Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 989

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 access
Knoben, J., Oerlemans, L.A.G.·2006·International Journal of Management Reviews

Abstract

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1468-2370.2006.00121.x

Cites

52 of 52 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 52 references

Research works printed but not linked: 11

  1. 10.1016/S0165-1765(02)00297-5 · doi:10.1016/s0165-1765(02)00297-5
  2. 10.1057/9780230554856_8 · doi:10.1057/9780230554856_8
  3. 10.1016/j.lrp.2003.08.008 · doi:10.1016/j.lrp.2003.08.008
  4. 10.1080/0965431042000220011 · doi:10.1080/0965431042000220011
  5. Höyssä M., 2005, Proximity in the Strategic Alliances of Small Knowledge‐Intensive Firms
  6. Hyypiä M., 2005, Dimensions of Proximity in Relationships between Knowledge Intensive Business Service Firms and Their Clients
  7. 10.1016/j.emj.2005.04.009 · doi:10.1016/j.emj.2005.04.009
  8. 10.1111/1467-9663.00139 · doi:10.1111/1467-9663.00139
  9. 10.1080/0965431042000219978 · doi:10.1080/0965431042000219978
  10. 10.3917/reru.035.0835 · doi:10.3917/reru.035.0835
  11. 10.1016/j.jebo.2004.03.019 · doi:10.1016/j.jebo.2004.03.019

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.