The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Exploring Exploration Orientation and its Determinants: Some Empirical Evidence*
Abstract
abstract Adopting an information‐process perspective, this article conceptualizes exploration orientation in terms of scope of information acquisition. In line with this conceptualization, a multidimensional operational measure of exploration orientation is developed and its internal consistency established. The measure appears to have nomological validity in that it behaves as predicted with measures of variables hypothesized to be related to exploration orientation. Consistent with the emerging co‐evolution framework, environmental pressures as well as managerial intentions are found to influence an organization's exploration behaviour. Specifically, empirical results indicate that more environmental dynamism, a stronger organization mission, a prospector orientation and larger slack resources are associated with a greater exploration orientation. Implications, shortcomings and future research directions are discussed.
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
Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1914185 · Cited by 48,524
Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning
March, J. G. (1991) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.2.1.71 · Cited by 21,942
A Paradigm for Developing Better Measures of Marketing Constructs
Churchill, G. A. (1979) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224377901600110 · Cited by 16,549
Core capabilities and core rigidities: A paradox in managing new product development
Leonard-Barton, D. (1992) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.4250131009 · Cited by 6,477
Organizational Strategy, Structure, and Process
Miles, R. E., Snow, C. C., Meyer, A. D., & Coleman, H. J. (1978) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1978.4305755 · Cited by 4,527
Cited by
Organizational Ambidexterity: Past, Present, and Future
O'Reilly, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2013) · Academy of Management Perspectives · doi:10.5465/amp.2013.0025 · Cited by 2,580
Ambidexterity as a dynamic capability: Resolving the innovator's dilemma
O’Reilly, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2008) · Research in Organizational Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.riob.2008.06.002 · Cited by 2,431
Exploration and Exploitation Within and Across Organizations
Lavie, D., Stettner, U., & Tushman, M. L. (2010) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.1080/19416521003691287 · Cited by 1,650
Linking routines to operations capabilities: A new perspective
Peng, D. X., Schroeder, R. G., & Shah, R. (2008) · Journal of Operations Management · doi:10.1016/j.jom.2007.11.001 · Cited by 612
How constraints and knowledge impact open innovation
Garriga, H., von Krogh, G., & Spaeth, S. (2013) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.2049 · Cited by 419
Metadata
- Authors
- Sidhu, J. S., Volberda, H. W., & Commandeur, H. R.
- Venue
- Journal of Management Studies
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2004-08-12
- Volume
- 41
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 913-932
- ISSN
- 0022-2380 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-6486
- OpenAlex
- W2129625300
- Cited by
- 203
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 8.74
- 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: Exploring Exploration Orientation and its Determinants: Some Empirical Evidence*. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2004.00460.x
- The paper
- Sidhu, J. S., Volberda, H. W., & Commandeur, H. R. (2004). Exploring Exploration Orientation and its Determinants: Some Empirical Evidence*. Journal of Management Studies. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2004.00460.x
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.
