The DOI matches its Crossref record; 146 of the 146 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Dismantling Knowledge Boundaries at NASA: The Critical Role of Professional Identity in Open Innovation
Open accessAbstract
Using a longitudinal in-depth field study at NASA, I investigate how the open, or peer-production, innovation model affects R&D professionals, their work, and the locus of innovation. R&D professionals are known for keeping their knowledge work within clearly defined boundaries, protecting it from individuals outside those boundaries, and rejecting meritorious innovation that is created outside disciplinary boundaries. The open innovation model challenges these boundaries and opens the knowledge work to be conducted by anyone who chooses to contribute. At NASA, the open model led to a scientific breakthrough at unprecedented speed using unusually limited resources; yet it challenged not only the knowledge-work boundaries but also the professional identity of the R&D professionals. This led to divergent reactions from R&D professionals, as adopting the open model required them to go through a multifaceted transformation. Only R&D professionals who underwent identity refocusing work dismantled their boundaries, truly adopting the knowledge from outside and sharing their internal knowledge. Others who did not go through that identity work failed to incorporate the solutions the open model produced. Adopting open innovation without a change in R&D professionals’ identity resulted in no real change in the R&D process. This paper reveals how such processes unfold and illustrates the critical role of professional identity work in changing knowledge-work boundaries and shifting the locus of innovation.
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
The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research.
Wagner, H. R., Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1968) · Social Forces · doi:10.2307/2575405 · Cited by 46,361
The Discovery of Grounded Theory; Strategies for Qualitative Research
Glaser, B. G., Strauss, A. L., & Strutzel, E. (1968) · Nursing Research · doi:10.1097/00006199-196807000-00014 · Cited by 39,449
(2008) · Biostatistics and Microbiology: A Survival Manual · doi:10.1007/978-0-387-77282-0_6 · Cited by 17,371
(2014) · Cited by 15,747
Gioia, D. A., Mehra, A., & Weick, K. E. (1996) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/259169 · Cited by 15,614
Qualitative Analysis for Social Scientists
Strauss, A. L. (1987) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511557842 · Cited by 12,277
Research in Organizational Behavior
Hammer, E. R., Cummings, L. L., & Staw, B. M. (1984) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258300 · Cited by 10,806
(2003) · Cited by 9,368
The Discovery of Grounded Theory
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (2017) · The Discovery of Grounded Theory · doi:10.4324/9780203793206-1 · Cited by 8,344
(2017) · The SAGE Encyclopedia of Communication Research Methods · doi:10.4135/9781483381411.n168 · Cited by 8,276
Cited by
Algorithms at Work: The New Contested Terrain of Control
Kellogg, K. C., Valentine, M. A., & Christin, A. (2020) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.5465/annals.2018.0174 · Cited by 2,732
Digital innovation and transformation: An institutional perspective
Hinings, B., Gegenhuber, T., & Greenwood, R. (2018) · Information and Organization · doi:10.1016/j.infoandorg.2018.02.004 · Cited by 1,537
Working and organizing in the age of the learning algorithm
Faraj, S., Pachidi, S., & Sayegh, K. (2018) · Information and Organization · doi:10.1016/j.infoandorg.2018.02.005 · Cited by 929
Chesbrough, H. (2020) · Industrial Marketing Management · doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2020.04.010 · Cited by 664
“…and Develop (Huston & Sakkab, 2006) US OSTP sharing all relevant research in machine readable format Outside in, b2c NASA Open Innovation Challenge (Lifshitz-Assaf, 2018) Users sharing designs for masks, hand sanitizer and how to support 2 patients on one ventilator Inside out, b2b Amazon Web…”
BackgroundLebovitz, S., Lifshitz-Assaf, H., & Levina, N. (2022) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.2021.1549 · Cited by 632
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Lifshitz-Assaf, H.
- Venue
- Administrative Science Quarterly
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2017-12-14
- Volume
- 63
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 746-782
- ISSN
- 0001-8392 (ISSN-L)
- 1930-3815
- OpenAlex
- W2772979140
- Cited by
- 322
- References
- 146
- FWCI
- 31.89
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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: Dismantling Knowledge Boundaries at NASA: The Critical Role of Professional Identity in Open Innovation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0001839217747876
- The paper
- Lifshitz-Assaf, H. (2018). Dismantling Knowledge Boundaries at NASA: The Critical Role of Professional Identity in Open Innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839217747876
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.