The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Innovation for Inclusive Business: Intrapreneurial Bricolage in Multinational Corporations
Abstract
It is often argued that multinational corporations (MNCs) are in a unique position to innovate business models that can help to alleviate poverty. This empirical study into intra‐organizational aspects of pro‐poor business innovation in two MNCs suggests, however, that certain elements of their management frameworks – such as short‐term profit interests, business unit based incentive structures, and uncertainty avoidance – may turn into obstacles that prevent MNCs from reaching their full potential in this respect. We introduce the concept of intrapreneurial bricolage to show how middle manager innovators may promote pro‐poor business models despite these obstacles. We define intrapreneurial bricolage as entrepreneurial activity within a large organization characterized by creative bundling of scarce resources, and illustrate empirically how it helps innovators to overcome organizational constraints and to mobilize internal and external resources. Our findings imply that intrapreneurial bricolage may be of fundamental importance in MNC innovation for inclusive business. In addition to the field of inclusive business, this study has implications for the study of bricolage in large organizations and social intrapreneurship, as well for managerial practice around innovation for inclusive business.
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
Handbook of Qualitative Research
Crozier, G., Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. (1994) · British Journal of Educational Studies · doi:10.2307/3121684 · Cited by 26,666
Qualitative Analysis for Social Scientists
Strauss, A. L. (1987) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511557842 · Cited by 12,277
Antoncic, B., & Hisrich, R. D. (2001) · Journal of Business Venturing · doi:10.1016/s0883-9026(99)00054-3 · Cited by 1,235
Conceptualizing Corporate Entrepreneurship Strategy
Ireland, R. D., Covin, J. G., & Kuratko, D. F. (2009) · Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice · doi:10.1111/j.1540-6520.2008.00279.x · Cited by 917
Cited by
George, G., Merrill, R. K., & Schillebeeckx, S. J. D. (2021) · Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice · doi:10.1177/1042258719899425 · Cited by 1,066
Incumbents and business model innovation for the sharing economy: implications for sustainability
Ciulli, F., & Kolk, A. (2019) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.12.295 · Cited by 177
Polycentric governance of privately owned resources in circular economy systems
Patala, S., Albareda, L., & Halme, M. (2022) · Journal of Management Studies · doi:10.1111/joms.12810 · Cited by 105
Self-citationSustainability value creation in frugal contexts to foster Sustainable Development Goals
Arnold, M. G. (2018) · Business Strategy & Development · doi:10.1002/bsd2.36 · Cited by 53
Barnard, H., & Pattit, K. (2022) · Journal of Comparative International Management · doi:10.55482/jcim.2022.32901 · Cited by 4
Metadata
- Authors
- Halme, M., Lindeman, S., & Linna, P.
- Venue
- Journal of Management Studies
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2012-02-24
- Volume
- 49
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 743-784
- ISSN
- 0022-2380 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-6486
- OpenAlex
- W2102770878
- Cited by
- 449
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 39.53
- 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.