The DOI matches its Crossref record; 52 of the 52 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Proximity and inter‐organizational collaboration: A literature review
Open accessAbstract
The proximity concept is used in many different ways in the literature. These dimensions of proximity are, however, defined and measured in many different (sometimes even contradictory) ways, show large amounts of overlap, and often are under‐ or over‐specified. The goal of this paper is to specify the different dimensions of proximity relevant in inter‐organizational collaboration more precisely and to provide definitions of these dimensions. The research presented contributes to reducing the ambiguity of the proximity concept as used in the literature. Based on the above, the following research question is addressed in this paper: ‘Which dimensions of proximity are relevant in inter‐organizational collaboration and how are they defined?’ A systematic literature review is presented in order to disentangle the dimensions of the proximity concept. Based on this literature review, three dimensions of proximity relevant in inter‐organizational collaboration are distinguished: geographical proximity, organizational proximity and technological proximity. Examples (case studies) from the literature are used to illustrate the current conceptual ambiguity as well as to clarify how the proposed dimensions of proximity reduce this conceptual ambiguity.
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
Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation
Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393553 · Cited by 35,728
Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness
Granovetter, M. (1985) · American Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1086/228311 · Cited by 28,745
Culture's Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions, and Organizations across Nations
Bhagat, R. S., & Hofstede, G. (2002) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/4134391 · Cited by 21,664
Brown, J. S., & Duguid, P. (1991) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.2.1.40 · Cited by 8,390
Burns, T., & Stalker, G. M. (1994) · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198288787.001.0001 · Cited by 7,250
Technological Discontinuities and Organizational Environments
Tushman, M. L., & Anderson, P. (1986) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2392832 · Cited by 6,112
Proximity and Innovation: A Critical Assessment
Boschma, R. (2005) · Regional Studies · doi:10.1080/0034340052000320887 · Cited by 6,055
North, D. C. (1991) · Journal of Economic Perspectives · doi:10.1257/jep.5.1.97 · Cited by 5,232
Relative absorptive capacity and interorganizational learning
Lane, P. J., & Lubatkin, M. (1998) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0266(199805)19:5<461::aid-smj953>3.0.co;2-l · Cited by 4,648
Prior Knowledge and the Discovery of Entrepreneurial Opportunities
Shane, S. (2000) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.11.4.448.14602 · Cited by 4,585
Research works printed but not linked: 11
- 10.1016/S0165-1765(02)00297-5 · doi:10.1016/s0165-1765(02)00297-5
- 10.1057/9780230554856_8 · doi:10.1057/9780230554856_8
- 10.1016/j.lrp.2003.08.008 · doi:10.1016/j.lrp.2003.08.008
- 10.1080/0965431042000220011 · doi:10.1080/0965431042000220011
- Höyssä M., 2005, Proximity in the Strategic Alliances of Small Knowledge‐Intensive Firms
- Hyypiä M., 2005, Dimensions of Proximity in Relationships between Knowledge Intensive Business Service Firms and Their Clients
- 10.1016/j.emj.2005.04.009 · doi:10.1016/j.emj.2005.04.009
- 10.1111/1467-9663.00139 · doi:10.1111/1467-9663.00139
- 10.1080/0965431042000219978 · doi:10.1080/0965431042000219978
- 10.3917/reru.035.0835 · doi:10.3917/reru.035.0835
- 10.1016/j.jebo.2004.03.019 · doi:10.1016/j.jebo.2004.03.019
Cited by
Adams, R. J., Smart, P., & Huff, A. S. (2017) · International Journal of Management Reviews · doi:10.1111/ijmr.12102 · Cited by 995
Castañer, X., & Oliveira, N. (2020) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206320901565 · Cited by 525
Balland, P.-A. (2012) · Regional Studies · doi:10.1080/00343404.2010.529121 · Cited by 466
Villani, E., Rasmussen, E., & Grimaldi, R. (2017) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2016.06.004 · Cited by 365
Farmers’ markets or the supermarket? Channel selection in small farming businesses
Cortes, J. D., Jackson, J. E., & Cortes, A. F. (2024) · New England Journal of Entrepreneurship · doi:10.1108/neje-07-2022-0045 · Cited by 9
Metadata
- Authors
- Knoben, J., & Oerlemans, L. A. G.
- Venue
- International Journal of Management Reviews
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2006-05-16
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 71-89
- ISSN
- 1460-8545 (ISSN-L)
- 1468-2370
- OpenAlex
- W1554765659
- Cited by
- 989
- References
- 52
- FWCI
- 49.09
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Proximity and inter‐organizational collaboration: A literature review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2006.00121.x
- The paper
- Knoben, J., & Oerlemans, L. A. G. (2006). Proximity and inter‐organizational collaboration: A literature review. International Journal of Management Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2006.00121.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.