The DOI matches its Crossref record; 86 of the 86 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
UNDERSTANDING HYBRIDITY IN PUBLIC ORGANIZATIONS
Open accessAbstract
This article explores and extends the concept of hybridity to understand current changes in public services organizations, notably as seen from an organizational studies perspective. The notion of hybridity has become more important, given that the public sector increasingly blurs with other sectors and more social actors. Previous reliance on the use of ideal‐types in characterizing public services reforms has masked expanding heterogeneity. We here move beyond the (i) conventional focus on structural hybridity to consider (ii) institutional dynamics, (iii) social interactions, and (iv) new identities and roles in public services. Based on these four dimensions of hybridity, we review alternative theoretical frameworks. We suggest that bringing together work from the neighbouring disciplines of public administration and organization studies may improve our understanding of public services hybridity and outline a future research agenda.
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
A PUBLIC MANAGEMENT FOR ALL SEASONS
HOOD, C. (1991) · Public Administration · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9299.1991.tb00779.x · Cited by 10,159
The Study of Boundaries in the Social Sciences
Lamont, M., & Molnár, V. (2002) · Annual Review of Sociology · doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.28.110601.141107 · Cited by 5,059
Latour, B. (1987) · Cited by 4,106
Modes of Network Governance: Structure, Management, and Effectiveness
Provan, K. G., & Kenis, P. (2007) · Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory · doi:10.1093/jopart/mum015 · Cited by 4,006
The Institutional Logics Perspective: A New Approach to Culture, Structure and Process
Thornton, P. H., Ocasio, W., & Lounsbury, M. (2012) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199601936.001.0001 · Cited by 3,764
A Conceptual Framework for the Design of Organizational Control Mechanisms
Ouchi, W. G. (1979) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.25.9.833 · Cited by 3,707
Building Sustainable Hybrid Organizations: The Case of Commercial Microfinance Organizations
Battilana, J., & Dorado, S. (2010) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/amj.2010.57318391 · Cited by 2,920
Institutional Contradictions, Praxis, and Institutional Change: A Dialectical Perspective
Seo, M.-G., & Creed, W. E. D. (2002) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/4134353 · Cited by 2,603
A Sociology of monsters: Essays on power, technology, and domination
Law, J. (1991) · Cited by 2,547
INSTITUTIONAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP IN EMERGING FIELDS: HIV/AIDS TREATMENT ADVOCACY IN CANADA.
Maguire, S., Hardy, C., & Lawrence, T. B. (2004) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/20159610 · Cited by 2,138
Metadata
- Authors
- DENIS, J., FERLIE, E., & VAN GESTEL, N.
- Venue
- Public Administration
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2015-05-07
- Volume
- 93
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 273-289
- ISSN
- 0033-3298 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-9299
- OpenAlex
- W1662542501
- Cited by
- 349
- References
- 86
- FWCI
- 69.22
- 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: UNDERSTANDING HYBRIDITY IN PUBLIC ORGANIZATIONS. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/padm.12175
- The paper
- DENIS, J., FERLIE, E., & VAN GESTEL, N. (2015). UNDERSTANDING HYBRIDITY IN PUBLIC ORGANIZATIONS. Public Administration. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12175
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.