The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Organizational Improvisation: What, When, How and Why
Abstract
In this article, the authors review the growing body of literature on organizational improvisation in order to present an encompassing and systematic perspective on this concept. An integrative definition of its construct is presented together with a new way of measuring this phenomenon in organizational settings. The article further explores this construct by presenting its triggers, necessary conditions, influencing factors and major outcomes. The issues of improvisation’s growing legitimization in the organizational arena for practitioners and researchers alike are addressed in order to argue for the need for and interest in a fuller development research on this concept.
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
Cited by
Management paradoxes: A relational view
Clegg, S. R., da Cunha, J. V., & e Cunha, M. P. (2002) · Human Relations · doi:10.1177/0018726702555001 · Cited by 498
Theatrical improvisation: Lessons for organizations
Vera, D., & Crossan, M. (2004) · Organization Studies · doi:10.1177/0170840604042412 · Cited by 369
(2007) · D-Scholarship@Pitt (University of Pittsburgh) · Cited by 141
How emotional is transformational leadership really?: Some suggestions for a necessary extension
Küpers, W., & Weibler, J. (2006) · Leadership & Organization Development Journal · doi:10.1108/01437730610677972 · Cited by 72
Açıkgöz, A., & Latham, G. P. (2022) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.10.074 · Cited by 36
Metadata
- Authors
- Pina e Cunha, M., Vieira da Cunha, J., & Kamoche, K.
- Venue
- International Journal of Management Reviews
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1999-09
- Volume
- 1
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 299-341
- ISSN
- 1460-8545 (ISSN-L)
- 1468-2370
- OpenAlex
- W1975647619
- Cited by
- 503
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 12.02
- 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
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.
