The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Stakeholder Influences in Organizational Survival*
Abstract
abstract Although much has been written on declines and turnarounds, virtually no research has examined stakeholders' influence in an existence threatening crisis of an organization. This paper provides a theory and a historical case study that show how the most influential stakeholders can be identified and managed during an organizational survival. The proposed model demonstrates how stakeholders' influence in organizational survival consists of both direct resource dependence‐ and structure‐based forms of power. The case analysis then describes an examination of actual stakeholder influences and changes in them during the decline and turnaround process. Finally, based on the findings of the case analysis and the influence identification, propositions are developed. They relate specific types of behaviours of influential stakeholders to the probability of organizational survival, showing how stakeholder management can be operationalized in an organizational turnaround.
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
Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications
Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511815478 · Cited by 17,557
Building Theories from Case Study Research
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258557 · Cited by 17,455
Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification
Freeman, L. C. (1978) · Social Networks · doi:10.1016/0378-8733(78)90021-7 · Cited by 17,062
Burt, R. S. (1992) · doi:10.4159/9780674029095 · Cited by 9,093
Strategic Responses to Institutional Processes
Oliver, C. (1991) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1991.4279002 · Cited by 8,950
Strategies for Theorizing from Process Data
Langley, A. (1999) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1999.2553248 · Cited by 7,008
The Stakeholder Theory of the Corporation: Concepts, Evidence, and Implications
Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. E. (1995) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258887 · Cited by 5,846
Moving beyond Dyadic Ties: A Network Theory of Stakeholder Influences
Rowley, T. J. (1997) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1997.9711022107 · Cited by 2,522
The Comparative Method: Moving Beyond Qualitative and Quantitative Strategies
Ragin, C. C. (2014) · doi:10.1525/9780520957350 · Cited by 2,130
Being in the Right Place: A Structural Analysis of Individual Influence in an Organization
Brass, D. J. (1984) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2392937 · Cited by 1,549
Cited by
Theorising from case studies: Towards a pluralist future for international business research
Welch, C., Piekkari, R., Plakoyiannaki, E., & Paavilainen-Mäntymäki, E. (2011) · Journal of International Business Studies · doi:10.1057/jibs.2010.55 · Cited by 1,316
Neville, B. A., Bell, S. J., & Whitwell, G. J. (2011) · Journal of Business Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10551-011-0818-9 · Cited by 275
Metadata
- Authors
- Pajunen, K.
- Venue
- Journal of Management Studies
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2006-05-25
- Volume
- 43
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1261-1288
- ISSN
- 0022-2380 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-6486
- OpenAlex
- W2026490261
- Cited by
- 224
- References
- 10
- FWCI
- 25.72
- 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: Stakeholder Influences in Organizational Survival*. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2006.00624.x
- The paper
- Pajunen, K. (2006). Stakeholder Influences in Organizational Survival*. Journal of Management Studies. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2006.00624.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.