle the issue of how knowledge flows are affected by organizational size. A theory is developed and several research propositions are introduced for future studies.
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
The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information.
Miller, G. A. (1956) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0043158 · Cited by 17,812
The Social Psychology of Stigma
Major, B., & O'Brien, L. T. (2005) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.56.091103.070137 · Cited by 3,114
Transactive Memory: A Contemporary Analysis of the Group Mind
Wegner, D. M. (1987) · Theories of Group Behavior · doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-4634-3_9 · Cited by 2,700
Neocortex size as a constraint on group size in primates
Dunbar, R. I. M. (1992) · Journal of Human Evolution · doi:10.1016/0047-2484(92)90081-j · Cited by 2,542
Cited by
Organizational culture and knowledge sharing: critical success factors
Ismail Al‐Alawi, A., Yousif Al‐Marzooqi, N., & Fraidoon Mohammed, Y. (2007) · Journal of Knowledge Management · doi:10.1108/13673270710738898 · Cited by 853
Knowledge management: A global examination based on bibliometric analysis
Gaviria-Marin, M., Merigó, J. M., & Baier-Fuentes, H. (2019) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2018.07.006 · Cited by 560
Metadata
- Authors
- Serenko, A., Bontis, N., & Hardie, T.
- Venue
- Journal of Intellectual Capital
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2007-10-23
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 610-627
- ISSN
- 1469-1930 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2089942076
- Cited by
- 161
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 28.00
- 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: Organizational size and knowledge flow: a proposed theoretical link. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1108/14691930710830783
- The paper
- Serenko, A., Bontis, N., & Hardie, T. (2007). Organizational size and knowledge flow: a proposed theoretical link. Journal of Intellectual Capital. https://doi.org/10.1108/14691930710830783
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.